Monday, April 21, 2008
One for the Blunder Books
I was reading this writeup about our good friend Bocock! and the lack of shortstop alternatives on McCovey Chronicles today when I thought of a horrifying scenario. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that Omar Vizquel comes back in the middle of May. He hits .300 the rest of the way, and the Giants have this miraculous season, at least when you take into account our expectations for them. They win 90 games, guys like Fred Lewis and John Bowker continue to produce, Tim Lincecum and Matt Cain come through with awesome seasons, and the bullpen, anchored by Brian Wilson, stabilizes and turns into one of the best units in the game. All of this happens, we all dance in the streets, Brian Sabean is re-christened with the name Genius...and yet the Giants still fall two games short of a playoff berth. It's a successful season, no doubt, buuuuut...
Now, in this same scenario, realize that in the six weeks prior to Vizquel's return, Bocock! has been given just about all of the at-bats, and he's continued to hit just as atrociously as he is right at this moment (I think it's safe to say that his hitting won't improve exponentially because...I mean, just watch the guy bat ferchrissakes).
If this were to really happen, then 30 years from now, when Rob Neyer publishes a new or extended version of his wonderful Big Book of Baseball Blunders, the decision to give Bocock! 150 at-bats or whatever would be right up at the top of the new list. If the Giants do somehow manage to squeak their way into a pennant race this season (hey, I'm still optimistic or naive enough at this point to believe it), then giving so much playing time to a sub-replacement level bat is going to kill them. Over the course of two months, playing a guy who hits worse than a pitcher will do that.
This isn't an indictment of Bocock! I love the guy. I'm rooting for him harder than any Giant on the field at this point. He's a great defensive player and he at least has some semblance of plate patience and speed. As I said last week, it's not his fault that he's been put into a situation where he has virtually no chance of succeeding. Plucking him from A-ball and throwing him to the wolves in the majors is like dropping a slack-jawed yokel in the middle of Times Square.
No, all the blame lies on the shoulders of Mr. Sabean, for not coming up with an adequate backup. Worse, he didn't have an adequate backup ready even after re-signing a shortstop who was 40 years old! A scan of the Giants' farm system reveals nothing even close to major league-ready at the shortstop position. This is bad enough, but Sabean didn't even bring in a player from outside the organization who could fill in at a utility role. I guess there was always Rich Aurilia to count on...but wait! That's right, he's our starting first baseman (yes, I just died a little inside as those words flashed across my computer screen). That's a rant for another day though.
No word at all when Vizquel is going to come back, so now we're watching the Bocock!/Manny Burriss tandem hit weak ground balls everywhere. All this because the Giants found a Marco Scutaro-type wanting, I suppose. Sabean will already have a lot to answer for even if the Giants live up (err...down?) to expectations and have a crappy year. Crazily enough, though, if the Giants do somehow stay in competition, he may still have a ton of criticism shoveled on him for the Bocock! debacle. The Pierzynski trade needs company in the Blunder books, I guess.
Now, in this same scenario, realize that in the six weeks prior to Vizquel's return, Bocock! has been given just about all of the at-bats, and he's continued to hit just as atrociously as he is right at this moment (I think it's safe to say that his hitting won't improve exponentially because...I mean, just watch the guy bat ferchrissakes).
If this were to really happen, then 30 years from now, when Rob Neyer publishes a new or extended version of his wonderful Big Book of Baseball Blunders, the decision to give Bocock! 150 at-bats or whatever would be right up at the top of the new list. If the Giants do somehow manage to squeak their way into a pennant race this season (hey, I'm still optimistic or naive enough at this point to believe it), then giving so much playing time to a sub-replacement level bat is going to kill them. Over the course of two months, playing a guy who hits worse than a pitcher will do that.
This isn't an indictment of Bocock! I love the guy. I'm rooting for him harder than any Giant on the field at this point. He's a great defensive player and he at least has some semblance of plate patience and speed. As I said last week, it's not his fault that he's been put into a situation where he has virtually no chance of succeeding. Plucking him from A-ball and throwing him to the wolves in the majors is like dropping a slack-jawed yokel in the middle of Times Square.
