User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Buy MLB playoff tickets, plus 2011 World Series, 2011 ALCS tickets and NLCS game tickets. We also have Texas Rangers playoff schedule, tickets to Red Sox games and Yankees game tickets. Plus, buy Phillies baseball tickets, Tigers playoff tickets and the biggies like ALDS baseball tickets and 2011 NLDS tickets. |
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
Page rendered in 0.5166 seconds
54 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. puck Posted: July 29, 2009 at 11:29 PM (#3273062)What would the Giants have done if they'd made no trade? I assume they'd have played Uribe everyday at 2nd.
Since he seems like a better defensive 2B than Sanchez, is this much of a upgrade? It doesn't seem like a 1 win upgrade, though, given the rest of season zips projections on fangraphs. Granted, with the Giants a half game up on the WC, every win counts.
Alderson would have been the best prospect sent to CLE if he was involved.
Who were the Giants competing against to get Sanchez? The Felipe Lopez trade set the market for above-average 2nd a few weeks ago--and Alderson is well above that price.
Also cross posted, and edited for length:
Uribe is fat and he sucks. Sanchez will be an improvement if he plays even half-way decent.
There are two responses to this. 1) I'm sceptical of Uribe's ability to maintain his hitting, he simply hasn't done this the last four seasons. 2) It really depends on whether the Giants have the cajones to sit Renteria's contract and his .623 OPS on the bench and slide Uribe over to short.
Who were the Giants competing against to get Sanchez? The Felipe Lopez trade set the market for above-average 2nd a few weeks ago--and Alderson is well above that price.
I heard the Twins wanted Sanchez too, but I doubt they would have given anything close to what the Giants gave up.
2B was a huge hole for SF, though.
Well Uribe used to be a very good defensive shortstop. So, I think those types of guys generally coast on reputation a lot - especially if they change positions. The thinking being that they can afford to lose a step moving off the position, and if they were good at SS then they're probably still good even with a lost step.
Not like he has any fans left to piss off. Why not tear it down completely. Save the money for when you've built a core, and operate at a loss for a few years when you're competitive.
Funny you mention this. I caught a Rockies-Giants game this weekend and had an upper deck seat. I had been distracted and then looked down and thought Kung fu panda was running to first, but then I realized it was Uribe.
Well, there's what spivey mentioned--shortstop sliding over to 2nd. But what prompted that statement is that his UZR seems consistent with him being at least equal to Sanchez.
...and accuse Adam Rubin of inquiring about a player personnel job in San Francisco's organization.
That might be true, but this was a really good trade for Pittsburgh.
Yes, yes.. WC, bad trade, yada yada... onto important things.
Who gets the ABs for the Bucs up the middle?
Cedeno seems a lock to make the lion's share of outs at SS. Using 32 yo Vazquez at 2B is a waste. Bixler?
I feel like I'm missing something.
Of course, the Pirates are a pretty pathetic franchise, but this statement kind of seems out of place in this thread. Aren't the Pirates taking the Giants to the cleaners in this trade? (Or do I just have an inflated opinion of Alderson? That guy seems pretty awesome)
EDIT: Ouch, #22 beat me to it, and to add insult to injury #21 beat me to the cliche
Well, duh. It took them 15 years of hard work to have this shitty a system.
Given the smoking wreckage of a system Huntington inherited, it's going to take a while to build out it. At least they seem to have stopped paying averagish players big money.
He's a good defender when healthy, and a bad defender when playing hurt. Which is why his numbers generally look average-ish for the year.
He was a VERY good defender at 3B, if the Giants want to use him there at some point. Like, +10 to +20 good.
"Sanchez has an option for $8 million next year."
A vesting option based on PT, which is likely to vest in the absence of a serious injury. And it's actually a hair over $8M (8.1, maybe?).
Where IS robinred when you need him?
And it gets picked up automatically if he gets 600 PAs this year. He currently has 382.
How many trades with the Cubs are we talking about here? Two, right? One of which involved the Cubs getting Randall Simon?
That's quite the era, there.
Probably some mix of Vazquez and Bixler, yes, barring another trade that brings back a 2B or SS.
Bixler is God-awful, but I can put up with a couple of months of him getting the bat knocked out of his hands if Alderson is the reward at the end of it.
ROFL.
Unless Alderson's blows out his pitching arm, he's going to be pitch on the major league level.
The Phillies have $106M.
That is one long trip across Alabama.
Anyone that says this loses all credibility when talking prospects imo. It has absolutely no basis in reality.
Looks like the Altoona Curve have a new ace. Anyone know when he's slated to start next? If you say 'Friday' I will be your new best friend.
I don't think anyone here believes in TINSTAAP.
I figured. That's why I was laughing so hard.
I think Alderson had his turn today, if I'm not mistaken. He was traded before he could take the mound. That could mean tomorrow, that could mean Friday. Could very well be Friday!
So, do you want to hang out?
Woops, look at the hound's buttons get pushed.
I do see the acronym bandied about a fair amount around here, but i acknowledge that it's probably used tongue in cheek more often than not.
LOL, thanks.
Tonight's game got rained out, so there's a doubleheader tomorrow. Kinda doubt they'll get Alderson out there that quickly, so Friday seems like a good bet.
Is there a chance that Alderson never achieves success in the majors? Certainly. But the chances that records some degree of success are quite high.
I don't buy this idea that the Giants have a true surplus of pitching. Beyond 2009, Cain, Lincecum, and Zito are sure bets for the rotation. Johnson will be gone. Sanchez should be traded (he will never have sufficiently consistent command to be successful over an extended period of time). Sadowski is roster filler. MB should get a long look for start of 2010. So they still could have had a spot for Alderson.
