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

Thursday, December 21, 2006

Padres - Signed Giles

San Diego Padres - Signed 2B Marcus Giles to a 1-year contract.

Being that this is $3.25 million for a single year, it certainly looks like while the Cubs were correct about outfielders going for a lot of money this offseason, they really overshot for Mark DeRosa in a market in which there was a glut of 2B, none of which really got big contracts.

I’m really shocked that the Braves did this in the end.  It’s one thing to dump salary when you can pick up something to help the team, but I have a really hard time believing that the Braves weren’t offered anything for Giles.

Obviously, this is a winning situation for the Padres.  They don’t give up Scott Linebrink for Giles and get to pay Giles less than they would have if he were going into arbitration.  It also makes the Barfield trade look even better and makes up for the Padres not winning the bid for Iwamura.  Big thumbs up for the Padres here.

2007 ZiPS Projection - Marcus Giles
———————————————————————————————————
          AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB   BA   OBP   SLG
———————————————————————————————————
Projection   525 84 145 31 2 11 54 61 102 11 .276 .356 .406
———————————————————————————————————
Opt. (15%)  545 100 160 37 3 14 69 71 98 16 .294 .381 .450  
Pes. (15%)  413 58 107 21 1   7 35 43 87   7 .259 .331 .366
———————————————————————————————————

Dan Szymborski Posted: December 21, 2006 at 08:19 PM | 37 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. frannyzoo Posted: December 21, 2006 at 08:33 PM (#2266604)
I haven't been paying attention....just how bad is Giles in the field now? Otherwise, ~.750 OPS 2nd baseman getting $3.25M just doesn't compute in this market. Or maybe replace the word "market" with "Hendry's insane voices".
   2. Latnam's first name is Bob Lemon's middle name Posted: December 21, 2006 at 08:48 PM (#2266614)
I wish Giles the best. I'll miss him. (I'm really glad he didn't go to the Mets.)
   3. Nobody ##### with DeJesus Posted: December 21, 2006 at 08:56 PM (#2266619)
That optimal projection would be frickin' amazing in PETCO.
   4. bibigon Posted: December 21, 2006 at 09:06 PM (#2266626)
Wouldn't optimistic projections generally be pretty positive?

I'll take the under on that projection by the way. That line is pretty close to what I'd project from him with the Braves - PETCO's gonna push that down some.
   5. The Answer to the TWolves (GMoney) Posted: December 21, 2006 at 09:29 PM (#2266646)
What are the Pads looking at for a lineup in 07?

C: Bard
1B: Gonzalez
2B: Giles
3b: Kouzmanoff
SS: Greene
LF: Sledge
CF: Cameron
RF: Giles
   6. Gaylord Perry the Platypus (oi!) Posted: December 21, 2006 at 09:37 PM (#2266651)
I have a really hard time believing that the Braves weren't offered anything for Giles
I thought that too, but this contract kind of proves that it was true. He would have gotten about $6 million in arbitration. This is about half that. Even assuming a discount because he wanted to play with his brother, I'm still guessing no one offered him more than $4 million, or more than one year. I mean, if the Mets had offered a three year deal worth $15 million, he'd be a Met today.

With that in mind, I'm convinced that no one offered the Braves anything for Giles.
   7. PreservedFish Posted: December 21, 2006 at 09:52 PM (#2266665)
Good signing but I am skeptical of Giles' future. He strikes me as a potential post-steroids player, and his defense is going to get worse this point.
   8. AROM Posted: December 21, 2006 at 10:02 PM (#2266675)
Ronnie Belliard's a pretty comparable player. I wonder if he winds up with the Braves for even less than this.

