Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Transaction Oracle > Discussion
Transaction Oracle
— A Timely Look at Transactions as They Happen

Wednesday, December 12, 2007

Giants - Signed Rowand

San Francisco Giants - Signed CF Aaron Rowand to a 5-year contract.

The financial terms also haven’t disclosed, but I’ll guess somewhere between $50 and $70 million.

Rowand’s not a bad signing for a team in contention, but the Giants almost certainly aren’t one of those teams.  Rowand might help the team simply not be embarrassing and avoid 100 losses, so I guess there’s value in that.  The good thing about the signing is that Rowand instantly becomes San Francisco’s best position player and practically the youngest position player with a full-time job.  Of course, that points to some serious issues San Francisco because Aaron Rowand shouldn’t be the best position player on your team or nearly the youngest.

If you’re taking odds on the Giants scoring the fewest runs in baseball, this might push them from 1-7 to 1-4.  Even the Astros should handily outscore this team.

I hope this signing puts to bed the notion that Bonds was hurting the team because his salary could sign 2 or 3 really awesome players.  That notion doesn’t get very far around here, obviously, but there’s a section of fans that still believes this.

I’m probably being too nice about this signing but half, but hey, I’m in a good mood that the Orioles didn’t just give away Tejada.

2008 ZiPS Projection - Aaron Rowand
——————————————————————————————————————-
          AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB   BA   OBP   SLG   OPS+
——————————————————————————————————————-
Projection   536 76 149 35 2 14 69 33 97   7 .277 .340 .427   97
2009?      504 70 133 29 2 12 63 27 92   8 .264 .325 .401   87    
2010?      458 65 123 26 2 11 60 25 82   7 .269 .331 .406   90
2011?      443 64 120 26 2 11 59 25 79   7 .271 .335 .413   93
2012?      417 60 112 24 1   9 56 24 72   7 .269 .335 .396   89
——————————————————————————————————————-
Opt. (15%)  600 96 175 41 3 17 82 44 94 10 .292 .364 .455   111  
Pes. (15%)  476 56 120 27 1   9 51 25 94   1 .252 .300 .370   72
——————————————————————————————————————-
Top Comps:  Ethan Allen, Paul Blair

 

 

Dan Szymborski Posted: December 12, 2007 at 10:08 PM | 47 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Related News:

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. rawagman Posted: December 12, 2007 at 10:31 PM (#2642808)
I didn't see this one coming. The Giants needed a rangy CF. How does this signing affect the Rios for Lincecum rumors? Lowry for Matsui rumors?
   2. zenbitz Posted: December 12, 2007 at 10:38 PM (#2642821)
Total $$ are being reported as $85M.

Sabean is the GM equivalent of Scottish food. It's like all his moves are based on a dare.
   3. Dan Szymborski Posted: December 12, 2007 at 10:41 PM (#2642826)
$85M? Jesus. If Rowand's worth $17 million a year, what was A-Rod really worth? $60 million?
   4. JPWF13 Posted: December 12, 2007 at 10:42 PM (#2642828)
Total $$ are being reported as $85M.


If that's true then the Fukudome signing is a great coup by Hendry
   5. zenbitz Posted: December 12, 2007 at 10:43 PM (#2642830)
latest is now only $60M. Sorry for the premature splooge.
   6. Famous Original Joe C Posted: December 12, 2007 at 10:43 PM (#2642831)
zenbitz - where did you hear that?
   7. BDC Posted: December 12, 2007 at 10:45 PM (#2642836)
Rowand will not nearly be old enough to play for the Giants, even at the end of the contract.
   8. zenbitz Posted: December 12, 2007 at 10:48 PM (#2642846)
ESPN sez: $60M
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3152201
   9. Dan Szymborski Posted: December 12, 2007 at 10:51 PM (#2642852)
Whew, glad it wasn't $85 million. You scared the crap outta me, Ben, and I'm not even a Giants fan.
   10. Rodder Posted: December 12, 2007 at 10:53 PM (#2642860)
Wow - the ZiPS OPTIMISTIC projection has him slugging 60 points below last year's .515 number. That has to be highly unusual.
   11. Rodder Posted: December 12, 2007 at 10:55 PM (#2642863)
Ok - now I am seeing is career slugging avg is .462. I understand he has played his career in two of the best hitter's parks, but is this entirely because of park factors?
   12. JPWF13 Posted: December 12, 2007 at 11:10 PM (#2642881)
Wow - the ZiPS OPTIMISTIC projection has him slugging 60 points below last year's .515 number. That has to be highly unusual.
11. Rodder Posted: December 12, 2007 at 04:55 PM (#2642863)
Ok - now I am seeing is career slugging avg is .462.


