Outside Topic Giants/Niners 2022 thread

Outside Topic Giants/Niners 2022 thread - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Outside Topic Giants/Niners 2022 thread (/thread-22890.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

RE: lex24 - teejers1 - 01-11-2022

(01-11-2022, 08:44 AM)lex24 Wrote:
(01-10-2022, 01:51 PM)teejers1 Wrote:
(01-10-2022, 09:10 AM)lex24 Wrote:
(01-09-2022, 11:34 PM)Phogge Wrote: Another nail biter. Crosby is a force.

Have to believe their HC is getting slammed. He should be. Going for it early in the game on 4th and 1 on your own 18 is dumb. Fortunate that it only cost him 3. Then why on earth did he call that TO. The Raiders were not going to risk a throw. Obviously you stack to stop run. Get a stop. Game ends in a tie and you are in playoffs.

Gave Raiders a chance to regrouped etc. Still ran it and they couldn’t stop it.

I buy the rationale for the timeout call. Real time, I was wondering if he wanted to make sure the D didn't get beat deep because it had feel of running out the clock. Plus, there were only a couple seconds left on snap clock (meaning he wasn't doing it to "save clock" for his offense). He clearly wanted to do it for defensive purposes. And he made the personnel change. They just failed to stuff the run as they should. My real question real time was why the Raiders were even risking a FG attempt. But then someone told me that a W avoids a trip to KC, and the Chiefs have worked the Raiders, so that was worth the minimal risk. But I was fearing a blocked FG . . .

Going for it on fourth down . . . well, that also struck me as indefensible.

No way Raiders were going to throw and risk an int or QB fumble. He didn’t need TO for personnel change. They were killing clock. He had plenty of time. Raiders coach admitted he was considering just kneeling. It was an incredibly dumb decision. But it was oh so Chargers…..

Why are you so confident that if he doesn't call the timeout the Raiders don't gain 12 yards on the same running play? If the Raiders were solely interested in running out the clock, then they would have taken a knee on second (or third) down.

Or are you saying that by calling a TO he changed the Raiders' mind about whether or not they would even try a FG at all?

I'm not buying that, either. I bet the Raiders try a FG, from 52 or inside. And they may have been there already . . . or awfully close to it.

RE: lex24 - DC 86 - 01-11-2022

(01-11-2022, 08:44 AM)lex24 Wrote: No way Raiders were going to throw and risk an int or QB fumble. He didn’t need TO for personnel change. They were killing clock. He had plenty of time. Raiders coach admitted he was considering just kneeling. It was an incredibly dumb decision. But it was oh so Chargers…..

If you watch the press conference Bisaccia said that they had considered just running out the clock until they got close to field goal range, at which point they decided to go for the win. His alluding to taking the tie has been taken out of context because he said that they were discussing it on the sideline, but it wasn't in reference to the third down play, but to earlier. Once Jacobs ran for seven yards on second down it made third down doable (only four yards for a first down and a chance at a winning field goal) so they decided to try to keep going and get into field goal range. Specifically what Bisaccia said was (with my clarifications in brackets}:

"... we ran the ball there and they didn't call a time out [referring to the first down play where Jacobs lost a yard] so they were probably thinking the same thing [running out the clock] then we had the big run [referring to the second down play where Jacobs gained seven yards] ..."

The Raiders threw a 17 yard out pattern on the first play of the drive and then threw it twice more, i.e. they threw the ball on 3 of 7 plays, so they weren't playing it safe. It's clear their plan was not to do anything stupid but to try to win if they could get into field goal range, since they didn't want to be matched up with Kansas City in the first round.

The timeout was called with 0:38 on the game clock and with 0:05 on the play clock, so the only effect of the timeout was for the next play (third and four) to start with 0:38 on the game clock or 0:34 on the game clock (if the Raiders wait until the last second to snap the ball). Given that the play clock is 0:40 it makes no difference whether there's 0:38 or 0:34 at the start of the play since the team has the option of running or not running another play either way. If the Raiders were going to take a knee they would have lined up in victory formation and snapped the ball at any point once the game clock hit 0:40 but they didn't do that, which is when the Chargers called time out.

