News Roundup: Giants Might Have Interest in Freddy Sanchez
by Charlie on Jul 4, 2009 10:41 PM EDT
70 comments
Lack of options result in Downs' demotion
The San Francisco Chronicle reports that the Giants are "thought to" be interested in Freddy Sanchez, and possibly also Adam LaRoche. Yay, passive voice! The Chronicle suggests that the Bucs might trade Freddy for another Sanchez, starting pitcher Jonathan. I do like Jonathan Sanchez, but he's 26 and still has big problems with walks, and anyway, the Pirates have any plenty of rotation options right now. Also, Sanchez hasn't yet posted a big-league ERA below 4.95 despite good strikeout numbers. I'd take him, but the Giants would have to include something else pretty nice. The Pirates should be listening to offers for Freddy, despite the fact that they really have no one to replace him, but a Sanchez-for-Sanchez swap doesn't do it for me.
Twitter / Jorge Arangure: Hearing #Twins have fallen ...
The Twins are out of the Miguel Sano sweepstakes, Jorge Arangure writes. It's down to the Pirates and Orioles.
Victoria Advocate | Closing mentality
Here's a pretty nice profile of Zachary Nuding, a junior college closer from Texas and the Pirates' 37th-round pick in the 2009 draft. He relies heavily on a fastball right now, but he does at least have a slider and change. He's also a huge dude who hasn't pitched much, so the way he pitches now might not have much to do with the way he ends of pitching later. His fastball has "been clocked in the mid-90s," for whatever that's worth--it's usually wise to be skeptical about reports of the velocity of a pitcher you haven't seen. The Pirates will probably wait until August to make a decision about whether to sign him.
0 recs |
70 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Not Johnathon O.
I’ve been following him closely this year due to a Fantasy trade I made – he struggled as the Giant’s #5 starter, finally losing his position to Sadowski. Now he’s in the bullpen. Bottom line is that if we needed a pitcher like him, we could go out and sign John van Benschoten to a minor league contract.
by Trogluddite on Jul 4, 2009 10:53 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Exactly. Sanchez has been consistently bad for the Giants for a few years now. In a combined eight starts for the Giants in 2006 and 2007, he went 4-6 with an ERA over five. Last year, he went 9-12 with a 5.01 ERA. So far this season, he’s been awful, going 2-8 with a 5.30 ERA. It would be one thing if was a young pitcher just now breaking into the league, but he hasn’t performed well at all for the Giants for four seasons now. His lowest ERA for a season? 4.95 back in 2006, although it was a small sample size with just 4 starts. I would be shocked if NH traded Freddy for Jonathan straight up. That’s selling way too low for a player of Freddy’s caliber. I know he’s older and he has a huge contract, but he’s still one of the best offensive second baseman in baseball. Surely, it would have to be an offer that NH just can’t refuse. How about LaRoche and Sanchez for Pablo Sandoval? (haha…kidding, obviously).
by mspirate on Jul 4, 2009 11:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
giant pitching trade
If it would happen it would probalby rival a trade with the Giants from a few years back…..Ryan Volgelsong. And I hope Millings works out…but at the moment the Millings trade reminds me of the other Giant we got in the Volgelsong “blockbuster”…..Armando Rios….
by Bucco44 on Jul 5, 2009 5:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
How can he remind you of anyone
when he hasn’t had an at-bat with the team (just curious)?
Of course, maybe that’s the thing… I wasn’t a fan at time of the Rios trade, so I don’t know much.
True Blue Jazz
Bucco Ball
I'm on Twitter
RIP Nick Adenhart. 4/9/09
by UtesFan89 on Jul 5, 2009 9:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
fair enuff
You are rite, he hasn’t had an AB…..just and unfotunate lack of trust on my part of Pirate history in trades. Millege…..not Millings…..sorry there too. We need a win stread badly!
by Bucco44 on Jul 7, 2009 4:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
How about...