He slugged .407 and .425 the two years before 2007
3-2-1 established slugging is .467
That's in parks with a park adjustment factor of 104/105
he's going to one that's played neutral the last 2 years
that .467 "would" have been .445 or so in San Fran
still .455 seems a might low for "optimistic"
   13. user Posted: December 12, 2007 at 11:22 PM (#2642905)
5-4-3 is probably a close eyeball weighting which knocks about another 10 points off. Given his age slugging 20 points higher than his 3 -year established performance seems reasonable.


That's in parks with a park adjustment factor of 104/105


Also are these factors for runs or slugging?

I'd expect a fractionally pessimistic projection anyway - unless Zips has a ran into a fence variable.
   14. zenbitz Posted: December 12, 2007 at 11:41 PM (#2642943)
You know, some day I will tell my Grandkids (Giants fans all, or they will be staked out for Exposure) horror stories of the Sabean Era.
   15. Athletic Supporter can feel the slow rot Posted: December 12, 2007 at 11:52 PM (#2642966)
I find it interesting that ZiPS projects a 2009 decline and then a 2010-11 "rebound." To my recollection, this is the first time I've seen ZiPS do this. I assume this is just a fluke from the comparable set? Or are there certain reasons why ZiPS identifies Rowand as a player that will decline in 2009 but not in 2010-11?
   16. akrasian Posted: December 13, 2007 at 12:01 AM (#2642986)
I find it interesting that ZiPS projects a 2009 decline and then a 2010-11 "rebound." To my recollection, this is the first time I've seen ZiPS do this. I assume this is just a fluke from the comparable set? Or are there certain reasons why ZiPS identifies Rowand as a player that will decline in 2009 but not in 2010-11?

Not a ZiPS expert, but I'd think that was tied into his 2007 being so much better than his 2005-2006. If the previous 3 years influence ZiPs so greatly, then I'd think that result would happen from time to time.
   17. GEB4000 Posted: December 13, 2007 at 12:20 AM (#2643016)
The first 8 years of the Sabean Era were pretty good (1 pennant, 3 division titles, 4 2nd place finishes). He just lost his touch; It happens. The owners will give another couple of years and then cut him loose.
   18. Johnny Tuttle Posted: December 13, 2007 at 01:02 AM (#2643061)
I have to think that in the context of last year's failed attempts to sign Matthews and Pierre to comparable $ and in light of this year's rumoured Lincecum to my Jays for Rios, this does represent something better than the worst case scenario for Giants fans. Small solace, but solace nonetheless.
   19. Johnny Tuttle Posted: December 13, 2007 at 01:02 AM (#2643062)
GEB4000, was there any player maybe with a remarkable peformance on the field any of those years to maybe give credit to?
   20. Johnny Tuttle Posted: December 13, 2007 at 01:04 AM (#2643064)
The Ethan Allen comp sounds like you're calling him old or something. Wasn't he a revolutionary era Founding Father from Vermont?
   21. Moe Greene Posted: December 13, 2007 at 01:08 AM (#2643067)
The Ethan Allen comp sounds like you're calling him old or something. Wasn't he a revolutionary era Founding Father from Vermont?

Aaron Rowand is a Green Mountain Boy?
   22. JJ1986 Posted: December 13, 2007 at 01:20 AM (#2643078)
Aren't all of the good position players who the Giants have outfielders who have decent overall production but no standout batting skill? I guess Rowand is a much better defender than Lewis, Winn and Schierholtz, but I'd try and upgrade somewhere else first.
   23. Steve Treder Posted: December 13, 2007 at 01:23 AM (#2643083)
Aren't all of the good position players who the Giants have outfielders who have decent overall production but no standout batting skill?

No. The Giants have no good position players.
   24. Gambling Rent Czar Posted: December 13, 2007 at 01:30 AM (#2643090)
GEB4000, was there any player maybe with a remarkable peformance on the field any of those years to maybe give credit to?


Dusty Baker?
   25. Steve Treder Posted: December 13, 2007 at 01:48 AM (#2643109)
GEB4000, was there any player maybe with a remarkable peformance on the field any of those years to maybe give credit to?

Duh.

But it is the case that the Sabean of those years and the Sabean of the past few bear little resemblance to one another. Sabean pulled off a number of good trades, acquiring Kent, Snow, Hernandez, Burks, and Schmidt, and moreover he demonstrated a nice knack for picking up bargains who made useful contributions in supporting roles.

However, since 2003 or so Sabean has turned into a complete blockhead.
   26. Dan Szymborski Posted: December 13, 2007 at 01:49 AM (#2643110)
Don't forget, the Cell and CBP are really good slugging parks and SF's a really bad slugging park. Now, I'm surprised that the optimistic is that low, but it's not an alarming difference really.

