San Francisco Giants
Signed P Brett Tomko to a 1-year contract, $1.5 million contract.
Good thing Brian Sabean didn’t waste $1.5 million on one of those evil, child-molesting draft picks when a player the caliber of Tomko can be acquired for the same price. If Sabean’s really having trouble figuring out what to do with the saved draft pick money, I can think of better uses than Brett Tomko, such as hiring someone to dub the entire run of Mama’s Family into Mandarin Chinese.
Most mediocre pitchers are able to sneak above league-average once in a while, but Tomko’s proven devilishly skillful at avoiding that nasty fate since his rookie year, maxing out at an ERA+ of 97 in 1998. Tomko has even proven impervious to ballpark effects, allowing 66 homers in the last 2 years playing at Qualcomm and Busch.
People say that ballplayers are spoiled nowadays, especially the stars. Brian Sabean has decided to change that and has dedicated the 2004 season to making sure Barry Bonds knows what it feels like to be working in a waste treatment plant.
Tomko, Brett - 2004 ZiPS Projection
———————————————————————-
W L G GS IP H ER HR BB SO ERA
———————————————————————-
9 11 31 30 196 208 102 29 58 113 4.68
Dan Szymborski
Posted: January 10, 2004 at 06:41 AM |
7 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.
From the Giants' angle I see nothing. The darkness is great...
But you aren't accurate in saying "Jay Witasick is pure waiver-wire material." This guy struck out 106 in 79 innings last year, which is not your basic waiver-wire kind of stuff. There was a reason the Yankees were willing to part with Jiminez to get him; their acquisition of him just happened to coincide with the one big slump he had all year (I know this all too well because I had him on my fantasy team). He managed to get it pretty much straightened out by the last few weeks of the season. He can pitch.
I interpret this as pure economics for the Giants. Vander Waal will make $1 million more than Witasick, which is another $1 million they can now dangle in front of Mr. Bonds. They can now also probably part with Tim Worrell, who I suspect makes more than Witasick and doesn't have near the upside.
The Witasick acquisition gives the Giants some flexibility in the bullpen, which might allow them to clear some salary for Bonds by moving Robb Nen (with Felix Rodriguez closing and Witasick taking FRod's spot).
-- MWE
The loss of Vanderwal, while not a killer in itself, is indicative of a franchise that has done nothing to address its weaknesses and, in fact, seems intent on eliminating any upside within their weaknesses. Vanderwal's not a star and he isn't good defensively, but he's one of the very few players on the Giants that could potentially hit even 350/500.
Bonds and Aurilia combined were in the range of *230* runs above replacement offensively last year. Aurilia just dropping to the level of Miguel Tejada loses 60 runs by itself. Even Aurilia staying the same with the lack of Bonds and replacing Bonds with the fictitious league average outfielder that the Giants have loses 100 runs and puts the Giants with the dregs of baseball offensively.
Let's assume that Witasick *does* a pretty good job in middle relief for the Giants. Is the difference between Jay Witasick and Robbie Crabtree worth letting *another* offensive position go unmanned in an offense which needed two MVP caliber performances just to be average?
Bonds was literally worth 110-120 runs more than the league-average leftfielder this year. Aurilia in the 60-70 range. The 2001 Giants had a *170-190* run head start on the rest of the league and to end up with an offense that was only 40-50 runs above average is truly pitiful. We're not talking a 190 run head start on replacement level either, even though the Giants showed with the rest of their positions that they're unable to find players that can hit above replacement level.
The Giants overall offensive rankings by position in the NL:
C: 10th
How can you call the best offense in the league average?
You're also assuming that the Giants won't pick up a CF or corner outfielder if Bonds leaves, which I think is a poor assumption. Magowan and Sabean have done pretty well with free agents and trades, starting with Bonds in 1993 and Kent a few years later. They are poor at developing talent, but not evaluating (other than Santiago).
Also, wouldn't it be wise to assume that a healthy Snow will improve the 1B rating and Feliz will improve at 3B. As long as they haven't lost Bonds, the Giants should finish with the best NL offense for the third consecutive year. Without him, they will fall to the average team you keep mentioning.
This is a great trade for the Mets. They traded waiver wire material for a decent starter. I mean Deivi Cruz and Neifi Perez are as good as Relaford, and they're free.
Cedeno's VORP was above Lawton's. Sure the Mets do need another OF, but I think they *expect* to get one. It wouldn't surprise me if Estes is traded, or Rusch, or Chen, or Trachsel.
And I think the Giants were clearing salary for Bonds.
"Police say San Francisco Giants pitcher Shawn Estes took a
But allowing Rivera to go without a murmur puzzles me. Sure, I think Shinjo at the end of the day is probably preferable as my center fielder, but I'm not so positive about it that I wouldn't like to see a good old Spring Training battle to find out. Rivera's one of those guys who just might, someday, make some team real happy they latched on to him at the right instant. If I'm the team latching on to him at the current moment, I don't want to let go until I have to. I don't see how it was that the Giants had to right now.
I'll take your point that it was a poor choice of words on my part to characterize Estalella as "inconsequential." You're correct that he demonstrated very intriguing power/walk potential, particularly in the first half of 2000.