No, all the blame lies on the shoulders of Mr. Sabean, for not coming up with an adequate backup. Worse, he didn't have an adequate backup ready even after re-signing a shortstop who was 40 years old! A scan of the Giants' farm system reveals nothing even close to major league-ready at the shortstop position. This is bad enough, but Sabean didn't even bring in a player from outside the organization who could fill in at a utility role. I guess there was always Rich Aurilia to count on...but wait! That's right, he's our starting first baseman (yes, I just died a little inside as those words flashed across my computer screen). That's a rant for another day though.
No word at all when Vizquel is going to come back, so now we're watching the Bocock!/Manny Burriss tandem hit weak ground balls everywhere. All this because the Giants found a Marco Scutaro-type wanting, I suppose. Sabean will already have a lot to answer for even if the Giants live up (err...down?) to expectations and have a crappy year. Crazily enough, though, if the Giants do somehow stay in competition, he may still have a ton of criticism shoveled on him for the Bocock! debacle. The Pierzynski trade needs company in the Blunder books, I guess.
Labels: brian bocock, brian sabean rant
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Time It Was, and What a Time It...Um, Wasn't
Did anybody notice the sad (yet fitting) bookend to the Giants season at Mays Field? On Opening Day, they got utterly shut down by Jake Peavy, and then last night, in the home finale, they got shut down by...yup, Jake Peavy again. It was pretty much the Giants' offense this season in a nutshell: totally weak overall and utterly useless against the better starting pitchers in the league. It's also sobering to realize that of the eight position players in the Opening Day lineup against Peavy, only three (Bonds, Winn, Molina) have had even decent seasons with the bat.
I tuned in to the game last night to catch the standing ovation for Barry Bonds, but that was about it. I had better things to do than listen to the Giants get slaughtered by a Scott Hairston-led Padre attack (seven of his ten homers against the Giants this season...what is with this guy?). In the past three weeks, I have caught two full Giants games and otherwise perhaps a grand total of one hour of G-men baseball on the radio. That's sad, and it's a problem, because I never thought my Giants fanaticism would sink to such lows.
I'm not a bandwagon fan, and I never have been. Last year the Giants sucked and I was still at Mays Field during the last weekend series, yelling for the team to beat the Dodgers. I remember in 1996, the last time the Giants lost 90 games (they look to be headed well on their way this year), I was rooting and rooting up until the last game, because somehow they were still fun, even though they were trotting out some of the worst players to ever don the black and orange.
Unfortunately, this year the team is just so dull, so poorly constructed, so clueless, that it's gotten to be too tiring. Losing is one thing; losing while simultaneously offering absolutely nothing of entertainment value is another. Last season I linked to Dead Can Dance's "Host of Seraphim" as a eulogy to the lost 2006 campaign. This year I'm not going to bother; the Giants don't deserve anything as beautiful as Lisa Gerrard's voice.
And the worst part is that Sabean and Co put this team together harping about pitching and defense and improving team speed and other such bullshit, and then when things fell apart, they got all butt-hurt and defensive when the fans started hurling well-deserved criticism their way. And it's going to be even worse next year without Bonds! Worse! Can you imagine that?
To steal a line from The Nerd...Sabean's my ass and Magowan's my balls! What a miserable, forgettable, gawdawful year.
I tuned in to the game last night to catch the standing ovation for Barry Bonds, but that was about it. I had better things to do than listen to the Giants get slaughtered by a Scott Hairston-led Padre attack (seven of his ten homers against the Giants this season...what is with this guy?). In the past three weeks, I have caught two full Giants games and otherwise perhaps a grand total of one hour of G-men baseball on the radio. That's sad, and it's a problem, because I never thought my Giants fanaticism would sink to such lows.
I'm not a bandwagon fan, and I never have been. Last year the Giants sucked and I was still at Mays Field during the last weekend series, yelling for the team to beat the Dodgers. I remember in 1996, the last time the Giants lost 90 games (they look to be headed well on their way this year), I was rooting and rooting up until the last game, because somehow they were still fun, even though they were trotting out some of the worst players to ever don the black and orange.