Not a ZiPS expert, but I'd think that was tied into his 2007 being so much better than his 2005-2006. If the previous 3 years influence ZiPs so greatly, then I'd think that result would happen from time to time.

Yeah, it happens a bit if a particular good or bad season moves farther off the radar. I use 7-5-4-2 weighting for hitters starting at age 25.

Also, you sometimes see some rounding issues. For example, the 2010 is 11.4 HR and the 2011 one is 10.5 HR, but I tell Excel to round to the nearest decimal so that the BA/OBP/SLG turns out correctly and fractional homers and stuff looks kinda retarded.
   27. ValueArb Posted: December 13, 2007 at 02:26 AM (#2643137)
Does ZiPS give credit for AL->NL transition due to talent level, or is it sopped up by having pitchers better rested due to no DH?
   28. King Anaconda Posted: December 13, 2007 at 02:35 AM (#2643144)
Rowand will help the flyballers staff with his defense but he can be the 21th century Jefrey Hammonds too with his bat.
   29. Dan Szymborski Posted: December 13, 2007 at 02:55 AM (#2643165)
Does ZiPS give credit for AL->NL transition due to talent level, or is it sopped up by having pitchers better rested due to no DH?

There's an NL->AL penalty, though I'm fairly certain it's less than PECOTA's (I tend to be conservative and regress the balance moderately towards even).
   30. Walt Davis Posted: December 13, 2007 at 05:26 AM (#2643340)
Relative to the Hunter/Jones contracts, this is roughly the sort of "bargain" I expected Rowand to be. But man that offensive projection is worse than I was expecting. Still, the main question is his defensive projection. ZIPS has him as "average" for 2008 (not sure how wide that average class is) and presumably that will get worse with age along with the hitting. So I'm a little less of a Rowand booster than I was. But if ZIPS underrates his defense, then he'll still be a fine player down the road. I think I'd take this over Hunter's contract.
   31. GEB4000 Posted: December 13, 2007 at 05:56 AM (#2643372)
The Giants sucked from 94 to 96 with Bonds. They won the division in 1997 (Sabean's first year). It's nice to have a superstar, but one man doesn't make a team.
   32. Runscreated Posted: December 13, 2007 at 10:38 AM (#2643476)
ZIPS' optimistic projections even do not look that great. What will be the Giants' batting order. Lots of guys with similar tools set-Winn, Roberts, Rowand- no big bat.

Dan,

When does the first build of ZIPS come out?

As always, I appreciate your work.
   33. North Side Chicago Expatriate Giants Fan Posted: December 13, 2007 at 06:36 PM (#2644010)
This is just stupid. Still no big bat, still no infielder.

Sabean needs to be fired yesterday.
   34. oldjacket Posted: December 14, 2007 at 02:34 AM (#2645112)
Dan, do you do this "in the Cells" of Excel or do you have a Visual Basic code that you use?
   35. Dan Szymborski Posted: December 14, 2007 at 03:01 AM (#2645133)
Cells. Old school, baby!
   36. shoewizard Posted: December 14, 2007 at 05:05 AM (#2645270)
I need to see a new team's ZIPS.....I'm bored with Detroit and I'm bored by the Mitchell report. Please come out with the next team Dan. You are the savior of my sanity.

Thanks
   37. zenbitz Posted: December 14, 2007 at 08:13 PM (#2645816)
GEB4000 - The 1997 Giants allowed more runs than they scored. They also won 103 games in 1993, Bonds' first year.

From 1997-2007 The Giants averaged 87 wins.
Over that time, Bonds was worth 6.7 Batting wins/year. Subtracting 6.7 from 87, and you get 81.3.

So, ignoring Bonds' defense (which includes some good, some average, and some ugly years in LF), Sabean has been worth 0.3 wins above average GM who was gifted Barry Bonds.

BUT he did at the expense of never developing the farm system, such that 81 wins would look mightly nice for 2008.

I don't buy that he had a touch, and lost it. Most of the "Sabean Value Added" has been those trades mentioned by Steve. I think those trades were pure, blind, dumb, luck. I mean, how could he know Kent would be come a HOF-level hitter? How could he know Schmidt was a couple happy words from a pitching coach away from a CY-calibre set of seasons? If he he did have some way of knowing - why would this ability disappear.

Signing Rowand is a vintage Sabean move. High batting average, started > 4 years in MLB, good defensive rep (in this case, probably justified, but I think Sabes goes on rep - Vizquel, Matheny, etc. rather than somehting more quantitative).

