[Phogge]

Some rumors re the Giants.

Verlander
Suzuki (Japan, But posted for USA) outfielder
Kluber
Belt accepting the Q offer, hoping for a healthy season and then entering FA market in 2023. But his agents have been talking to the Giants about a three year deal in the Crawford range per season.

[Phogge]

Some rumors re the Giants.

Verlander
Suzuki (Japan, But posted for USA) outfielder
Kluber
Belt accepting the Q offer, hoping for a healthy season and then entering FA market in 2023. But his agents have been talking to the Giants about a three year deal in the Crawford range per season.

[Mick]

Jim Kaat, 283 wins but then again a few of you guys don't recognize wins, just WHIP and GETTING WHIPPED.

What about losses? Kaat was a starter for twenty seasons and lost 237 games, meaning that on average his record was 14-12 each season.

He pitched for 25 years overall and received Cy Young votes in exactly one season. During the first decade of his career, voters (two per city) could only list one pitcher on the ballot, thereafter they could list three pitchers per ballot (with a 5-3-1 point system). In 1975 Kaat received seven third place votes from 24 voters. The other 24 seasons not a single voter considered him as the top (or one of the top three) pitchers in the league.

I will dispense with the advanced metrics that are telling, but even standard statistics (3.45 career ERA in one of the lowest scoring eras in baseball history) are not kind. He was a good pitcher and great fielder and he played for a long time.

He wasn't even that good in the year he received Cy Young votes.  He led the league in hits allowed that year.  In fact, he led the league in hits allowed four separate times, only leading in innings pitched once.  To be fair, he didn't give up many walks.  But ERA-wise and WHIP-wise, he was pretty close to Jim Barr.

---

Some rumors re the Giants.

Verlander
Suzuki (Japan, But posted for USA) outfielder
Kluber
Belt accepting the Q offer, hoping for a healthy season and then entering FA market in 2023. But his agents have been talking to the Giants about a three year deal in the Crawford range per season.

I think I'd do that Belt deal.  Worry about his injuries, though.

Seiya Suzuki sounds strong, versus amazing.  His stat lines are more like Darren Ruf's than Ichiro Suzuki's.  For example, Suzuki had 38 home runs last year.  Tuffy Rhodes, six year MLB career with 13 HRs in 594 ABs had 40 HRs in the Japanese league.  

I wouldn't sign Verlander.  Too many injury and other issues.

[Mick]

Jim Kaat, 283 wins but then again a few of you guys don't recognize wins, just WHIP and GETTING WHIPPED.

What about losses? Kaat was a starter for twenty seasons and lost 237 games, meaning that on average his record was 14-12 each season.

He pitched for 25 years overall and received Cy Young votes in exactly one season. During the first decade of his career, voters (two per city) could only list one pitcher on the ballot, thereafter they could list three pitchers per ballot (with a 5-3-1 point system). In 1975 Kaat received seven third place votes from 24 voters. The other 24 seasons not a single voter considered him as the top (or one of the top three) pitchers in the league.

I will dispense with the advanced metrics that are telling, but even standard statistics (3.45 career ERA in one of the lowest scoring eras in baseball history) are not kind. He was a good pitcher and great fielder and he played for a long time.

He wasn't even that good in the year he received Cy Young votes.  He led the league in hits allowed that year.  In fact, he led the league in hits allowed four separate times, only leading in innings pitched once.  To be fair, he didn't give up many walks.  But ERA-wise and WHIP-wise, he was pretty close to Jim Barr.

---

Some rumors re the Giants.

Verlander
Suzuki (Japan, But posted for USA) outfielder
Kluber
Belt accepting the Q offer, hoping for a healthy season and then entering FA market in 2023. But his agents have been talking to the Giants about a three year deal in the Crawford range per season.

I think I'd do that Belt deal.  Worry about his injuries, though.

Seiya Suzuki sounds strong, versus amazing.  His stat lines are more like Darren Ruf's than Ichiro Suzuki's.  For example, Suzuki had 38 home runs last year.  Tuffy Rhodes, six year MLB career with 13 HRs in 594 ABs had 40 HRs in the Japanese league.  

I wouldn't sign Verlander.  Too many injury and other issues.

