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.
Some of it is the Conte factor, but whatever, he's done pretty well.
Real Perspective: This is a move soley to solidify the 2003 playoff rotation at the expense of all other considerations. Ainsworth was likely done for the year, and Moss was no Loss. I wince at the 3-young-guys-for-1-soon-to-be-free-agent, but I suppose I have learned to trust Sabean the Hoss trader.
Last thought: Hannaman is a throw-in who is roughly equivalent to the draft pick SF gets for not resigning Ponson (whom they might sign if he is a Jason Schmidt-style Pac Bell God (tm))
Is Neyer smoking crack- he's talking about veteran experience ?
Ponson's numbers are basically the same as Ainsworths, extrapolated over a period of almost double the starts. Ainsworth (3.82 ERA, 6.34 K/9, 1.65 K/BB)- Ponson (6.08 K/9, 2.33 K/BB, 3.77 ERA)- I realize Ainsworth is in PAc Bell as opposed to Camden Yards, and concede Ponson is a better pitcher, but 8 million dollars (expected free agent price) and 5 years cheap better ? More so, Moss had been pitching far better recently- why mess with a winning formula, by trading guys who are doing damn well ? And Hannerman is a high upside prospect- certainly a flameout possibility, but the kind of guy you throw in as a the bait on a big deal- not as a filler at the end, the way SF is doing it. Sabes got snookered by the win totals- bring back Thrift- we could have gotten Ponson for Bernard and Neifi...
however, with Hannaman, in a prospects-are-like-gold environment, Sabean overpaid by at least one grade of pitcher. he should have offered Moss, Hermanson and Woolard instead.
does Minaya know Savean was offering this nice a package around? because if the trade had been for Vazquez, the crowd would be singing a different tune.
pull this and job offer or no, you don't eat lunch that day.
don't even get me started on the David Cash 'deal' (of which admittedly I should long have let go) in which Sabean gave away an interesting prospect to the Cubs in order to.. um.. make the Tribune Corporation stop badmouthing him around the league. yay!
all you O's fans should write thank-you notes to Brian Sabean.
As an aside, what value - player wise - does a world championship have? Say you're the Red Sox, and knew that Bagwell would become a superstar, but also knew that with the addition of Larry Anderson you win the WS. I think they'd pull the trigger in a minute and let the Astros have their HOFer. Of course, there's never that kind of certainty, but the addition of Ponson does increase the Giants' chances in a short series, and the likelihood of Ainsworth or Hannaman being stars is pretty low. Certeras Parabus, it's a bad trade, but in the context in which it actually happened, go Giants.
As for Ainsworth, he had Tommy John surgery in college, he had back trouble last season, and now has a broken shoulder blade. Maybe the Giants decided he was never going to be healthy.
I liked Felix Diaz as much as a guy could like an injury-prone AA ball pitcher, but Ryan Meaux was hardly interesting. The problem with the Lofton trade was that everyone compared it to the Durham trade, which was straight thievery. Meaux is a 24-year old reliever who has great control, but has never posted more than a decent K/9 against much younger competition. If there is no such thing as a pitching prospect, there is definitely no such thing as a relief prospect.
Felix Diaz is 22, and having an okay season in AAA. He might yet pan out, but he has had the exact same career path as Lorenzo Barcelo so far.
Moss is useless, Hannanman is a fragile talent with a long way to go, and Ainsworth is out for the year. The Giants got the best starter on the block, and are going to stick him Pac Bell. Next year, worst case, they start Schmidt, Rueter, Williams, Foppert, Correia/mid-range FA, and they snatch the draft picks for Ponson. Ainsworth would look nice in that rotation, but they'll manage.
He also sugggested that Rueter's shoulder really pushed Sabean to get Ponson, which makes me a little concerned about Rueter's health.
Gammons also said that the Giants were in serious talks with Montreal about Vazquez but the talks broke off yesterday when the Expos were told by Selig that they couldn't trade their stars.
As is the case with Gammons, feel free to question the source if you like.
I think one of Gammons' interns is stalking Sabes.
So.
Sabes trades a walking gas can and a broken scapula for one of the best pitchers in the AL.
This is so the Giants can get back to the Series, this year. Next year is next year. Sabean will worry about it come November. He tore a NL champion apart last year; he can and will do it again this year if he needs to. I trust the guy, even though he traded Ortiz for a walking gas can to save some money.
"I'll take 'Tortured Metaphors' for $500 Alex"
Don't sell yourself short, that's genius. You've been saving that up, looking for the right thread to toss it in, and I'm not going to let it pass unnoticed.