But on the other hand, in the other 326 atbats of his career, he's come in at .212/.309/.417 (.726 OPS). Baseball Reference identifies the two most similar players to him as Tom Haller and Billy Bryan. At his still young age, Estalella has now been dismissed by two different organizations (deemed less useful than the likes of Chris Brock and Boehringer), and it's not apparent to me that the Yankees have any plans for him. I'm seeing more Billy Bryan than Tom Haller here. It'll be quite a story when this guy wins the MVP.
So, sure, he's not inconsequential, but what exactly is he? Something less than irreplaceable, I would think.
And, Tejada, if I'm "Brian Sabean's lapdog," why is the fundamental point of my post to question the wisdom of the Rivera non-tender?
No argument that the Giants' catching sucks.
And keep those knee-slappers coming. You're a regular laugh riot.
Who would play CF? Bonds? Both Bonds and Henderson are leftfielders.
I think a lowball offer to Kenny Lofton might not be a bad idea. He fell off a cliff last year, but if they could get him for nothing and incentives he could turn out better than Benard. And if it's clear that he's got nothing left they can cut him and not be out anything. They're both on the far side of the hill, but at least Kenny has been useful in the recent past and might be line for his Mid-30s Blaze Of Glory Flameout Season (TM).
But more amazing, in one season of Diamond Mind, Damon Buford actually put up an OPS over 950 as a full-time starter. Talk about your random variation.
The only reason the Giants rank so well in EqA is that Bonds is a monster, their 2B hits like a RF, and their SS hits like a 1B. Sabean has the hard-to-find positions settled, but can't build the rest of the team with average hitters. No credit.
That would be a 4-year, $72MM contract for arguably the best hitter in baseball. I think the likelihood of him completing the contract is well above 50-50; for the reason Chris just said; conditioning.
I really don't understand the consistent bashing of Sabean on these boards
Only partially tongue-in-cheek answer:
Sabean dares to build teams that win consistently in spite of his ignorance of sabermetric tenets. A team's not allowed to win consistently unless it does it the right way.
Sabean doesn't own the Giants; he's an employee of the owner, Peter Magowan. His boss has given him two (mutually incompatible) objectives: (1) field a playoff-contending team every year; no rebulding periods allowed, and (2) operate within the constraints of a mid-tier payroll. Sabean has consistently met both objectives, which I for one didn't expect he'd be able to do. I think this is pretty impressive. He's also making his boss rich(er) -- no wonder he's considered an attractive catch by other organizations.
If indeed the Giants go through the entire 2002 season with no other catchers in their lineup than Santiago, Service, and Edwards Guzman, the position will bring new meaning to the term "weakness." But I really doubt that's what will happen. Sabean will likely come up with some (cost-effective) help from somewhere. And, very likely, come September the Giants will be in the thick of the race.
IMHO, this is a BS reason for the Giants to claim "poor." The Giants are BETTER off financially for owning Pac Bell than they would otherwise be: if they were still renting Candlestick, they'd be paying rent rather than paying a mortgage, and the mortgage is a tax write-off that rent wouldn't be; since they own Pac Bell all the stadium advertising and concessions rentals become their revenue rather than the city's; and since they own Pac Bell it is an asset that continues to grow in value (tried to buy any commerical real estate in China Basin lately?), continuing to grow the owner's equity in addition to the otherwise-growing value of the baseball franchise.
Magowan COULD increase the team's payroll. He chooses not to. It's his money, and his team; he has the right to spend the money and operate his team as he pleases. But he gets no sympathy from me with his tired "the Pac Bell mortgage prevents me" line.
Tom, I think you're right regarding Estalella. The Giants were discreet about exactly what was going on, but it's apparent that they had some discipline issues with him.
It's in regard to things like this that I think sometimes it's easy for us out here to be armchair GMs and convince ourselves that if we were doing their jobs, we wouldn't be making these moves that make no sense on a spreadsheet. But real teams don't play their games on a spreadsheet, and real GMs have to contend with lots of issues that may not be visible to us.
http://www.pittsburgh.com/shared/sports/ap/ap_story.html/Baseball/AP.V8611.AP-BBN-Pirates-Mov.html
-- MWE
You may well be right regarding the tax implications to the team regarding rent vs. mortgage; I certainly profess no expertise in tax accounting. Nevertheless I remain convinced that ownership of Pac Bell Park is a net positive financial condition for the Giants, to a significant degree.
Of course there are reasons to conclude that this is a suboptimal arrangement to have; if we think Sabean doesn't have much of a grasp of sabermetric basics, try Baker: he bats Dunston LEADOFF a lot of the time, for crying out loud. But I think this is another one of those times in which looking at a team through a narrow stat-focused lens can cause one to miss the larger picture. In the Giants' situation, Baker has complete, total, and legitimate authority. The players know they can't go behind his back or over his head to Sabean, because Sabean and Baker are on the same page. As the Estalella case showed, you try and defy Dusty's authority, the next thing you know you're in the International League.