Unfortunately, this year the team is just so dull, so poorly constructed, so clueless, that it's gotten to be too tiring. Losing is one thing; losing while simultaneously offering absolutely nothing of entertainment value is another. Last season I linked to Dead Can Dance's "Host of Seraphim" as a eulogy to the lost 2006 campaign. This year I'm not going to bother; the Giants don't deserve anything as beautiful as Lisa Gerrard's voice.
And the worst part is that Sabean and Co put this team together harping about pitching and defense and improving team speed and other such bullshit, and then when things fell apart, they got all butt-hurt and defensive when the fans started hurling well-deserved criticism their way. And it's going to be even worse next year without Bonds! Worse! Can you imagine that?
To steal a line from The Nerd...Sabean's my ass and Magowan's my balls! What a miserable, forgettable, gawdawful year.
Labels: baseball depression, brian sabean rant
Monday, September 17, 2007
Infield of Screams
On Friday I talked a little bit about how awful Omar Vizquel's hitting has been this year, and how I didn't totally grasp the magnitude of his suckiness until I actually went to Baseball Reference and checked the numbers. Due to the Giants' general inability to toss out an entertaining product this season, I've honestly been kind of wavering in and out of interest in the team's numbers for the last month or two.
When I looked at the Giant team page on BR, though, I realized that the problem isn't just isolated to their shortstop. The team's whole infield has been an absolute nightmare. I'm sure all Giants fans are sadly aware of the whole infield unit's struggles at the plate, but really, it's got to be historically bad. Not one player has been above average, and three have been downright abysmal. Here are the gory details, with each starter, his hitting line, and his OPS+:
Ryan Klesko: .265/.349/.413, 97
Ray Durham: .217/.297/.346, 66
Omar Vizquel: .240/.300/.295, 56 (!)
Pedro Feliz: .249/.289/.414, 80
Rich Aurilia: .249/.301/.366, 72
Okay, going into the season we all knew that the Giants' offense would probably stink and that Brian Sabean's loyalty to all things over 35 might come back to bite him in the ass, but to this extent? Look at those numbers again. That's astoundingly bad. That's Lara Croft: Tomb Raider/Armageddon double-feature bad. Forget the youth movement, why the hell are these guys getting at-bats over, like, 30-year old non-prospects like Justin Leone or Scott McClain at this point?
We've discussed Vizquel already, so let's look at these other guys point by point. Klesko's on-base ability still gives him some value, so he hasn't been a total disaster, but his total lack of power is unacceptable at a position where it just isn't that hard to find a slugger. As I've harped about again and again and again, Sabean has just demonstrated an utter lack of imagination in filling the chasm at first base the past few years.
For example, Carlos Pena was DFA'd by the Yankees in the spring, and the Giants could have had him for basically nothing, even less than they're paying Klesko. Instead Sabean was asleep at the wheel. What has Pena done this year? Check for yourself. Perhaps Pena wouldn't have gone bonkers in the same way if he'd been hitting at Mays Field, a tough park on lefty hitters, but come on. Klesko has been decent, but it could have been soooo much better.
Moving on to Durham...I just don't know what to say. Being a leading proponent of his re-signing, I can't criticize Sabean too much here. Durham was awesome in 2006 and was one of the best second baseman in the NL from 2003-2006, so when the Giants got him for reasonable value this winter, it seemed like a very good move.
For whatever reason, though, he's just gone in the tank. Is it age? Injury? Complacency from the new contract? You tell me. I seriously just can't fathom how a guy can go from a line of .293/.360/.538 to the complete disaster we have on our hands now. Since this year is so out of line with his usual performance, and since he isn't that old, I'd say that Durham has to rebound next year. How could it get worse?
Moving on to Feliz...well, my hatred of Pedro is well-documented here. The only question, I guess, is what did Sabean expect when he brought Feliz back this offseason? That he'd magically turn into Matt Williams? We fans pretty much anticipated another year of Felizian helplessness at the plate, and we've been treated to exactly that. Seriously though, if Feliz is the Giants everyday third baseman again next season...well, remember George Brett's reaction when the ump tossed him for having too much pine tar on his bat? Yeah, that'll be me.
Aurilia has been hampered by injuries, but it's hard to really say how much they've affected his hitting. What I do know is that he wasn't much good in 2004, then he did well in a great hitters' park for the 2005 and 2006 seasons, and now he's back in a pitcher's park and he stinks.