Anyway, point is he's a pitching prospect who has less than 70 IP in high-A. That's like a beautiful woman whose language you don't speak who shows up at your house one night and starts sleeping with you. Its nice while it lasts, but you won't be totally surprised if she suddenly disappears and you never see her again.
"I'll take 'Tortured Metaphors' for $500 Alex"
I wouldn't take him over Mike Mussina, Roger Clemens, David Wells, Pedro Martinez, Roy Halladay, Estaban Loaiza, Tim Hudson, Barry Zito, Mark Mulder, Rich Harden, or Joel Pineiro. At best, he was the 12th best pitcher in the American League. His numbers are solid, but some people are making him out to be an ace, and he's not. His ERA is 3.77. His strikeout to walk ratio is worse than Bartolo Colon, Andy Pettitte, and a few other guys I didn't list as clearly better than Ponson. In his career, he's tended to be a late-fader: His ERA after the All Star break is .40 runs higher than before the All-Star break.
To #37 - in the wild card era I'm not sure making moves to win this year is such a hot idea. You have to win 3 series, which makes it more or less a crapshoot. I'd rather have a team that wins the division 3 or 4 years straight and gets 3 or 4 chances at the Series. I don't see SF winning the series thanks to Ponson, and I don't see him having anywhere near the value of the three guys they traded for him next year.
while the assessment of 'third tier' is spot on (where someone like Williams or Foppert is first tier, Hannaman second), I will miss Bruso's singleminded devotion to throwing strikes.
Still, nice move by the Giants.
Yeah it'd be better if they hadn't dumped Ortiz in the first place, but it wasn't as bad as say...
LESS NEIFI PEREZ.
I've got a disease, and the only prescription is LESS NEIFI PEREZ.
I could kiss Sabean.
While this is frustrating for Texieria-less Giants fans, I think this is really a "design" choice by Sabean and Co. Their draft/develeop philosospy is pitching, pitching, and more pitching, and if they have enough pitching they get some more pitching. They then flip the suspect-side prospects in trade, and sign proven ML veteran position players.
I think Huckaby said (is that like quoting Aristotle?) that he doesn't necessarily agree with that philosopy, but at least it's a consistant method. I echo those sentitments.
Pac Bell Tix tonight! Row 3 section 151
Ben
Yep, I'm going to hell.
I'll freakin' take that. He's a catcher.
"As the mayor of Druggachussets, I declare that projection to be...awesome!"
but.. in the Metrodome, his hits will roll for awhile and he may pick up an extra base or two.
I will second that, and he probably won't hit .311 next year either but next year is the only year I will ever take the under on that. EVER.
I would kind of like the Twins to find a one-year stop gap type so they won't need to start him on Opening Day unless he looks 100% ready in spring training. At the same time who ever they sign can't be too good since that guy will most likely be the backup in the second half. I'm assuming LeCroy will never catch again and I'm certain Morneau won't.
maybe in AAA, a fielder may be better than in the majors, but not in High A and AA. No way.
The Twins could always keep a catcher around for spring training just in case.
Is Leyritz available?
For some reason him hitting .330-something in the Florida State League and then moving up to AA and hitting .340-something tells me he's quite capable of it.
Define "useful"? A 4.66 ERA (the ZIPS projection) in Pac Bell is not exactly sterling performance. Last year, that would have been an ERA+ of 92. Assuming ZIPS uses multi-year park factors, that 4.66 ERA is probably closer to an 86 ERA+.
The point isn't that Jensen is a good pitcher or even a useful pitcher (depending on your definition), it's that Hermanson's projection of a 5.01 ERA (at Pac Bell!) looks even worse....and certainly not worth the extra $500,000.
And, hey, below average pitchers have to pitch somewhere. Below average pitchers still belong in the major leagues somewhere. They are still useful. The back end of the Giants bullpen is as good a place as any for one of those guys.
The Hermanson who was in Boston and St. Louis had nothing. He looked like a righty Rueter without the changeup. The Hermanson we saw for the Giants had all sorts of movement and velocity, and finished the season very strong.
If there's a choice between:
a) A former fringe major leaguer who lost four miles off his fastball last year, and struggled in AAA
or
b) A former two starter who long ago lost effectiveness due to injury, but showed considerable promise at the end of the season.
I'll pay the extra $.5M for "b" every time. While I like Correia, he is just one season removed from stinking up the Northwest League. Lowry is coming off an erratic, injury-filled year. Brower is much better as a reliever. Pettyjohn hasn't even pitched 100 innings since having his colon removed. Chad Zerbe would not last as a starter, to be generous.
I don't see the internal options for the Giants. This was a great low risk/high reward signing.