Second baseman are like kickers in football these days.
   9. Barnaby Jones Posted: December 21, 2006 at 11:21 PM (#2266738)
Supposedly the D-Rays offered a 3-year deal.
   10. Darren Posted: December 22, 2006 at 01:36 AM (#2266839)
I agree that this is a mystery. I wish the Red Sox had traded some trinket for him and paid him $5 mil/year or whatever he'd get in arb. Maybe everyone thought they could sign him after he became a FA and he just decided he wanted to go to SD.
   11. G A Delgado Posted: December 22, 2006 at 01:44 AM (#2266846)
He always said he wanted to play in SD. I think that they did asked him about playing in lots of places, but he just said "No, thanks". He did said in an interview "As soon as the Braves didn't offer me a contract, my eyes turned to the Padres".
   12. Kyle S Posted: December 22, 2006 at 02:55 PM (#2267051)
That's a pretty crummy lineup, really. Here's hoping they can pick it and pitch a little bit.
   13. Nobody ##### with DeJesus Posted: December 22, 2006 at 11:08 PM (#2267522)
Is Bard really the starting catcher?
   14. Scott Kazmir's breaking balls Posted: December 22, 2006 at 11:38 PM (#2267543)
Is it politically correct, being so close to the Mexican border, to shout "Ole" every time one gets through for a base hit? What's so bad about Josh Barfield's fielding that would justify this signing? Just doesn't make much sense to me.
   15. Tanto Posted: December 23, 2006 at 02:01 AM (#2267576)
I have a really hard time believing that the Braves weren't offered anything for Giles.

Of course, it didn't help that the Braves were waving the "If we can't get anything for him, we'll non-tender him!" flag since Day 1. Would you trade anything for him if you knew you could get him for just cash if you held your ground? The Braves should have called the other teams' bluffs on this one.
   16. CoastalFan Posted: December 23, 2006 at 04:27 AM (#2267622)
So the biggest hitters in Padre land this summer will be.....
Gonzalez and Kouzmanoff? That looks like a long, frustrating summer waiting to happen. Here's to a bunch of 2 - 1 10 - inning home wins and 85 or so 8 - 2 road losses in parks where everyone else will be able to hit....
   17. Cowboy Popup Posted: December 23, 2006 at 04:52 AM (#2267628)
I don't get why everyone here is down on the Padres. Kouzamanoff is supposed to be a good hitter. Gonzalez is a 24 year old coming off a 125 OPS+ season. They're getting rid of the huge sinkhole that was Vinny Castilla, which will make up for the loss of offense at catcher. I think Khalil Greene can be better and the outfield production should be similiar (Cameron slowing down, Giles bouncing back, Sledge probably doing a bit worse then Roberts).

Anyway, their starting rotation is pretty nasty, and I think they'll hit enough to stay in it, and their oldest infielder will be 29 next year.
   18. Harold can be a fun sponge Posted: December 23, 2006 at 08:47 PM (#2267785)
Once he became a FA, there was no chance that Giles was going anywhere but SD. His daughter was just born prematurely and is still in the incubation ward. Playing at home is always nice, but in Giles' situation it was more important than anything else.

Link
   19. Greg Maddux School of Reflexive Profanity Posted: December 23, 2006 at 10:07 PM (#2267818)
Tracy suffers from placenta percreta, which means her pregnancies are risky to both herself and the fetus because the placenta can grow through the uterus and attach to nearby organs. Bleeding may occur in the third trimester, and premature births are often a result.

The lesson: keep having more.
   20. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: December 23, 2006 at 10:54 PM (#2267836)
Did you know: Barry Bonds is so evil he causes steroids accusations to be leveled at Marcus Giles?

True fact.
   21. fracas' hope springs eternal Posted: December 24, 2006 at 05:22 PM (#2268076)
What's so bad about Josh Barfield's fielding that would justify this signing?

He lacks the arm strength to throw out baserunners from Cleveland?
   22. Astro-Bonilla Posted: December 25, 2006 at 08:20 PM (#2268481)
That's a pretty crummy lineup, really. Here's hoping they can pick it and pitch a little bit.


C: Bard
1B: Gonzalez
2B: Giles
3b: Kouzmanoff
SS: Greene
LF: Sledge
CF: Cameron
RF: Giles
Not really; once you take into account park effects, Giles, Giles, Gonzalez and Cameron will be projected to be above average at their position; nobody is below replacement level, half are above average, and their is a good chance 2-3 out of the other 4 will be about league average.