Not to beat a dead horse, but this infield ineptness is yet another shining example of Sabean's flawed "proven veterans" philosophy. It was certainly fair to assume that Vizquel, Durham, Klesko, and Aurilia wouldn't be nearly this bad, but when you're dealing with players over age 35 you have to realize that they could crap out at any minute. Some players age well, some don't. So it's totally foolish to rely on such an aged group of players to help a team win, when the risk of them falling apart is so high.
As for Feliz, well, he isn't over 35...he just blows.
When I looked at the Giant team page on BR, though, I realized that the problem isn't just isolated to their shortstop. The team's whole infield has been an absolute nightmare. I'm sure all Giants fans are sadly aware of the whole infield unit's struggles at the plate, but really, it's got to be historically bad. Not one player has been above average, and three have been downright abysmal. Here are the gory details, with each starter, his hitting line, and his OPS+:
Ryan Klesko: .265/.349/.413, 97
Ray Durham: .217/.297/.346, 66
Omar Vizquel: .240/.300/.295, 56 (!)
Pedro Feliz: .249/.289/.414, 80
Rich Aurilia: .249/.301/.366, 72
Okay, going into the season we all knew that the Giants' offense would probably stink and that Brian Sabean's loyalty to all things over 35 might come back to bite him in the ass, but to this extent? Look at those numbers again. That's astoundingly bad. That's Lara Croft: Tomb Raider/Armageddon double-feature bad. Forget the youth movement, why the hell are these guys getting at-bats over, like, 30-year old non-prospects like Justin Leone or Scott McClain at this point?
We've discussed Vizquel already, so let's look at these other guys point by point. Klesko's on-base ability still gives him some value, so he hasn't been a total disaster, but his total lack of power is unacceptable at a position where it just isn't that hard to find a slugger. As I've harped about again and again and again, Sabean has just demonstrated an utter lack of imagination in filling the chasm at first base the past few years.
For example, Carlos Pena was DFA'd by the Yankees in the spring, and the Giants could have had him for basically nothing, even less than they're paying Klesko. Instead Sabean was asleep at the wheel. What has Pena done this year? Check for yourself. Perhaps Pena wouldn't have gone bonkers in the same way if he'd been hitting at Mays Field, a tough park on lefty hitters, but come on. Klesko has been decent, but it could have been soooo much better.
Moving on to Durham...I just don't know what to say. Being a leading proponent of his re-signing, I can't criticize Sabean too much here. Durham was awesome in 2006 and was one of the best second baseman in the NL from 2003-2006, so when the Giants got him for reasonable value this winter, it seemed like a very good move.
For whatever reason, though, he's just gone in the tank. Is it age? Injury? Complacency from the new contract? You tell me. I seriously just can't fathom how a guy can go from a line of .293/.360/.538 to the complete disaster we have on our hands now. Since this year is so out of line with his usual performance, and since he isn't that old, I'd say that Durham has to rebound next year. How could it get worse?
Moving on to Feliz...well, my hatred of Pedro is well-documented here. The only question, I guess, is what did Sabean expect when he brought Feliz back this offseason? That he'd magically turn into Matt Williams? We fans pretty much anticipated another year of Felizian helplessness at the plate, and we've been treated to exactly that. Seriously though, if Feliz is the Giants everyday third baseman again next season...well, remember George Brett's reaction when the ump tossed him for having too much pine tar on his bat? Yeah, that'll be me.
Aurilia has been hampered by injuries, but it's hard to really say how much they've affected his hitting. What I do know is that he wasn't much good in 2004, then he did well in a great hitters' park for the 2005 and 2006 seasons, and now he's back in a pitcher's park and he stinks.
Not to beat a dead horse, but this infield ineptness is yet another shining example of Sabean's flawed "proven veterans" philosophy. It was certainly fair to assume that Vizquel, Durham, Klesko, and Aurilia wouldn't be nearly this bad, but when you're dealing with players over age 35 you have to realize that they could crap out at any minute. Some players age well, some don't. So it's totally foolish to rely on such an aged group of players to help a team win, when the risk of them falling apart is so high.