But your comments are more than fair enough. I don't know enough about the Giants system to say that Hermanson isn't the best option here. My main point is to note that Dan's projections are not at all out of line and, if you believe the projections, the Giants do have equally good or slightly better options that would also be cheaper.
If he is being slated for 5th starter, I really don't like his chances no matter what he's being paid or whether the Giants have any internal options or not.
I don't even understand my own logic, but I'm more comfortable with a team paying him $800 k to be the 11th pitcher than to pay him $800 k to be the 5th starter. I'd probably sign him to a guaranteed deal (though probably not $800 k) to be that 11th pitcher, but I'd give him an NRI as the 5th starter.
I know, it makes no sense to me either. I guess it's that I think his chances of giving me 60-80 decent innings of low-leverage relief are decent while his chances of giving me 150-180 near-decent innings as a starter are tiny. But hey, I haven't seen the guy pitch in at least a year, so what do I know?
If you're talking about Matt Cain and Craig Whitaker as potential contributors to a major league team, then the TINSTAAPP theory holds up. But if you're talking about them as possible trade bait, they are very valuable prospects for the future. If that makes sense.
FWIW.
I'm all for snatching up free talent, but there isn't that much out there right now. At least, no one I can point to and say, "Ye gods, that player would be better than Jeffrey Hammonds!"
If someone structures their comment in an "If-Then" format, if he matches his career numbers then he's worth the money, the only thing that's really arguable is whether he's worth the money under those conditions.
#4 didn't say you could bank on anything.
That said, when you look at Hammonds career, he had a nice string of OBP+ years before signing his Milwaukee contract which was exactly the disaster that everyone predicted. His only bad years were really in Milwaukee.
If this is a Raul Ibanez contract, it's a bad deal. But, a million dollars isn't that much anymore.
I guess what I was suggesting in my first point is that maybe this is a new Hammonds. What stands out in his brief time with the Giants is his better discipline at the plate. Sometimes, when there's a performance spurt past 30, it can be meaningful, especially when it's related to much better command of the plate. Hammonds went to Stanford, he's probably a bright guy. My point was that if you're talented and bright, and you're watching Bonds dominate game after game, might you not try to do the same things?
If Hammonds tears a muscle in spring training and is limited to 50 games and hits .230, we can all say we told the Giants we told them so. But, there are holes in RF and CF, and if you get 120 games from Hammonds with .270/.370/.460 numbers playing in that park, it's a pretty good deal.
Voice?
ESPN's player pages include reasonably detailed reports by STATS, Inc., although they're usually not available for rookies or bit players. Here's one on Shawn Green.
The Toronto Star also has some info, though theirs aren't as detailed. Here's their site.
Neither one's perfect, but they're the best I've been able to find.
Offering Worrell arbitration seems too risky to me. Even with Quantrill and Hawkins getting borderline-goofy deals, I don't think there will be a rush to give Worrell a multi-year deal.
Santiago isn't coming back. I think it's a given you offer him arbitration. There will be a least one team willing to give him two years. He wouldn't risk becoming a resented, overpaid backup.
Aurilia, I'm not so sure about. I think he needs to come back, regardless, but if the team is really yellowing their knickers over the budget, arbitration seems risky.
Just out of curiosity, who would you have signed instead of Hammonds? I'm sure there are better values, but I don't recall seeing any on the free agent lists, and there isn't anything already in the organization.
If teams start using intrusive, freedom-threatening methods to assemble their bullpens, would that be a "Worrellian nightmare"?
Every so often, us statheads get together and talk about Barry Bonds. Very often. We talk about every aspect of his game from his personal accomplishments to wondering if teams could have league-average offenses just by putting a lineup of Barry Bonds and 7 (or 8 if you're the AL) bums out on the field.
Thanks to Brian Sabean and the acquisitions of Neifi Perez and Marquis Grissom, one of our most treasured dreams is about to come true.
Now all the Giants need to do now is to find a way to get rid of Durham, Alfonzo, and Pierzynski and they'll be well on their way.
Snow isn't bad at this price, so long as they spot him properly. But Tucker: WTF?
Furthermore, in a bid to shore up their rotation, two sources said the Giants are pursuing left-hander Darren Oliver. One said the Giants have offered the 33-year-old pitcher a one-year contract for about $2 million, but general manager Brian Sabean said he has extended no firm offers to any other free agents.
Michael Tucker? Darren Oliver?
A $3.5 million dollar investment in Tucker is usually better than a $2 million dollar investment in the guy from Mount Pile High School who has a wicked curve ball. Sometimes even the "sure thing" college guys like Nick Swisher or Jeremy Guthrie don't pan out.
At least with Tucker you know you're getting a (nearly) league average hitter.
