I'm with Danny. I think this is a fine deal. The Giants have to play somebody in center field. Rowand improves their offense, he improves their defense, and all he costs is money.

I'm not all that thrilled about it, but it isn't a terrible deal. The worst aspect of it is the 5-year length; almost certainly by that time it'll be a millstone. But in the short term there's nothing terrible about it.

Zito deal is only 11 months old and that will probably end up on top 10 lists for worst deals in the history of the game.

Wow, I could have sworn he'd been plodding around out there for at least 2 years. Doesn't it seem like forever ago?

It looks to me like another in a long string of ill-advised long-term contracts given to outfielders.

At some point you just have to accept that these signings define the market. An average starting player will sign for $10M/year and at least two years longer than you are certain you want to see him in uniform.

Zito and $30 million to the Mets... for pinky dust!

At some point you just have to accept that these signings define the market.

We've been having this discussion on the THT email circuit this afternoon. If a whole bunch of signings appear to be overpriced, that's probably a good indicator that our perception of "overpriced" has become outdated.

I don't think it's a bad deal as such, but it's wrong for the Giants, they should only get players under 25 years old for a while.

--At some point you just have to accept that these signings define the market. An average starting player will sign for $10M/year and at least two years longer than you are certain you want to see him in uniform.--

If the market for guys who are average, and on the wrong side of 27 is 10 million, then a team should just focus on finding those average guys on the right side of 27....because they will cost less than 10 million a year (even when you factor in having to have three of them in your farm system just to have one of them pan out).

--At some point you just have to accept that these signings define the market. An average starting player will sign for $10M/year and at least two years longer than you are certain you want to see him in uniform.--

You make a credible point, but it might be more accurate that this is what weak GMs do...

Why is the 5 year length so bad? It seems as if some here would prefer that the deal be 4 yrs./$60 mil. just to get the contract off the books sooner.

In reality, $12mil/yr. is today's going rate for a somewhat above average CF. In all likelihood, salaries will continue to rise, meaning an extra year of an average-ish (if still healthy) CF in 2012 will seem relatively inexpensive.

I don't think it's a bad deal as such, but it's wrong for the Giants, they should only get players under 25 years old for a while.

If the market for guys who are average, and on the wrong side of 27 is 10 million, then a team should just focus on finding those average guys on the right side of 27

But players under 27/under 25 aren't really "freely available" - the ones that are going to be able to help your team within the next couple of years are under the control of teams, so they're going to cost talent for you to acquire. Sure, it'd be great for the Giants to try to trade Dave Roberts and Randy Winn and Ray Durham for good young players, but who the hell's going to be willing to give away good young players in exchange for Roberts or Winn or Durham? And if the Giants trade away their guys with value (Cain, Lincecum) for other guys of value, all they're doing is shuffling the cards - the net talent level's going to be about the same (assuming Sabean doesn't get fleeced), just a little redistributed. Worrying about the distribution of talent is something that teams with a lot of talent and/or are close the playoffs worry about. Better optimizing the Giants' talent will add what, maybe 2-3 wins, which gets them from 70 wins to 73 wins. Whoopee.

Should the Giants be investing in draft picks and international signings? Of course. But in the meantime, they're forced to either pay free-agent rates to fill out their major-league roster or play their AAA team at the big-league level with potentially '03 Tiger-style results. And for a team as well off as the Giants, I can't see this Rowand deal hurting their prospects of signing top amateur talent.

Sometimes teams get better bit by bit. Maybe Rowand adds 3 wins to the team next year. Maybe they can find somebody next year who adds another 3 wins and another guy who adds 3 wins the year after that. In that time, maybe Lincecum and Cain develop into the aces that many think they can become and all of the sudden, this is an 85+ win team. That's certainly an optimistic scenario and Rowand may be in decline by that point, but I find it hard to argue with signing a player to a reasonable contract (which I think this is) no matter where on the success cycle the team is. Teams can't wait until their young players appear to be ready to compete before they go out and sign expensive free agents. Sometimes, you can't find the right guy at the right price at the right time. If you think you have found the right guy at the right price, sign him regardless of whether the timing is right. Baseball isn't so predictable that teams can refrain from making reasonable moves that improve their team because their 5 year projections don't have them exceeding 78 wins in a season.

If Rowand put up a 109 OPS+ that makes the Giants what, a 75-win team. If instead he puts up a 90 OPS+ that drops to what 70 wins at worst. Big deal. They're a last-place team either way. But if Rowand puts up a 130 OPS+ maybe that inches the Giants up toward 80 wins

The gap between a 130 and 90 OPS+ for just one player isn't that big. Its more like 3 wins than 10 - of the last 4 years Rowand's best is +2.0 batting wins, worst is -0.9. Thank you Sean Forman for putting batting wins on B-Ref.

I like the Giant's defense - Rowand, Roberts, and Winn means they're playing 3 centerfielders. Tim Lincecum could put up a 2.60 ERA to go with his 8-16 record.

The problem isn't Rowand per se or the money; it's more that Sabean does not seem to realize/accept that the team needs a major rebuild: the rumors about Matsui, bringing back Vizquel, etc.

Now, "Well, what the hell should they do instead?" is a reasonable question. I see wanting to avoid 50-112, and Rowand, a decent ballplayer, helps with that. But the way Sabean talks and the stuff he does gives the impression he still thinks the Giants can contend with a few tweaks. I think that is what bugs SF fans more than Rowand specifically.

Globe and Mail blog:

Great moments in conferencing calling, Vol. 1, Edition 1:

On the conference call held today to announce the signing of free-agent outfielder Aaron Rowand by the San Francisco Giants - a move that derricks the Toronto Blue Jays' best-laid plan of acquiring Giants pitcher Tim Lincecum for Alex Rios - somebody who clearly didn't believe they were on-line dropped a not-so-well placed but spectacularly audible 'F-bomb' during a brief second of silence.

"Boch ... was that you," one of the writers asked Giants manager Bruce Bochy.

"No way," Bochy responded.

After a second's silence, one wag said:

"It was probably J.P. Ricciardi."

Alderson said that they learned of Fukodome picking the Cubs at the same time that all of the season ticket holders.

After telling us that, he went into a story about him being at a meeting this morning and someone asking him how you pronounced "that Japanese outfielder's name".

He told them, "Well, if he signs with us, it's Foo-kuh-doe-may. If he goes somewhere else, well......."

The whole crowd (and panel) erupted into laughter.

You make a credible point, but it might be more accurate that this is what weak GMs do...

Obviously more cost-effective to invest in player development than to "build" through the free agent market. That said, even a good team with a strong farm system will need to fill an occasional hole. At that point you have two choices:

(1) Look for a below-average or risky player you can get on the cheap. (Carlos Pena, David Eckstein)

(2) Sign a premium free agent at premium prices. (Johnny Damon, Julio Lugo)

With few exceptions, I don't see teams hamstringing their finances with these deals.