As for Feliz, well, he isn't over 35...he just blows.
Labels: brian sabean rant, offensive anemia
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
The Bravos
As I wait for the new Angry Video Game Nerd video to load, I'll take the time to fawn over an organization that I think is certainly one of the best-run in the major leagues, the Braves. Many fans simpy equate the Braves' run of success (they won 14 straight division titles from 1991-2005) with three great pitchers, Tom Glavine, Greg Maddux, and John Smoltz, and those guys are obviously key reasons, but there's a lot more to their continued excellence than meets the eye.
Last month I read through John Schuerholz's book Built To Win, a memoir of his time running the team during their long run of success (he came aboard in 1990; the Braves went from last place that year to first in '91). While the book does contain the patented "crusty old baseball dude anti-Moneyball rant" (in the second chapter Schuerholz calls the basic premise of Moneyball "flawed", then demonstrates over the next ten pages or so that he has no understanding of what that premise actually is), overall it's a very good read. Schuerholz comes across as authoritarian and a bit of a stuffed shirt (the Braves don't allow any of their players to wear jewelry on the field; you get the idea that Schuerholz would have hated Bill Veeck), but there's no denying that when it comes to evaluating talent and putting together competitive teams, he has few peers.
What I find most impressive about the Braves is not what they did in the years when they had Maddux, Glavine, etc, but what they've done since 2004, after those guys left and after they had restrictions put on their payroll by Time Warner. As team payrolls began to escalate, the Braves were given a ceiling starting in 2001, and slowly the percentage of their team payroll relative to the league began to decrease. For a lot of teams, this would have meant bad times.
Not for Schuerholz. As their players got older and they started to lose some guys to free agency, a steady influx of young talent has kept the team afloat. The Braves won 96 games in 2004 (the first post-Maddux/Sheffield year), 90 in 2005, and now are 54-47 and three games back of the Mets in the NL East. They had a little squawk last year, finishing at 79-83, but their expected won-loss record (go here if that concept is foreign to you) was still 85-77. As Schuerholz is proud to point out, in 2005 the Braves had 17 rookies make appearances on their major league roster, and many played significant roles.
In fact, take a look at this list of players, 25 or under, on Atlanta's roster in 2007, making a significant contribution to the Braves this season (alongside is their age):
Brian McCann, 23
Kelly Johnson, 25
Jeff Francoeur, 23
Scott Thorman, 25
Jarrod Saltalamacchia, 22
Yunel Escobar, 24
Chuck James, 25
Kyle Davies, 23 (ok, he sucks, but there's still potential)
McCann and Johnson are two of the best players at their respective positions. Francoeur isn't too far away, if he'd just learn to take a freaking pitch, and "Salty" (too tired to spell his name out) and Escobar are apparently big time talents. All of these players came up through Atlanta's organization and all are making solid contributions. That's quite a list. It's a testament to the Braves' scouting department, which is clearly tops in the game.
You see, this is sort of what pisses a lot of us Giants fans off about our team. The Braves won a lot during the 90's and into the aughts, and yet here they are, still on top, producing prospects out of every orifice (um, franchises have orifices? Where...never mind). You'd think that they would have fallen into the typical cycle of producing a winning team for a decade, and then losing those players to age or free agency, then sucking for a while. It hasn't happened, because their farm system has continued to bear fruit, even as their big dogs (Glavine, Maddux, Gary Sheffield, Javy Lopez) have gone.
Meanwhile, we look at the Giants, who have been winning for a long time, and their resume looks essentially like a how-to guide to running a farm system into the ground. Let's see, ignoring potential impact hitters in the draft? Check. Giving away picks in order to have more money to spend on Michael Tucker? Check. Continuing to draft pitching projects even though the organization hasn't produced a hitter since the days of Kruk and Kuip (the playing days, that is)? Check.
The Giants' argument for their continued insistence on signing late-thirtysomethings to surround Bonds has been that they want to compete now, while Bonds is still around; they don't have time to sit and wait for young players to develop. What Atlanta has done the past few years (and their success compared to the Giants') is like the perfect rebuttal to that argument. Perhaps Brian Sabean should look at the Braves and take some pointers on how to successfully replenish your major league team with young players while continuing to win. Hint: it doesn't involve Dave Roberts or Rich Aurilia.