Sanchez and LaRoche for Brandon Crawford, Tim Alderson, and a PTBNL. Alderson could probably be had because his ceiling isn’t very high and Crawford would give us a pretty solid shortstop who is kind of close to the majors.
by joegonzo on Jul 4, 2009 11:06 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Way too much
on the Giants side of things for the two of them. But hey, it’s nice to want things. If they do do a deal like that, it’s a coup.
by Slizeezyc on Jul 4, 2009 11:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Kevin Goldstein on Alderson:
One pitcher with numbers that are impossible to argue with is Giants righty Tim Alderson. After leading the California League in ERA during his full-season debut last year, the 20-year-old has a 2.36 ERA in his first nine Eastern League starts for Double-A Connecticut. Scouts still find it difficult to warm up to Alderson, however. “It’s not an insult at all, he’s a for-sure, big-league starting pitcher for me,” said one scout who saw him recently, “but it’s strictly back of the rotation for me,” he added, while explaining that Alderson’s backwards style of pitching is not one that is usually conducive to major league success. “That plus breaking ball is his calling card, and he’s a guy with plus-plus control and average command, but he can’t pitch off his fringy fastball, and you don’t really see many changeups out of him.”
That would appear to go against the Huntington strategy of upside if Alderson is the centerpiece of that kind of deal. But, he is widely considered their third best prospect so maybe there is more value there.
by Gorkys n' Beans on Jul 4, 2009 11:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Might be one of those
Yusmeiro Petit type things. Regardless, I don’t think the Giants would do that deal.
by Slizeezyc on Jul 4, 2009 11:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe he just meant back of the rotation for the Giants though? With Lincecum, Cain, and Bumgarner, the best he can do is #4 on that team.
by Gorkys n' Beans on Jul 5, 2009 12:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No...
he is at best a number 3 on any team without adding velocity. It makes sense because he is a good prospect, but lacks upside. That was my thinking. He could probably be had because of his limited upside. This deal isn’t really a bad deal for either team.
by joegonzo on Jul 5, 2009 12:07 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
He seems like a Maholm/Duke guy, but he seems like a sure thing to reach that type of plateau, which makes him more valuable. I don’t know if the Giants are going to turn around and trade their 4th round pick, top 5 prospect and a PTBNL.
PS, I still haven’t given up on Jonathan Sanchez.
by Slizeezyc on Jul 5, 2009 12:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Velocity
Velocity is not that important if you have a masterful breaking ball and control.
See: Pedro Martinez, Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine later in his career. Location and movement are the most important things, and it sounds like this kid has those.
www.sixtyftsixin.com
by Sixty Feet, Six Inches on Jul 5, 2009 12:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Martinez...
Had good velocity and a lot of movemt. Maddux was probably the smartest pitcher ever and sat at about 93-94 and Glavine was left handed and had outstanding control. That’s what seperates Alderson from those three. I’m not saying he won’t be good, just he is probably not going to be a top of the rotation guy.
by joegonzo on Jul 5, 2009 1:04 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maddux
Never hit 93-94. In his prime he maxed out around 92 and was usually in the 88-91 range. It doesn’t matter how hard you throw as long as you have the ability to strike batters out and prevent walks. Glavine and Maddux had passable strikeout rates, but excelled because they had outstanding control and issued very few walks. Greg Maddux dominated for the better part of 20 years with one above average pitch (changeup) primarily because of his control.
by ILLZ on Jul 5, 2009 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m sure Tim Alderson would be flattered at being compared to a couple of HOF pitchers, but I’m not sure what it has to do with projecting his likely performance in the majors.
by WTM on Jul 5, 2009 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I remember...
watching Maddux in about 96 or 97(can’t remember) and see him hitting 93 pretty consistently. Also, the reason he dominated is because he was a genius. He knew exactly what to do and when to do it at almost all times. He was probably the smartest pitcher of all time.
by joegonzo on Jul 5, 2009 3:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, Maddux threw harder than 92
Not much, but it’s not fair to him to say he maxxed out at 92. Not that you said it, but he was unfairly labeled a finesse pitcher.
by azibuck on Jul 5, 2009 4:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Charlie.....
Yea, I don’t want to sound like one of the crazy people on the site who say, “sure we can trade him, but we shouldn’t give him away.” but you we disagree here—BIG TIME. Anything for Freddy is good in my opinion.