No superstar; but you don't need one to have a league average offense.
   23. Dandy Little Glove Man Posted: December 25, 2006 at 09:23 PM (#2268507)
Once he became a FA, there was no chance that Giles was going anywhere but SD. His daughter was just born prematurely and is still in the incubation ward. Playing at home is always nice, but in Giles' situation it was more important than anything else.

Anyone consider that the Braves could look better to free agents and players in their own organization as a result of how they handled Marcus Giles? Rather than sending him somewhere he didn't want to go for some marginal return, they non-tendered him and allowed him to sign with San Diego. Coupled with Glavine's apparent desire to go back to Atlanta, the Braves look like an organization that treats players well. Also, Rocker's diatribe against Schuerholz and the reminder that they cut ties with him can't help but be a positive. All in all, quite an offseason for Atlanta in terms of cementing itself as a great place to play. It'll be interesting to see if this translates into market discounts over the next few years.
   24. Rickey! In a van on 95 south... Posted: December 26, 2006 at 09:55 PM (#2268923)
Did you know: Barry Bonds is so evil he causes steroids accusations to be leveled at Marcus Giles?

You know what else will cause those accusations? Losing power every year since steroid testing began. See also Blalock, Hank and, oh, what a coincidence, Giles, Brian.
   25. Greg Maddux School of Reflexive Profanity Posted: December 27, 2006 at 06:31 AM (#2269183)
Yeah, there's that telltale ISO jump between 2004 and 2005.
   26. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: December 27, 2006 at 09:52 AM (#2269232)
You know what else will cause those accusations? Losing power every year since steroid testing began

1. This didn't happen.

2. What does this have to do with Barry Bonds?

3. This didn't happen to Brian Giles, either.

See: Accusations, unsubstantiated; rumours, mongering of; and rudimentary research, lack of.
   27. Rickey! In a van on 95 south... Posted: December 27, 2006 at 02:54 PM (#2269268)
526
443
461
387

Graph the line, Dextor.
   28. Rickey! In a van on 95 south... Posted: December 27, 2006 at 02:56 PM (#2269269)
And since we're drawing downhill curves, here's Brian:

514
475
483
397
   29. Josh Posted: December 27, 2006 at 03:04 PM (#2269272)
People keep using this argument in a number of threads.

Is there any reason to think that projections actually work like this - ie, a straight line downward slope?

If we took 1000 players with a 500, 470, 440, 400 slg'ing line, would the best projection be a weighted average with an age adjustment, and some various adjustments for league and park, and a adjustment towards the mean (either population/position specific, or general)? In other words, given Giles's age, if he stayed in the same park/league context, shouldn't we expect him to rebound. If we are graphing the next point, shouldn't it be above 400?

There were a number of threads about this when discussing Lowell to the Red Sox last year, amongst other transactions. MGL's 4 yr wght'd avg for Lowell, iirc, turned out pretty spot on, though it is really meant for a larger population rather than any specific player. Unless we have concrete real knowledge that keeps this player out of the larger population group (eg, Julio Franco), shouldn't we assume that the rules for projecting the larger population group are valid?
   30. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: December 28, 2006 at 06:55 AM (#2269837)
Congratulations, Hutcheson, you've noticed that two guys had SLG fall-offs several years after steroid testing went into effect. Altert me when you stop being a misinformed mudslinger.
   31. Rickey! In a van on 95 south... Posted: December 28, 2006 at 02:55 PM (#2269896)
Brian can be written off somewhat due to age. Marcus, not so much. Maybe it was the violent injuries. Maybe his major concussion at the knee of Mark Prior combined with his run-in with Andruw Jones and resulting broken collarbone sapped his power. Or maybe he had to change his training regimen. Whatever, the fact is his SLG has dropped every year since testing began, he has always been a gym rat with more power than his frame would generally suggest, just like his brother, and those two things add up anecdotally to questions about his training habits.