Don't get me wrong, I don't have some man-crush on the Braves here. I'm not particularly fond of them, and their fans (at least the ones who go to the games) are an apathetic lot. However, I'm just impressed by their smarts as an organization. It's like the samurai: I don't like you, I will kill you, but I respect you as a fellow warrior. And notice how this tribute to the Braves slowly morphed into another anti-Sabean rant? Sigh, some habits die hard.
Last month I read through John Schuerholz's book Built To Win, a memoir of his time running the team during their long run of success (he came aboard in 1990; the Braves went from last place that year to first in '91). While the book does contain the patented "crusty old baseball dude anti-Moneyball rant" (in the second chapter Schuerholz calls the basic premise of Moneyball "flawed", then demonstrates over the next ten pages or so that he has no understanding of what that premise actually is), overall it's a very good read. Schuerholz comes across as authoritarian and a bit of a stuffed shirt (the Braves don't allow any of their players to wear jewelry on the field; you get the idea that Schuerholz would have hated Bill Veeck), but there's no denying that when it comes to evaluating talent and putting together competitive teams, he has few peers.
What I find most impressive about the Braves is not what they did in the years when they had Maddux, Glavine, etc, but what they've done since 2004, after those guys left and after they had restrictions put on their payroll by Time Warner. As team payrolls began to escalate, the Braves were given a ceiling starting in 2001, and slowly the percentage of their team payroll relative to the league began to decrease. For a lot of teams, this would have meant bad times.
Not for Schuerholz. As their players got older and they started to lose some guys to free agency, a steady influx of young talent has kept the team afloat. The Braves won 96 games in 2004 (the first post-Maddux/Sheffield year), 90 in 2005, and now are 54-47 and three games back of the Mets in the NL East. They had a little squawk last year, finishing at 79-83, but their expected won-loss record (go here if that concept is foreign to you) was still 85-77. As Schuerholz is proud to point out, in 2005 the Braves had 17 rookies make appearances on their major league roster, and many played significant roles.
In fact, take a look at this list of players, 25 or under, on Atlanta's roster in 2007, making a significant contribution to the Braves this season (alongside is their age):
Brian McCann, 23
Kelly Johnson, 25
Jeff Francoeur, 23
Scott Thorman, 25
Jarrod Saltalamacchia, 22
Yunel Escobar, 24
Chuck James, 25
Kyle Davies, 23 (ok, he sucks, but there's still potential)
McCann and Johnson are two of the best players at their respective positions. Francoeur isn't too far away, if he'd just learn to take a freaking pitch, and "Salty" (too tired to spell his name out) and Escobar are apparently big time talents. All of these players came up through Atlanta's organization and all are making solid contributions. That's quite a list. It's a testament to the Braves' scouting department, which is clearly tops in the game.
You see, this is sort of what pisses a lot of us Giants fans off about our team. The Braves won a lot during the 90's and into the aughts, and yet here they are, still on top, producing prospects out of every orifice (um, franchises have orifices? Where...never mind). You'd think that they would have fallen into the typical cycle of producing a winning team for a decade, and then losing those players to age or free agency, then sucking for a while. It hasn't happened, because their farm system has continued to bear fruit, even as their big dogs (Glavine, Maddux, Gary Sheffield, Javy Lopez) have gone.
Meanwhile, we look at the Giants, who have been winning for a long time, and their resume looks essentially like a how-to guide to running a farm system into the ground. Let's see, ignoring potential impact hitters in the draft? Check. Giving away picks in order to have more money to spend on Michael Tucker? Check. Continuing to draft pitching projects even though the organization hasn't produced a hitter since the days of Kruk and Kuip (the playing days, that is)? Check.
The Giants' argument for their continued insistence on signing late-thirtysomethings to surround Bonds has been that they want to compete now, while Bonds is still around; they don't have time to sit and wait for young players to develop. What Atlanta has done the past few years (and their success compared to the Giants') is like the perfect rebuttal to that argument. Perhaps Brian Sabean should look at the Braves and take some pointers on how to successfully replenish your major league team with young players while continuing to win. Hint: it doesn't involve Dave Roberts or Rich Aurilia.