We should give Freddy away. If we get ANYTHING of value for him and don’t have to pay $8.4 million it is a win. Not sure why this isn’t clear to everyone. Freddy is way overpriced. Orlando Hudson got a one year $4 million contract last year as a free agent. As you and many have pointed out get talent….I don’t care if Delwyn plays second for a year. Advance the organization.
by dtoddwin on Jul 5, 2009 1:25 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
How are you “advancing the organization” if you just give Freddy Sanchez away? Freddy Sanchez and Ryan Doumit are the two players on this team that could get us some big-time prospects (or major-league-ready players) in a trade. NH isn’t going to just give Sanchez up for nothing. He’s going to look for the right players in return. You also have to remember that we have nothing after Freddy Sanchez in terms of second basemen. The closest player we have is Shelby Ford, and he looks like he’s taken a step backward and won’t be ready for another couple years. You say you don’t care if Delwyn plays second base for a whole year, but after Delwyn butchers the defense at 2B (assuming Sanchez does get traded) for half a season, you’ll be calling for his head. I’m not at all against trading Sanchez IF the deal is right and the team is willing to give us what NH wants in return, but to say that “anything for Freddy is good” , especially with nobody being close to ready to step in and take over at 2B, is absurd. He’s not Jack Wilson or Adam LaRoche. Good thing you don’t run the team.
by mspirate on Jul 5, 2009 3:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pot, meet kettle.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jul 5, 2009 6:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
His point was that at $8.4 million Sanchez is
too expensive for his skill set. If we let him go, even for nothing, we are actually better off since we’ll be able to use that $8.4 million, for instance to sign a FA better than Freddy. I don’t necessarily agree with that but to successfully rebut his post you need address dtoddwin’s main point.
by WestCoastBuc on Jul 5, 2009 9:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK then
Among major league secondbasemen, Sanchez is 4th in OPS. He’s also slightly above average defensively, by UZR. Since he’s now healthy for the first time in three years, there’s no reason to expect him to decline badly just yet. At $6.1M (according to Cot’s—I don’t know where this $8.4M comes from), he’s underpaid. And the Pirates have nothing to replace him with. Nothing. (Anybody who thinks they’ll put Young there full-time is mistaken. It’s be Vazquez. Young is a butcher even in RF.) There isn’t much the Pirates can do with the $8.0M he’d get next year that’d improve the club. Somebody like Orlando Hudson isn’t signing with the Pirates, because even in a depressed market there’ll always be a team, like the Dodgers, that he’s going to prefer. If they can’t get a very significant return for Sanchez, meaning something close to what they got for Nate, it makes no sense to trade him.
by WTM on Jul 5, 2009 9:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess the $8.4 million is Freddy's option
for next season. Someone has been on the war path for a long time arguing that the Pirates should make sure that that option doesn’t vest. It seems to me that the long-term interests of the club might be better served if that money was spent on prospects, Sano for instance, and some of the unsigned draftees, but I have no way to evaluate this.
by WestCoastBuc on Jul 5, 2009 11:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think it’s as straightforward as saying you can take the money and spend it here or there. If the Pirates go into next year without Adam LaRoche (which is a lock), Wilson and Sanchez, and if they’re not replaced by players who are not now in the organization, we’re looking at about what the Nationals are doing this year. I absolutely don’t understand the attitude that these guys just suck and the team would be better off just releasing them, although I notice the people maintaining this attitude never back it up. The fact is, taking into account both offense and defense, Wilson and Sanchez right now are well above average players for their positions. LaRoche is a little below average for his, although that’ll change if he has anything like his usual second half. Even if he stays where he is now, there’ll still be a huge drop-off if they have to go with some combination of Jones and Pearce. (Anybody who thinks Jones can replace LaRoche needs to take a long, serious look at Jones’ minor league career.) If the Pirates have a Nats-type season next year, the drop in attendance will probably offset any savings in payroll. The payroll isn’t the only variable here. And if they have to go into the market to replace these guys with veterans, they’re going to spend about as much money while still getting a large dropoff in performance.
by WTM on Jul 5, 2009 11:51 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Makes sense
If I understand you correctly then you’d favor picking up both Freddy’s and Jack’s options unless we get a very nice offer after which we will only have to worry about 1B.