This can only serve to foster an atmosphere in which every player who is on the roster is focused on doing the best he can. I think someone else made this point in another one of these threads: Sabean makes goofy acquisitions, but the players on the Giants' roster very rarely underperform, and there are many examples of players performing better than ever expected: Kent and Aurilia obviously, but also the likes of John Johnstone, Marvin Benard (at least for a couple of years), Felix Rodriguez, Ramon Martinez, Ellis Burks, and Armando Rios. And Bonds seems to be making an annual event of outperforming even high expectations.
None of this is to say, of course, that the team wouldn't be better off if Sabean and Baker had a bit of a clue regarding such subversive concepts as OPS. But I think it points to the fact that there just might be some factors influencing team success that a guy like Sabean might have a pretty good handle on.
A class act.
I trust he's aware he's sitting on 99 wins unlike Al Kaline,who when asked why he had retired with 399 career taters stated "How was I supposed to know how many I had".
Mike Hampton - 99-66(active with Colo.but might stay at 99)
Joey Jay is also the only 99 game winning/ex Little Leaguer to be placed in the Witness Protection Program.
Also another hurler who won 99 games was George Suggs who went 99-91,but pitched his last 2 years in the Federal League with the Baltimore Terrapins.
When Mark Quinn first got injured, I read on ESPN.com that he injured himself after falling out of a chair. Then, a couple days later, the truth was revealed.
I wonder what Kent really hurt himself doing?
Barry Bonds sure is a lot more durable than Jeff Kent. I mean Bonds stayed healthy all year and he was carrying an entire team, whereas Kent hurts himself cleaning his truck!
Now that would be amusing. Isn't he the reason drafted players can't be traded within a calendar year of their being drafted? If memory serves, Incaviglia refused to report to the Expos when they drafted him out of college way back when, forcing them to trade him to Texas for Bob Sebra.
The KNBR update guy called Kent's injury a "freak accident" and reported that Kent didn't think too much of it when it happened. Overnight swelling changed that opinion.
Off-hand the Giants should be covered defensively, putting Martinez in as the everyday 2B and letting Bell get a clean shot at 3B. ESPN.com seems to think Bell will move to 2B, but I don't see that happening.
I'd agree wholeheartedly if the Giants hadn't traded Relaford to the Mariners for Bell (and I believe Pat Gillick did specify "no takebacks").
I'll believe Kent being ready on opening day when I see it (not that he should be out long enough to have too much effect).
I just feel luckyluckyluckylucky...luckluckluckluckluckluck...
Perhaps we could negotiate with Pitt, The Even Younger, or Pitt, The Embryo...
I take my cars to a car wash that provides exactly this kind of service, in Santa Clara, California. $8.95 including vacuum, wash & wax, all windows washed inside and out, wheel-brite on the wheels, and armor-all on the tires. I always give them a tip because they work so hard and so well. It's a terrific bargain.
If the season doesn't start soon, we may start arguing over who is the all-time greatest dry cleaner ...
This weekend I'm heading down to Arizona for a week, where among other things I'll take in several Cactus League games. It'll be my third straight year going down there, and it really is a blast. "Seeing the game in a more humble setting tends to make one appreciate it even more." Absolutely true.
Why didn't I wait to go to the car wash until I got my new sticker? A friend of mine threw up on my car, that's why.
Even my last speeding ticket (more than 2 years now!) was only $120 and it was in a double fine area.
Well, let's see if this helps:
2001 BA/OBP/SLG
Shinjo 268/320/405
Something about that phrase just strikes me funny. Does that mean I've never really bought anything, I've just "traded" cash for goods? I mean, I guess technically that's true, but what's so bad about saying the Giants "sold" Murray to the Rangers?
Ahh, but now Tommy Goodwin is back to fill the role of a fast left-handed hitter who can't get on base for the Giants.
It's always important to have one of those around.
A joy and a frustration to watch.
Jason Kendall: 190 AB, .666 OPS, +4.9 RARP.
Can we warm up the "R" word? The "MC" catch phrase?
Brett had a White Sox trade idea awhile ago (for a package including Crede) that seemed pretty plausible considering the White Sox will apparently have to be forced at gunpoint to give Crede a shot.
I liked Diaz much more last year (even had him rated over Foppert who I was high on...), but that was before I found he was 20/21 instead of 19/20 dominating the lower minors...
He does know how to keep the ball in the park, and could fit a similar statistical profile as Derek Lowe (Not high K's, solid K:BB, low HR allowed)
It may be a small victory but it's a victory.
This is exactly what you do with a player like Lofton. Sign him cheap, if he can have a decent year you may be able to get a couple of spare parts for him. Diaz might wind up as a back of the rotation guy at best, something the Sox have plenty of already, but at least this trade looks OK.
Sounds like Crede is coming up this week.
Even if the trade's a victory for Rowand, it might turn out to be a pyrrhic one.
At that point I think it has to be the manager's responsibility, not the GM's, to evaluate whether Rowand is worthy of beating out the incumbents.
-- MWE
Somewhere Rob is laughing and skipping...
Odd move, though. What's the risk that someone else would claim him, and what's the penalty if they do?
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main