Don't get me wrong, I don't have some man-crush on the Braves here. I'm not particularly fond of them, and their fans (at least the ones who go to the games) are an apathetic lot. However, I'm just impressed by their smarts as an organization. It's like the samurai: I don't like you, I will kill you, but I respect you as a fellow warrior. And notice how this tribute to the Braves slowly morphed into another anti-Sabean rant? Sigh, some habits die hard.
Labels: atlanta braves, brian sabean rant, sucky giants farm system
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Pondering Sabean
I was perusing McCovey Chronicles the other day when I happened upon a diary with the headline "In Defense of Sabean". Immediately upon reading this title, I thought to myself, "uh oh." From time to time over at Grant's site, some poor soul will begin a diary trying to defend an unpopular notion, with a title like "Feliz Isn't So Bad" or "Give Benitez a Chance." Sure enough, the other denizens of the site soon catch wind of it, and things get reaaaaal ugly. Insults get tossed, VORPs and EQAs get thrown around, and soon enough the little troll who started the mini-argument is chased back into his little cave.
Thankfully, though, the debate sparked by this latest contrarian diary, while very passionate, was actually quite cordial, and I recommend that all fans go and read it. There are a lot of intelligent arguments pointing out the pros and cons of Brian Sabean's tenure as Giants GM, and whether or not he earned his extension.
That's what I'm here to talk about now. I, like many Giants fans, was baffled by the full vote of confidence given to Sabean by Giants ownership. I wanted to see the Giants go in a different direction. The Giants' future outlook is relentlessly bleak, and most (if not all) of it is of Sabean's making. I can see giving him the chance to dig himself out of the mess he's created, but what indication is there that he's competent enough to do it? He rebuilt the team from scratch in 1997, and did a hell of a job, but he also had Bonds in his prime and a bunch of other solid players entering their prime, so comparing then to now is apples and oranges.
Now, to be fair, I would argue that from 1997-2002, Sabean was one of the five best GMs in baseball. As I said before, he did a great job revitalizing this team at the major league level. Through 2002, he surrounded Bonds with adequate talent, and he found that talent through a number of shrewd trades. He absolutely robbed teams of Jeff Kent, J.T. Snow, Ellis Burks, Robb Nen, Jason Schmidt, Felix Rodriguez, Brian Johnson, and even Wilson Alvarez and Roberto Hernandez, if for just half of a season. His general philosophy was: trade your prospects (i.e. risks) for known commodities, and for a while it worked beautifully. Most of the prospects he traded flamed out completely, while the guys he traded for shined. He had the Giants in contention every year from 1997 to 2002, and while the farm system did continue to decay, you can't deny those results.
From 2003 to the present, though, I think it's clear that Sabean has been one of the worst GMs in all of baseball. His "prospects for vets" philosophy became increasingly cockeyed to the point where it almost became self-parody, as he began sacrificing draft picks for guys who he thought would help the team now. It might have worked, but instead of bringing in good players in their primes like Snow or Nen in '97 and '98, he was throwing away picks for mediocrities like Michael Tucker.
They say the definition of insanity is doing the same dumb thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome each time. Perhaps Sabean's old person fetish drove him into insanity's cold embrace, because he kept on signing bad veteran after bad veteran in the hopes that the team would get better, and now we're stuck with the results of that plunge off the edge, as the team has a bunch of old guys and a horrible farm system. Where Sabean was once ahead of the curve when it came to building a contending team, at some point many other GMs grew wise to his ways and realized it was cheaper and easier to build through a solid combination of young talent and smart free agent pickups, and Sabean got left in the dust.
The Giants need to retool, and they need to do it by overhauling the farm system and just blowing up the roster as it is now. Sabean isn't the man to do it. Maybe if there were a quick fix, if it were a situation like 1997, Sabean would be the right man, but there's just no evidence whatsoever that he has the ability to rebuild this franchise. And don't start with the cries that he's rebuilt the pitching staff. Yes, Matt Cain rocks, and so does Lincecum, but Lincecum was a guy the Giants basically lucked into because a bunch of scouts had their heads up their asses. Noah Lowry? I like him, but he was an afterthought in the farm system who was thrown into the rotation in 2004 and, voila. He was a huge surprise. Plus, his control problems and below average stuff don't portend future greatness. These three guys are hardly indicative of some underlying genius.