by WestCoastBuc on Jul 5, 2009 12:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep
Unless they can make real trades that include replacements for them with legit potential, although they ought to be able to sign Jack to an extension for less than his option. Might have to give him a second year, but I don’t have a problem with that, either. Unless they can trade for a SS with a real ceiling, he still won’t be blocking anybody in 2011, at least until maybe mid-season, when they can just ease him out if Mercer or D’Arnaud is ready. I don’t see any reason the payroll would stand in the way of them doing what needs to be done in the scouting and development areas. I’m all for rebuilding, but only if it really is rebuilding and not just dumping salary that doesn’t need to be dumped.
by WTM on Jul 5, 2009 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wrong again, WTM
(Anybody who thinks Jones can replace LaRoche needs to take a long, serious look at Jones’ minor league career.)
It should only take a quick, semi-serious at most, look.
by azibuck on Jul 5, 2009 4:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I understand the money side of it, but regardless of money or anything else, NH isn’t going to just give him away to get rid of Freddy’s contract. I believe we are past the Littlefied/McClatchy way of “trading” players just to get the contract of their hands. Also, we aren’t going to be signing any free agents that are better than Freddy Sanchez. The only FA we will sign will be bench players, and it will be a 1-year contract for around $1M-$2M (like Gomez/Doug M. in ‘07 and Hinske/Vazquez this year). They don’t need any extra money to sign FA for their bench next season, and the Pirates will trade for a starting 2B (assuming Sanchez is traded) before they go to the FA market and sign one.We are not a better team just because we save $8.4M.
by mspirate on Jul 5, 2009 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
crazy people
I am crazy and I am visualizing a pirate offensive explosion tomorrow
by changepirateskarma on Jul 5, 2009 2:51 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
What would it take?
As a giants fan I would be very happy if we acquired both Sanchez & Ad. LaRoche but my question is how bad to the pirates want to dump Sanchez’s salary? would a package of J.Sanchez, Kevin Pucetas (ML Ready pitcher), Merkin Valdez and Brandon Crawford be enough to get both Sancgez & LaRoche?
Grab Some Pine Meat!
by Gobroks on Jul 5, 2009 4:23 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I would think so, although I have no idea what caliber of player those guys are. I’m not impressed with J. Sanchez at all, but we would be getting 4 players back in return. If Huntington thinks the deal is too good to pass up, he will pull the trigger. What kind of players are the guys you mentioned (in terms of talent)?
by mspirate on Jul 5, 2009 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not too excited...
about Pucetas, but I would take him if it’s part of a big package like that. I don’t know much about Valdez though.
by joegonzo on Jul 5, 2009 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pucetas was rated as the Giants 15th best prospect by Baseball America and Crawford (SS) is having a break out year after being drafted in the 4th round last year. Valdez is a young power reliever but he basically only has 1 pitch (high 90’s Fastball).
Grab Some Pine Meat!
by Gobroks on Jul 5, 2009 4:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks. Surely, NH would be looking for some middle infielders in return (as well as pitching) so if we could get a top-notch SS and P in return for Sanchez, I’d be happy.
by mspirate on Jul 5, 2009 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Valdez in a nutshell:
Good FB, can’t throw strikes, almost never healthy.
Not a fan.
by Vlad on Jul 6, 2009 11:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I love this
Huntington, if he’s actually entertaining dumping Sanchez (which he certainly ought to be), clearly doesn’t care what the yinzers think. At the same time, he’s got to have some rock-solid backing from Coonelly and Nutting. Or incriminating photos of them both.
by matskralc on Jul 5, 2009 9:16 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Apologies to all the Freddy lovers in advance....
He is just not a good hitter……..if he had any plate discipline at all, he could hit .330 every year. Bur he doesn’t, and never will. Trade his never walking, first pitch swinging ass to the first bidder;
by Hitman Easler on Jul 5, 2009 10:20 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
124 OPS+ = “not a good hitter.” Interesting theory . . . .
by WTM on Jul 5, 2009 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
WTM
For a guy who generally doesn’t look at small sample sizes, I’m not sure why you are using this year’s numbers as opposed to the numbers generated by 2500+ career at bats. His career OPS+ is 100. I realize he was a bit injured last year, but 2500 at bats is 2500 at bats.