It's not going to cripple the Giants (although not a great time to punt even a 2nd round pick), but realisitically, it's just another Randy Winn.
   38. standuptriple Posted: December 14, 2007 at 08:36 PM (#2645838)
If he becomes the new Marquis Grissom or Reggie Sanders I think they'll be happy with the purchase. The '08 Giants will be the epitome of "small ball". Maybe they can bring Brett Butler back to teach them the finer points of bunting.
   39. zenbitz Posted: December 15, 2007 at 12:59 AM (#2646116)
Brett Butler would immediately have the highest OBP on the Giants. I think even the 45-year-old version.
   40. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: December 15, 2007 at 04:40 AM (#2646236)
So a team with Dave Roberts and Randy Winn needed to go out and find another overrated centerfielder?
   41. GEB4000 Posted: December 17, 2007 at 10:37 PM (#2648282)
Zenbitz

I was referring to 1997 to 2004. They average 92 wins per season. The Giants average 73 wins from 1994 to 1996 and they were getting worse each year with a 68 wins in 1996. That's a pretty big jump. What changed in 1997?

90% of the men who have ever been GM's would not have made the Matt Williams trade. He was almost as big a star as Bonds. The fans were outraged, but Sabean had the big brass ones to make that move, which was his first significant one. He got JT Snow that winter, turning over his entire infield. He started with two third baseman and ended with an entire infield before the beginning of the 1997 season. But that's why he was successful. He was willing to make risky trades because he had nothing to lose when he was started. After a while of enjoying the fruits of his success, he starts worrying about screwing up and loses his nerve to make daring trades. One day he wakes up and trades three good pitchers for AJ Pierzynski.
   42. zenbitz Posted: December 20, 2007 at 06:38 PM (#2650807)
GEB4K -
Why do you throw out 2005-2007?
The Williams trade was brilliant. Miraculously so. That's the thing about miracles. They are hard to depend on. It was simply a miracle that Kent turned in to the player he did. If not, why didn't Sabean after getting blasted for the trade say "hey, Kent is going to be a bigger star that Matty ever was". He didn't because he had no idea. He made that trade because he also got Jose Vizcaino (the first), and Julian Tavarez!!! Those two guys were not exactly huge keys for the Giants in 1997 or any ML team, ever. One thing Sabean was correct about was that Matt Williams was done, and he absolutley traded him at the correct time.

JT Snow was the worst regular (i.e., good enough to keep his job) player in baseball for about 10 years.

His other great trade was getting Schmidt for squid scraps.
   43. Floyd Thursby Posted: December 22, 2007 at 07:44 PM (#2652241)
From 1997-2007 The Giants averaged 87 wins.
Over that time, Bonds was worth 6.7 Batting wins/year. Subtracting 6.7 from 87, and you get 81.3.


So Sabean would have went with a 24-man roster? Without Bonds, Sabean would have done something stupid -- like outbid the Orioles for David Segui -- but whomever he signed would have added some value.

There's also a chance that the Giants could have signed Manny Ramirez or Gary Sheffield. The whole "the Giants wuz handcuffed by Bonds's's salary"-argument is lame, but you have to think that ownership would have at least considered overpaying for a star if Bonds wasn't around.
   44. Dan Szymborski Posted: December 22, 2007 at 07:49 PM (#2652247)
ZB, it's good to have you around by the way - I'm always sad that some of the usenet crew didn't come along to BTF.
   45. Floyd Thursby Posted: December 23, 2007 at 12:24 AM (#2652419)
ZB, it's good to have you around by the way - I'm always sad that some of the usenet crew didn't come along to BTF.

I feel like that with the alt.sports.baseball.sf-giants folks and McCovey Chronicles. The only one whose name I recognize on McC is, uh, Zen Bitz. He gets around.
   46. Dan Szymborski Posted: December 23, 2007 at 01:14 AM (#2652434)
I feel like that with the alt.sports.baseball.sf-giants folks and McCovey Chronicles. The only one whose name I recognize on McC is, uh, Zen Bitz. He gets around.

Yeah, I can't think of any else of the Giants NG crowd that's around here, though I could just be forgetting someone (like I forgot you were a usenet guy, too). It'd be tickled pink if I could somehow lure Bernstein or Pearlman or Lentz to stop by.
   47. zenbitz Posted: December 27, 2007 at 01:14 AM (#2654006)
well, it's nice to be wanted. I think I was around for a while back when it was baseballprimer. But mostly I stop back here to pick up Zips projection ammo for the occasionaly pesky sabeanite that pops up his bootlicking head on MCC.

As for you Floyd, you forgot to add that Sabean should be credited with an average number of wins garnered from Bonds' salary.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
aleskel
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.5213 seconds
47 querie(s) executed