If the Raiders make a first down then a field goal attempt comes into play, if they are stopped short then it doesn't. So the only thing that matters for the Chargers at that point is preventing the first down. The Raiders lined up in shotgun and Staley determined that he had the wrong personnel for the play that he anticipated from that formation, so he called timeout and replaced a LB with a DL. So the only question is whether the Chargers calling timeout (enabling them to make a personnel change but for the Raiders to rethink the play call) enhances the Chargers chances of making the stop, or not.

(01-11-2022, 09:57 AM)Giants Wrote: Switching back to baseball…

The Athletic published a number of trades suggested by fans (I didn’t see yours, lex, however; the writer indicated he would review more fan-suggested trades in a future article) with some comments by the writer.

One Giants trade that was included was intriguing.

Cubs trade C Willson Contreras to the Giants for C Joey Bart and LHP Seth Cory (as part of the trade, the Cubs give SF a four day window to sign Contreras, which they do).

Note: Contreras is signed through 2022. I assume the “window” comment references a contract extension).

I like the deal because it gives the Giants a proven major league catcher without sacrificing any high end prospects (I am not a big fan of Bart).

I respect the fact that you make your own evaluations, but it's interesting that you consider Bishop to be "untouchable" but consider trading Bart to not be a sacrifice of a "high end prospect". Every single prospect ranking (mlb.com, Fangraphs, The Athletic, Baseball America, etc) has Bart ranked far higher than Bishop. That's not saying that you won't be proven right because prospects are highly unpredictable, but it's not how the industry values these guys.

In any case, I think that trade is horrible. You are trading six years of cost-controlled Bart (several years at the minimum salary) for one year of Contreras. The extension is irrelevant because you are going to be paying full market (theoretically in one year you can sign Contreras or an alternative in the free agent market for the same extension amount without having had to give up any prospect capital for that opportunity). Contreras is a very good player but he'll be 30 around the start of next season (whenever that is). Trading six years of Bart for one year of a 30 year old catcher, with the opportunity to sign him to an expensive extension, sounds very anti-Zaidi, meaning not logical.

RE: Giants/Niners 2021 thread - slide - 01-11-2022

Bowden didn't like the trade either. he's not sold on Bart and thought the Cubs should ask for better prospect than Bart.

RE: Giants/Niners 2021 thread - DC 86 - 01-11-2022

(01-11-2022, 02:51 PM)slide Wrote: Bowden didn't like the trade either. he's not sold on Bart and thought the Cubs should ask for better prospect than Bart.

Regardless, a team would be foolish to trade six years of a top prospect for one year of Contreras.

RE: Giants/Niners 2021 thread - Phogge - 01-11-2022

I still like Steven Duggar for Trout. Can't imagine why the Angels won't go for it. Lex would toss in Garrapolo too.

lex24 - lex24 - 01-13-2022

(01-11-2022, 06:14 PM)Phogge Wrote: I still like Steven Duggar for Trout. Can't imagine why the Angels won't go for it. Lex would toss in Garrapolo too.

Niners- Cowboys. 40 years since The Catch. Hope Trent Williams is back. I like the Niners chances in this one.

RE: lex24 - Mick - 01-13-2022

(01-09-2022, 10:32 AM)lex24 Wrote:
(01-09-2022, 12:06 AM)Giants Wrote:
(01-08-2022, 02:51 PM)DC 86 Wrote:
(01-08-2022, 02:46 PM)Giants Wrote: Lockhart is my primary source for information regarding the farm system. Her reporting is very thorough. That is why I have Bishop in the “untouchable unless absolutely overwhelmed by an offer” category.

So if she ranks Bishop #9 that means that SF has at least nine minor league players considered "untouchable unless absolutely overwhelmed by an offer" ?

I guess you can tell that I am not a big fan of trading top prospects, particularly at this time when the team’s core group of stars is nearing the end of their careers.

On the other side of you of this one. Save for the very top, I’m willing to deal. Not for half season loaners (although there is always the potential whale that at least you consider). But if I can get an established major leaguer under team control for a couple three years, I’m doing it.