I would have been happy to have traded Sanchez for Sanchez. But Alderson could have been a great, cheap #4 starter (if not better) for a half dozen seasons.
bunyon's mom's place.
There Is No Such Thing As A Pitching Prospect. It's a BP thing (if you are asking seriously).
Alderson's most likely to wind up as a mid-rotation type, a groundballer who doesn't strike many guys out but eats up innings, especially if you put a good defense behind him. But for a ceiling there's at least the potential to get an approximation of Brandon Webb, no?
Apropos of nothing, I wonder how often this has happened. Not just Sanchezes, but same names. As I recall, Ron Taylor was once traded for Chuck Taylor. I think.
There is no such thing as a pitching prospect. Guess that should be two p's on the end.
Tucked In Nut Sack Touched Ardently Against Penis. Or at least that is what it stood for in our fraternity.
It's going to be a while before we know whether any of these kids they're obtaining turn out to be anything.
Why does this mater?
Andy Marte may suck now, but had the braves traded him for Ricardo RIncon it would have been a waste of resources.
JESUS CAN'T I JUSTIFY THE TEAM I ROOT FOR WITHOUT SOME GUY TRYING TO BUTT IN WITH HIS STUPID REALITY TALK??
And are you? Don't keep us in suspense, man!
I think this is what they call selling high.
Alderson has his flaws. Sanchez is quite a nice score for them and possibly better for them than Hudson/Lopez. But they paid much, much more than they had to. Fail. No matter what happens with Lopez or Alderson. This could be Alexander/Smoltz or this could be the Yankee's cost of getting Cone.
Agree. That was definitely a concurrent thought to the notions that any high school pitcher carries injury risk, pitcher performance in the minors needs a lot of contextualizing (seems a simple point now), and keeping arms healthy is a boon/quest. I take it as a variation on you can't have too much pitching. Agree.
The snappier, faster popular def. isn't accurate. The term likely doesn't deserve the time to qualify it like we are (I haven't Gleeman Point Average in a while either).
I've definitely read prospect hounds suspicious of the same things: that this is akin to seeing a high walk, low avg slugger in the minors and thinking you've got the new Dunn. Andy Sonnanstine likely blew people away at some point; he adjusted (Stolen thought from his BP09 blurb). Dunn had high AVG and realistic K rates in MiLB. Maybe he's just out skilling the younger, more talented folks.
Still, Alex's point is right. Maybe good sell high, but get $ back, too. Get a couple of fliers.
Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't have done this deal myself. But if the Giants make the playoffs and Alderson doesn't become a star, I think history will treat it well. And if they don't make the playoffs and Alderson doesn't become a star, no one will much care either way. So the weighted odds aren't awful, really.
Well, Lieber for Brown as well.
And you don't still lie awake at night haunted by the Matt Lawton trade? :-)
freddy sanchez is a decent infielder, and he sure as heck is a LOT bettern uribe
in case all yall disremembering - felipe lopez has a glove of lead
Actually, what I was tired of was them keeping guys like Wilson and Sanchez, which is utterly pointless. I love the fact they've turned over most of the roster in a year's time and gotten some real talent back for it.
You mean the Marlins that won a world championship despite having no fans, because they did an excellent job of stockpiling and developing talent and got a little lucky? You say that like it's a bad thing...
Yeah, you combine that with a judicious expansion of the payroll to $80M when you're good, you could win a few divisions, and maybe a couple of pennants/WS.
Is their a % above infinity? That + 1.
Naw, I kid. He'll be fine. A new sun shines over Pittsburgh.
The Pirates are in the 15th year of their 3-year plan.
it's a bad thing if you want to create a successful franchise, the Marlins have done a terrible job of getting their fans to return to the stadium in consecutive seasons. It's fun to win a world championship, but for a team owner it's probably more fun/profitable to create a fanbase that gives you 3million attendence per year.
yeh i mean the team that finally managed to get more than 50 fans in the ballpark for the last 2 weeks of the year, then got rid of most of the team the offseason/next year and settled in for another 5-6 years of suckulousness
Eleven years ago. I think we can put that one to bed at this point.
...if the guy was homeless and "all his stuff" was a prized bag of cans and a rusted out shopping cart.
Not sure where you got the impression of Alderson as an elite groundball guy, Justin. He's been right around one grounder for every flyout in the minors. Brandon Webb's at 3.5 to 1 for his career.
I think that it varies quite a bit by team. Some quite track quite well with BA's relative emphasis on tools over statistical extrapolations, others have their own ideas.
I don't know if they're entirely fluke, but San Jose Muni and Dodd, his home parks for all but 5 IP of his profession career, are two of the toughest pitchers' parks in the minors. Their HR park factors have been .87 and .81 respectively over the last three seasons.
I am thinking along with you, there is a conceit among the many prospect watchers that they have a better appreciation of the value of prospects than the Major league teams do. Oh No, somebody who is #26 on XYZ's prospects of the year is obviously worth more than player N. We really don't know that.
It is comparable to people thinking they understand illness better than their doctors do.
Most specifically a Gary Huckabay thing. And he meant it.
In about the same way he meant it when he said Tony Phillips > Pete Rose. Or any other hyperbole that made sense to him at that moment. Always one of my favorite writers/usenet posters, but you did have to know where he was coming from.
EDIT: It's really a variation of Sam's Law. "Young pitchers will break your heart"
I doubt there is a team left that does not spend more money on using modern analytic tools to appraise players than all of the "sabremetric" oriented prospect sites put together. And in case you haven't noticed, anyone who has shown a real ability to see things that teams were missing HAS BEEN HIRED BY A TEAM!
Go down the list of really good sabremetric or analytic people, one by one they have been picked off.
Things just aren't done the old fashioned way, at all, anywhere.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main