You make exactly that argument against Jones, to not rely on his success this year, but to look at his career numbers. I am certainly not arguing that Sanchez is a bad player. He is a good player. But he is in his age 31 season and $8.4 million seems like a high price to pay for his services next year.
by dtoddwin on Jul 5, 2009 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
His career OPS+ is weighed down by his horrid 79 last year, when he wasn’t healthy. His other three most recent seasons are 119, 103 (with a bad knee) and 124. That hardly makes him “not a good hitter.” And according to Cot’s, the option is just $8M guaranteed. It’s $8.4M only if he gets all his incentives, which include All-Star, Gold Glove, World Series MVP, and NL MVP. At least three of those ain’t happenin’.
Jones’ “success” this year is a decent season (people seem to think he was tearing the place up or something—he wasn’t) for a corner player as a 28-yr-old in his fifth AAA season. His OPS in his five AAA seasons runs like this: .741, .733, .807, .821, .850.
If you want to get a realistic idea about Jones, compare him to Brian Daubach, who probably represents a best-case scenario for Jones. Daubach’s AAA OPS numbers, which came at ages 25-26, were .877 and 1.055. He also had far better plate discipline.
by WTM on Jul 5, 2009 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's gonna be.....
between $8 and $8.4
From cot’s:
2 years/$11M (2008-09), plus 2010 club option
re-signed by Pittsburgh 2/5/08 (avoided arbitration, $4.9M-$4.1M)
$0.3M signing bonus
08:$4M, 09:$6.1M, 10:$8M club option ($0.6M buyout)
2010 club option guaranteed with 635 PAs in 2009 or 600 PAs and All Star selection in 2009
base salary for 2010 option may increase by $0.5M ($0.1M each for 1) 650 PAs in 2008, 2) 650 PAs in 2009, 3) All Star in 2008, 4) All Star in 2009, or 5) Gold Glove or Silver Slugger in 2008 or 2009
performance bonuses: $25,000 each for All Star, Gold Glove, WS MVP; $0.125M for MVP ($75,000 for 2nd in vote, $50,000 for 3rd)
by dtoddwin on Jul 5, 2009 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Health.....
is a skill as well. Hard to discount injuries when he got over 600 PAs in each of those seasons.
by dtoddwin on Jul 5, 2009 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The fact remains that, even with a 100 OPS (and there’s no reason to think he won’t easily surpass that this year and next), he’s still an above average player because he’s a little above average defensively. If he goes without them obtaining a good prospect to replace him, we’re looking at below average play at 2B.
by WTM on Jul 5, 2009 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who cares...
who is playing second on a losing team. I would love to get a 2B prospect back, but one that will help for the future. Otherwise we could just sign a stopgap or let Ramon Vasquez play there.
by joegonzo on Jul 5, 2009 1:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just because he doesn’t have the greatest plate discipline in the world doesn’t mean he’s not a good hitter. He’s a great hitter.
by mspirate on Jul 5, 2009 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fair offer...
For Sanchez and Laroche: J Sanchez, Alderson, SS Ehire Adrianza, and 2B Nick Noonan.
For LaRoche alone: J Sanchez and Adrianza
For Sanchez: Alderson and Noonan
Just some thoughts. Might be hard to get SFG to part with two of their top ten prospects, a young upside SS, and a major league arm, but in return for two starters that would immediately help an already good team, might have to overpay. In order to get a package like either of these, the bucs might have to eat some of Freddy’s contract, but I think it would be worth it. The Giants don’t have a loaded farm system, but they do have a big need for Freddy and Adam, which makes for a great trading partner.
by jlk9697 on Jul 5, 2009 12:06 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Actually, BA ranked the Giants’ farm system 5th coming into this year.
by WTM on Jul 5, 2009 12:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I Think They Might Overpay For Sanchez And Mario
They’re tenuously holding on to the Wild Card spot right now, so they want to make sure they can hold onto it. And they might even have ideas about trying to take the division. Although I don’t think that’s particularly likely, but anything can happen.