I’d love to know how many of the Giants top from 15 from say ’05 to ‘18 have made the major leagues. (And stuck for awhile. Not talking about cup of coffee guys). I leave the last couple years off as many of those prospects are climbing the ladder. My guess is, if you are getting 5 out of your top 15 to the ML you are ahead of the game.

Prospects are just that. Most don’t make it.

05 Sergio Romo
06 Tim Lincecum, Emanuel Burriss
07 Bumgarner, Charlie Culberson, Dan Runzler, Dan Otero (22-8)
08 The mother lode. Buster Posey, Brandon Crawford, Conor Gillaspie
09 Zach Wheeler, Brandon Belt, Chris Heston
10 Gary Brown (I guess), Jarrett Parker (I guess), Mike Kickham (I guess), Adam Duvall -- let's send him packing, and he has 151 MLB home runs now... Brett Bochy-> here's a trivia question for you. Guess Bochy's MLB ERA. Now think lower...2.84...and he hung them up. Giants picked Golden Tate of Notre Dame as their last draft pick that year, BTW.
11 Joe Panik, Kyle Crick, Andrew Susac, Josh Osich, Ray Black, Derek Law, Kelby Tomlinson
12 Chris Stratton, Mac Williamson, Steve Okert, Ty Blach, Matt Duffy
13 Christian Arroyo, Ryder Jones, Tyler Rogers
14 Tyler Beede, Logan Webb, Sam Coonrod, Austin Slater
15 Phil Bickford, Chris Shaw, Andrew Suarez, Steven Duggar,

Interesting news about the 49ers. The 49ers lost by 2 points to the #1 seed in the NFC and by 3 points to the #1 seed in the AFC. The 49ers turned the ball over twice in each game and forced none.

RE: lex24 - teejers1 - 01-13-2022

(01-13-2022, 01:14 AM)lex24 Wrote:
(01-11-2022, 06:14 PM)Phogge Wrote: I still like Steven Duggar for Trout. Can't imagine why the Angels won't go for it. Lex would toss in Garrapolo too.
Niners- Cowboys. 40 years since The Catch. Hope Trent Williams is back. I like the Niners chances in this one.

The Cowboys have higher ceiling. If they play at or near it, then SF will lose.
But SF can win if they run effectively, Jimmy plays well (may not need perfectly), and the D stuffs the run.
I'm thinking Dak and receiving corps will get theirs . . . just hope it's not enough.

RE: Giants/Niners 2021 thread - Phogge - 01-13-2022

Trent Williams practiced Thursday.

RE: lex24 - Mick - 01-14-2022

(01-13-2022, 06:52 PM)teejers1 Wrote:
(01-13-2022, 01:14 AM)lex24 Wrote:
(01-11-2022, 06:14 PM)Phogge Wrote: I still like Steven Duggar for Trout. Can't imagine why the Angels won't go for it. Lex would toss in Garrapolo too.
Niners- Cowboys. 40 years since The Catch. Hope Trent Williams is back. I like the Niners chances in this one.

The Cowboys have higher ceiling. If they play at or near it, then SF will lose.
But SF can win if they run effectively, Jimmy plays well (may not need perfectly), and the D stuffs the run.
I'm thinking Dak and receiving corps will get theirs . . . just hope it's not enough.

I think the Niners win if they win the turnover battle. Dallas leads the NFL with a +14 turnover differential. Niners are at -4. Leads to Dallas being favored by 3.

RE: Giants/Niners 2021 thread - Phogge - 01-14-2022

Slater article this morning in the Chronicle. Not enthused by MLB's stance at yesterday's meeting.

These guys don't remember 1994. Either side.

lex24 - lex24 - 01-14-2022

(01-14-2022, 11:58 AM)Phogge Wrote: Slater article this morning in the Chronicle. Not enthused by MLB's stance at yesterday's meeting.

These guys don't remember 1994. Either side.

Idiotic. This is not the time to miss ST or games because of a labor dispute between billionaires and multi millionaires. They want to kill the sport, by all means miss the start of the season. Then you can allow players to use PEDs in the hope someone can hit 75 Homers, pretend you don’t know about the use of the PEDs and laugh all the way to the bank.