Chipper Jones has become a hell of a lot more injury prone in the post-testing years too. Or do you suppose that the only players using steroids or PEDs were the stars called before congress or a grand jury? Surely you're not that stupid.
   32. Dan Szymborski Posted: December 28, 2006 at 07:29 PM (#2270102)
Vox, what you're missing is that Sam isn't one of the big OMG STEROIDS guys. If one doesn't feel it's a huge deal for a player to be using steroids, then suggesting someone has used steroids isn't really intended to be mudslinging. I've been under the impression that Sam likes the Gileses actually.
   33. Rickey! In a van on 95 south... Posted: December 28, 2006 at 07:58 PM (#2270138)
I have always liked Giles. I was part of the Free Marcus Giles brigade before it was hip and trendy. I've supported Giles from his rookie league debut through 2006. And I think Marcus Giles is a reasonably good case, anecdotally, for steroid use. His career is built around slugging outside of his frame and playing the middle infield regularly. Since testing began his frame has shrunk, his SLG has dropped every year (more or less) and he is constantly injured. It may be something _other_ than PEDs, but the league's book on Marcus Giles no longer reads "potential All Star." He's essentially become a fungible MI part. The D-Rays offered him 3 years to _back up_ 2B and 3B. No team in the league was willing to risk arbitration on him. His market value is exactly what he made in his mid-arb year ($3.5 mil.)

I don't know for certain what happened, of course. I'm not in an MLB front office. But somewhere between 2004 and now Marcus Giles' stock dropped from "potentially the best 2B in the league" to "Mark Derosa except when dealing with the Cubs." A couple of notable things happened in that span. He got the living #### knocked out of him by Mark Prior, going unconscious on the field due to the collision of his head and Prior's knee. Since then his OBP and SLG have slipped to pedestrian levels. Maybe his eyesight isn't as perfect as it was before? He then got run through wholly and entirely by Andruw Jones on a pop to shallow CF, breaking his collar bone in the process. His SLG went even worse at that point. Maybe he hasn't healed properly and doesn't generate the same power stroke he used to get to the majors? Finally he's been hampered by nagging injuries -- hand problems from sliding into bases, leg aches and the like. In the mean time he's gotten visibly less bulky.

Does that all add up to proof positive of steroid use? No, of course not. But steroids have two primary uses for baseball players. First they allow them to recuperate faster from gym sessions, which allows them to bulk up. Giles used to be bulky, now he's not so much (just like his brother. And Ryan Klesko and Jason Giambi.) The other use of steroids is to return from nagging injuries faster, as the same process that heals the body from repeated workout strain also heals the body from wear and tear of playing the middle infield (or relieving.) Marcus Giles now has nagging injury issues he never had before (as does Chipper Jones.) So, while it's far from proof positive, anecdotally it is something reasonable people should consider. The bottom line is that the league doesn't think of Marcus Giles the same way it used to think of Marcus Giles, and I'm kinda interested in figuring why.
   34. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: December 28, 2006 at 08:06 PM (#2270145)
Marcus ISO:

168
169
210
132
170
125

Brian ISO

257 (121 AB)
191
191
299
279
281
324
215
191
172
134
   35. 5.00, .280/.320/.400, 4th outfielder Posted: December 28, 2006 at 08:15 PM (#2270154)
How does slugging more than your frame would suggest mean steroids. Don't steroids add to your frame?
   36. Rickey! In a van on 95 south... Posted: December 28, 2006 at 09:43 PM (#2270245)
How does slugging more than your frame would suggest mean steroids. Don't steroids add to your frame?

No, steroids assist in adding muscle. The frame, the skeleton, is what you're born with.
   37. Kyle S Posted: December 28, 2006 at 10:02 PM (#2270266)
I've heard rumors that Giles' extracurricular activities didn't endear him to that Atlanta brass, and that performancing enhancing drugs may not be the kind that Schuerholz et al were concerned with...

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Randy Jones
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

 

Page rendered in 0.4370 seconds
47 querie(s) executed