Interesting point. And this is the second year in a row the Giants have done this. The A's were not planning to offer Ray Durham arbitration last year, and the Giants gave the A's an extra two draft picks by signing him before the arbitration deadline. Do the Giants feel that the cost of first round picks are just not worth the investment? But if that's the case, then why did they offer Jeff Kent arbitration last year?
If you are going to spend $2 - $3 million, then maybe. If I were a team with a really tight payroll, I'd be hesitant. First round draft picks make a lot of money for zero production at the major league level. It's even worse when you give them major league contracts, where they are potentially a detriment to the team.
I'm not saying every team shouldn't draft guys in the first round, but I do think that they money that these guys get as signing bonuses is something that must be considered. Instead, we here tend to gloss over that as if the first round picks are free.
As a hitter that was below league average in an extreme hitters environment, I'd argue that he is not worth anywhere near what Sabean signed him for. In fact, I don't think he's worth more than $600k per year.
He's a slightly below average hitter with an OPS+ of 92. He may be overpaid, but probably not grossly. He's still taking a $1 million paycut.
If you don't think a 1st rounder is worth the money, then don't sign him.
If you don't want to sign a guy, why keep the pick? "Trade" the pick away by signing someone else's free agent.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the signing, I'm just pointing out that we do have to consider the money being paid to the draft picks just as we consider the money being paid to the regulars.
Perhaps I'm remembering this quote from Gammons: "Beane was ecstatic to get a first-rounder and a sandwich pick as compensation for the Giants signing Ray Durham."
That sounds to me like they were not expecting to get any compensation at all.
Yah, I've since double-checked with the EqA's and he's pretty bad. I have to agree that he's overpaid. How's his defense? Didn't realize 92 OPS+ was replacement level, but I guess it makes sense for an outfielder.
But the Giants aren't getting any value for the pick.
Can't really argue with that - I never meant to imply I was defending the signing. Just wanted to point out that maybe losing a first round draft pick isn't as terrible as we make it sound.
MLB should get their heads on straight and let teams trade draft picks (and lose the draft pick compensation for losing a free agent).
Getting a draft pick is like putting a coin in a slot machine.
Getting Michael Tucker is like putting that coin in a slot machine that has two signs on it that say "out of order" and "absolutely no refunds."
Getting a draft pick is like putting a quarter in a slot machine.
Getting Michael Tucker is like taking the quarter to the cashier's window and exchanging it for a Canadian penny.
Getting a draft pick is like putting a quarter in a slot machine.
Signing Michael Tucker is like putting a quarter in a slot machine, smashing the slot machine to pieces with a sledgehammer, feeding the pieces to a walrus, killing the walrus, burning its body, shooting its body into the sun, and then destroying the sun.
That's like someone burning their money because they might have spend it on something stupid.
Sabean should be fired. Any other job in the world, a mistake this catastrophic loses you your job. You simply cannot defend picking "no thing" over "thing for free" if the thing can be entirely ignored if you decide you don't want it.
That's EXTREMELY insensitive to the guy you draft. Do you realize that you are denying this person a chance to make money with another team? You own this person's rights for the next year and he is NOT free to sign with someone else. He has to go to the Independent league, or something similar, and you piss off his agent.
You are not allowed to not draft someone, so you either sign a FA to ditch the draft pick or you draft santa clause or someone similar. Probably better to stick another team with a $1.5 million+ "investment."
and John Patterson.
But take all that in, and then realize that the Giants compete with the Royals. He just gave a competitor something for free.
And as stupid as you may be(ha, quote marks mean it's not really an investment! Cause, uh, sometimes they don't pan out. As opposed to signing 4th outfielders for $3 million, which always pans out) even you must realize that... Wait, I just thought about your position some more. I take that back, you don't realize and probably never will. You are honestly arguing the merits of no free cookie as opposed to free cookie. What can I possibly say that the facts already haven't?
Can they?
And why did they dump Jose Cruz Jr. again? To get these guys instead? I realize Jose Cruz Jr. is no Ellis Burks (vintage 2000), but it's quite possible none these guys will play as well as Cruz did last year.
So, the giants currently have:
The San Francisco Giants sent minor league pitcher John Thomas to Minnesota on Wednesday to complete a trade that brought outfielder Dustan Mohr to the Giants.
Thomas, a 23-year-old left-hander, went 5-12 with three saves and a 3.45 ERA in 33 games, 19 starts, for single-A San Jose last season. He was originally selected in the second round of the 1999 amateur draft. He is 9-20 with a 4.11 ERA in 59 minor league games over three seasons.
I thought Lastings Milledge got more than 1.5...
I don't know. With Tomko pitching, they're going to be starting awfully deep.
Please cease and desist all posting and return to elementary school immediately. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main