The Giants have got to feel that this could be their year. It’s time to rip them off.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 5, 2009 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly. Once again, it comes down to how desperate a team is for a good-hitting 2B and a power-hitting 1B. If they want them bad enough, they will be willing to do whatever it takes to get them.
by mspirate on Jul 5, 2009 5:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Keeping Freddy makes sense if there are no great trade offers because he is still an All-Star 2B and can help us. Keeping Adam makes a little bit of sense unless they want to give it to Pearce and Jones plus Adam may be holding out for a (somewhat) big payday elsewhere.
As I’ve said with Jack before, we should let him go if we can’t trade him because he’ll be overpaid no matter what especially with that option. And if there is anything close on the FA list for shortstop then just go with that for a 1 or 2 year deal.
by Gorkys n' Beans on Jul 5, 2009 1:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Well, Adam is gone. Dejan has written several times that they’re far apart on money and I haven’t heard of any negotiations in a long time.
by WTM on Jul 5, 2009 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We haven’t heard talk of extensions for Freddy or Jack either, and I doubt they are going to pick up those options unless they have to for Sanchez.
by Gorkys n' Beans on Jul 5, 2009 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
on June26 Adam was classified as type B free agent
supplemental 1st round if nothing is to NH’s liking. Of course that would entail offering arbitration.
by buccoben on Jul 5, 2009 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sanchez/Ad. LaRoche
I am also all for trading Sanchez and LaRoche to San Francisco. We’d have some decent leverage, as this trade could push the Giants into legitimate contenders. I’d love to package the two of them for either one or two very high ceiling prospects, rather than four decent prospects. I don’t know much about their system, but I’d like to see NH throw out an offer for Bumgarner/Villalona and Noonan/Adrianza. Any of these four possibilities look good to me, I’m just not certain how highly these players are regarded by the SF management.
by AMast0010 on Jul 5, 2009 1:20 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Bumgarner...
I’d assume is almost untouchable, unless SF would be getting back a major league starter as well (Duke?) and Pitt would eat most of the Freddy contract. Given SF already has two aces in Lincecum and Cain, maybe they’d be more willing to deal Bumgarner if a team like the Pirates would pay a huge price? Not sure that could be worked out, but Madison is the kind of arm the Pirates at least need to look into. Just not sure they have the talent to aquire him.
by jlk9697 on Jul 5, 2009 1:24 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
We don’t have the talent to get Bumgarner or Buster Posey, unless maybe we are willing to package up McCutchen, or the front office is as smart as Washington…
by Gorkys n' Beans on Jul 5, 2009 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No way...
we get Bumgarner. Like Gorkys said above, the only way we get him is if we give them McCutchen and someone else. I would love to have him, but it is really unrealistic. Guys who I would try to get are Alderson, Crawford, Noonan, Sosa, or Rafael Rodriguez. These guys are more realistic and could all be potential stars.
by joegonzo on Jul 5, 2009 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just read...
..the Giants won’t even consider moving Bumgarner for Victor Martinez. Puts an end to that quick discussion.
by jlk9697 on Jul 5, 2009 2:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
From the Giants side
Interesting reading the other side on this. I’ll give a bit of perspective on the other partner.
Forget about any of the top 4 – Bummy, Alderson, Villalona, or Posey. First two are in the Giants rotation next year, and Posey is more than likely the catcher unless something weird happens (or unless they decide they need to really fill a hole at another position, since he can play everywhere.) AnVil isn’t going anywhere unless they get one whopper of a 1B in return, and in any case his future (and trade chip value) is more than likely as a DH. Bucs don’t have anything remotely worth these guys from the Giants side.
If it’s a salary dump, you’re not going to be getting equal talent in return – Sabean has a history of actually being a good trader on those, versus talent trades where he’s gotten ripped off. However, I do think the Giants fan base isn’t quite aware that the Pirates are being more competently run than in the past (ok, that’s debatable, but from afar I actually liked most of the trades you guys have made in the last few months even if they hurt near term.)