Baseball is run by mental midgets. With that douchebag of a Commissioner at the top. F em.

(01-14-2022, 10:21 AM)Mick Wrote:
(01-13-2022, 06:52 PM)teejers1 Wrote:
(01-13-2022, 01:14 AM)lex24 Wrote:
(01-11-2022, 06:14 PM)Phogge Wrote: I still like Steven Duggar for Trout. Can't imagine why the Angels won't go for it. Lex would toss in Garrapolo too.
Niners- Cowboys. 40 years since The Catch. Hope Trent Williams is back. I like the Niners chances in this one.

The Cowboys have higher ceiling. If they play at or near it, then SF will lose.
But SF can win if they run effectively, Jimmy plays well (may not need perfectly), and the D stuffs the run.
I'm thinking Dak and receiving corps will get theirs . . . just hope it's not enough.

I think the Niners win if they win the turnover battle. Dallas leads the NFL with a +14 turnover differential. Niners are at -4. Leads to Dallas being favored by 3.

3 points for home field. Teams are pretty even. I think Niners run the ball, control clock and win 28-24.

RE: Giants/Niners 2021 thread - BobK - 01-15-2022

https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/giants/mlb-rumors-giants-sign-top-10-international-class-talent

A SS from the Bahamas. Phogge and I remember the last one. Tremendous arm some power AAA All Star. Andre Rogers

RE: Giants/Niners 2021 thread - Giants - 01-15-2022

Today is the first day that international free agents can be signed in this cycle. The Giants signed two of the Top 50 (per MLB Pipeline):

#9 Ryan Reckley, SS, Bahamas
#30 Juan Perez, C, Venezuela

Note: Each team has a pool of money they can spend thus keeping any teams from cornering the market.

RE: Giants/Niners 2021 thread - DC 86 - 01-15-2022

(01-15-2022, 12:40 PM)BobK Wrote: https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/giants/mlb-rumors-giants-sign-top-10-international-class-talent

A SS from the Bahamas. Phogge and I remember the last one. Tremendous arm some power AAA All Star. Andre Rogers

Jazz Chisholm was a highly regarded shortstop prospect who was the Marlins starting second baseman this year although he also played 37 games at shortstop; he was a slightly below average hitter but fielding and some power (18 HR) pushed him to an above average 2.5 bWAR.

RE: Giants/Niners 2021 thread - lex24 - 01-15-2022

(01-15-2022, 03:03 PM)DC 86 Wrote:
(01-15-2022, 12:40 PM)BobK Wrote: https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/giants/mlb-rumors-giants-sign-top-10-international-class-talent

A SS from the Bahamas. Phogge and I remember the last one. Tremendous arm some power AAA All Star. Andre Rogers

Jazz Chisholm was a highly regarded shortstop prospect who was the Marlins starting second baseman this year although he also played 37 games at shortstop; he was a slightly below average hitter but fielding and some power (18 HR) pushed him to an above average 2.5 bWAR.

Had a monster series against Giants. He was a royal pain in the ass. Miami got him from Arizona in a straight up trade for Zac Gallen.

RE: Giants/Niners 2021 thread - martyup - 01-16-2022

Niners are smokin' the Cowboys.

RE: Giants/Niners 2021 thread - BostonCard - 01-16-2022

Schultz one of the few bright spots for the Cowboys. Two score game as we head to the fourth.

BC

(01-16-2022, 04:42 PM)martyup Wrote: Niners are smokin' the Cowboys.

The woofing gods heard that and are now punishing you.

BC

RE: Giants/Niners 2021 thread - martyup - 01-16-2022

(01-16-2022, 04:56 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Schultz one of the few bright spots for the Cowboys. Two score game as we head to the fourth.

BC

(01-16-2022, 04:42 PM)martyup Wrote: Niners are smokin' the Cowboys.

The woofing gods heard that and are now punishing you.

BC

It was an observation, not a prediction.

RE: Giants/Niners 2021 thread - BostonCard - 01-16-2022

Cowboys did themselves in.

BC

Not over yet, I guess.

BC

What the actual F were the Cowboys thinking?

BC

Hey TC, what is with the fake bokeh in the camerawork?

BC