So no, I'm not thrilled about Sabean's coming back, and a lot of Giants fans share my view (as do Joe Sheehan of BP and John Perricone of OBM, only they are way blunter about it than I am). I personally think the Giant front office is behind the times when it comes to talent evaluation and how to build a franchise. In extending Sabean, it's unfortunately likely to stay that way.
Thankfully, though, the debate sparked by this latest contrarian diary, while very passionate, was actually quite cordial, and I recommend that all fans go and read it. There are a lot of intelligent arguments pointing out the pros and cons of Brian Sabean's tenure as Giants GM, and whether or not he earned his extension.
That's what I'm here to talk about now. I, like many Giants fans, was baffled by the full vote of confidence given to Sabean by Giants ownership. I wanted to see the Giants go in a different direction. The Giants' future outlook is relentlessly bleak, and most (if not all) of it is of Sabean's making. I can see giving him the chance to dig himself out of the mess he's created, but what indication is there that he's competent enough to do it? He rebuilt the team from scratch in 1997, and did a hell of a job, but he also had Bonds in his prime and a bunch of other solid players entering their prime, so comparing then to now is apples and oranges.
Now, to be fair, I would argue that from 1997-2002, Sabean was one of the five best GMs in baseball. As I said before, he did a great job revitalizing this team at the major league level. Through 2002, he surrounded Bonds with adequate talent, and he found that talent through a number of shrewd trades. He absolutely robbed teams of Jeff Kent, J.T. Snow, Ellis Burks, Robb Nen, Jason Schmidt, Felix Rodriguez, Brian Johnson, and even Wilson Alvarez and Roberto Hernandez, if for just half of a season. His general philosophy was: trade your prospects (i.e. risks) for known commodities, and for a while it worked beautifully. Most of the prospects he traded flamed out completely, while the guys he traded for shined. He had the Giants in contention every year from 1997 to 2002, and while the farm system did continue to decay, you can't deny those results.
From 2003 to the present, though, I think it's clear that Sabean has been one of the worst GMs in all of baseball. His "prospects for vets" philosophy became increasingly cockeyed to the point where it almost became self-parody, as he began sacrificing draft picks for guys who he thought would help the team now. It might have worked, but instead of bringing in good players in their primes like Snow or Nen in '97 and '98, he was throwing away picks for mediocrities like Michael Tucker.
They say the definition of insanity is doing the same dumb thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome each time. Perhaps Sabean's old person fetish drove him into insanity's cold embrace, because he kept on signing bad veteran after bad veteran in the hopes that the team would get better, and now we're stuck with the results of that plunge off the edge, as the team has a bunch of old guys and a horrible farm system. Where Sabean was once ahead of the curve when it came to building a contending team, at some point many other GMs grew wise to his ways and realized it was cheaper and easier to build through a solid combination of young talent and smart free agent pickups, and Sabean got left in the dust.
The Giants need to retool, and they need to do it by overhauling the farm system and just blowing up the roster as it is now. Sabean isn't the man to do it. Maybe if there were a quick fix, if it were a situation like 1997, Sabean would be the right man, but there's just no evidence whatsoever that he has the ability to rebuild this franchise. And don't start with the cries that he's rebuilt the pitching staff. Yes, Matt Cain rocks, and so does Lincecum, but Lincecum was a guy the Giants basically lucked into because a bunch of scouts had their heads up their asses. Noah Lowry? I like him, but he was an afterthought in the farm system who was thrown into the rotation in 2004 and, voila. He was a huge surprise. Plus, his control problems and below average stuff don't portend future greatness. These three guys are hardly indicative of some underlying genius.
So no, I'm not thrilled about Sabean's coming back, and a lot of Giants fans share my view (as do Joe Sheehan of BP and John Perricone of OBM, only they are way blunter about it than I am). I personally think the Giant front office is behind the times when it comes to talent evaluation and how to build a franchise. In extending Sabean, it's unfortunately likely to stay that way.
Labels: brian sabean rant, sucky giants farm system