Where you do have an advantage is that the Giants do have an awful lot of pitching with not an awful lot of places to put it. They’re carrying 13 pitchers on the MLB roster because they simply can’t figure out what to do with the excess – since the starting pitching has been good enough so that they could easily carry 11.
They also have a bit of a 40 man problem (something that some Giants fans would be willing to disagree with me on), so there’s AAA pickings as well in both pitching and hitting. Currently have 3 2B at AAA, and at least one of them will probably end up being an every day major leaguer – it’s not a replacement for your Sanchez by any means, but the hole in the roster might not be as tremendous as it’d be at first glance.
I could also see Sosa or Pucetas going, since unless they figure out a way to trade Zito, the rotation for at least the next couple of years is going to be Lincecum/Cain/Bummy/Alderson/Zito unless A/B totally bomb. I wouldn’t underestimate J. Sanchez either. A lot of Giants fans have given up on him, but he’s a guy who I could easily see turning into one heck of a closer, or at the very worst one of the better set up guys in the game. There really aren’t that many lefties who can strike people out like that, and his first trips through the lineups have tended to be very, very quick (it’s been his second time through the batting order where he gets into trouble.)
Finally, Valdez was actually ranked higher than Cain at one point before he hurt his arm. His velocity is now finally back – it’s just a matter of confidence, and if he finally starts throwing his breaking stuff he could be just as nasty as Sanchez. He’s just not gotten a ton of opportunities this year, and has been mostly used in mopup.
So yeah, I’d expect more pitching back for your hitting, but you might actually be surprised of the quality you’d get back. They may not be the guys in the minor league spotlight, but they’ve periodically undervalued their pitching prospects and overvalued their hitting ones, and traded the former. It’s not just the infamous Lirano and Nathan trade, but there’ve been a few others that have ended up as #3 or #4 starters.
by HaroldS on Jul 5, 2009 5:09 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Not sure why everyone seems to think...
…the Pirates are desperate to dump salary. LaRoche and Freddy are getting fair $ for the production they provide, and the team isn’t exactly crushed under a huge payroll. If a deal is mostly just offering financial relief, I don’t think it gets made.
Speaking just for myself, I don’t want any part of a guy with Valdez’s medical history.
by Vlad on Jul 6, 2009 11:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree somewhat. I think fans have been brainwashed by the Littlefield/McClatchy era in thinking that anybody on the team that makes over $5M/year is automatically going to get traded for basically anything they can get in return to simply dump salary. I think we are past that with this new regime. We may look to trade the guys with the big salaries, but the difference is that NH is going to look for the right return before trading them, where as Littlefield was looking to get those guys traded as quick as possible to dump their salaries. Freddy is getting paid fair $ for his production, but I have to disagree about Adam getting fair $. He doesn’t deserve $7M for what he does. We could put Garrett Jones or Steve Pearce at 1B and they would have 12 HR (maybe more) at this point of the season, too.
by mspirate on Jul 6, 2009 12:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why are you so fixated on HR?
Singles and doubles and triples and walks and such all have value, too. And runs are runs, regardless of the form they take. If you had a 1B who did nothing but hit three singles a game, every game, he’d be the most valuable player in the history of baseball.
[I’m also dubious, to say the least, of the idea that Jones would have 12 HR if he’d been the ML starter from the get-go.]
by Vlad on Jul 6, 2009 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Myth Of Balance
It’s this old baseball idea that in order to win you need a strikeout pitcher, but also a finesse pitcher, and a ballsy closer, along with a couple power hitters, and a speedy guy, and a glove wizard, and that this balance will create wins. When actually, what you need is a bunch of players who score more runs than they give up, no matter how they do it.
by Androgen Jar Jimmy on Jul 6, 2009 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Randy Johnson is on the DL and Peter Gammons says this might keep J.Sanchez off the market but...
I think he can still be traded for F. Sanchez & Ad. LaRoche if the pirates throw in the right handed Jonathan Sanchez… Ian Snell. What do you guys think?
Grab Some Pine Meat!
by Gobroks on Jul 7, 2009 2:39 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think Jonathan Sanchez’s asking price may have gone up a bit :P
by HaroldS on Jul 11, 2009 4:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Bucs Dugout
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