[Mick]

Lefty O’Doul is up for HOF consideration….

https://baseballhall.org/news/era-commit...sideration

Of the Golden Era nominees, who should (if any) receive the necessary 75%?

Dick Allen - 7x all star, led league in walks, triples, runs,  and RBIs once each, OPS 4x, HRs and OBP 2x, K's 2x, ROY, MVP 1x, but only finished in Top 5 for MVP twice.  Better than Boyer.  Yes for me.
Ken Boyer - Close, but no.  6x AS.  Very consistent, 1x MVP, only led the league once, in RBIs, over a 15 year career.
Gil Hodges - Close to Jeff Kent in many ways.  If Jeff is in, Gil is in.  If Jeff is out, Gil is out.  370 career HRs in 18 seasons, didn't lead the league in batting in any major category except strikeouts once.  8x all star.
Jim Kaat - No.  Not in top 400 career pitchers for ERA.
Roger Maris - No.   12 year career, 3 great years, one superb year.  4x all star, 2 MVPs.  Only six of 12 years were really strong.
Minnie Minoso - No. 9x all star, led the league in triples four times, led the league in steals 3x, but led the league in caught stealing 6x.  3x GG.  Finished top four in MVP voting four times...always 4th.
Danny Murtaugh - No.  Went to the postseason 4x in 14 years, 2 WS championships.  Won more than 90 five times in 15 managing seasons.  Finished sixth or worse in 15 seasons.  Not bad.  Not HoF.
Tony Oliva - No.   Contact hitter that never led the league in OPS or steals, but led league in hitting 3x, led league in hits 5x, doubles, 4x.  Runs, once.  8x all star in 15 seasons, other 7 seasons were mediocre.  Not quite as good as Will Clark, who isn't in the hall.
Billy Pierce - No.   Let league in losses once and wins once.  7x all star.  Barely in top 300 in ERA.  Third in Cy Young voting in 1962 as SF Giant, no other honors.
Maury Wills - No.  One trick pony, and not that great of a trick.  Career .281, OPS of .330 which is average.  586 career steals, but led league in getting caught seven times.
Lefty O'Doul - Yes for me.  Not even a question, and an absolute travesty that he's not in the HoF.  half a career, but one of the very best hitters in the game.  Career .349 avg, would be fourth behind Cobb, Hornsby, Shoeless Joe if he had enough ABs.  Unlike other high average hitters, clobbered many home runs, career OPS of .945, better than Willie Mays, same as Cobb, just below Mel Ott.  Also baseball's best brand ambassador to Japan.

[Mick]

Lefty O’Doul is up for HOF consideration….

https://baseballhall.org/news/era-commit...sideration

Of the Golden Era nominees, who should (if any) receive the necessary 75%?

Dick Allen - 7x all star, led league in walks, triples, runs,  and RBIs once each, OPS 4x, HRs and OBP 2x, K's 2x, ROY, MVP 1x, but only finished in Top 5 for MVP twice.  Better than Boyer.  Yes for me.
Ken Boyer - Close, but no.  6x AS.  Very consistent, 1x MVP, only led the league once, in RBIs, over a 15 year career.
Gil Hodges - Close to Jeff Kent in many ways.  If Jeff is in, Gil is in.  If Jeff is out, Gil is out.  370 career HRs in 18 seasons, didn't lead the league in batting in any major category except strikeouts once.  8x all star.
Jim Kaat - No.  Not in top 400 career pitchers for ERA.
Roger Maris - No.   12 year career, 3 great years, one superb year.  4x all star, 2 MVPs.  Only six of 12 years were really strong.
Minnie Minoso - No. 9x all star, led the league in triples four times, led the league in steals 3x, but led the league in caught stealing 6x.  3x GG.  Finished top four in MVP voting four times...always 4th.
Danny Murtaugh - No.  Went to the postseason 4x in 14 years, 2 WS championships.  Won more than 90 five times in 15 managing seasons.  Finished sixth or worse in 15 seasons.  Not bad.  Not HoF.
Tony Oliva - No.   Contact hitter that never led the league in OPS or steals, but led league in hitting 3x, led league in hits 5x, doubles, 4x.  Runs, once.  8x all star in 15 seasons, other 7 seasons were mediocre.  Not quite as good as Will Clark, who isn't in the hall.
Billy Pierce - No.   Let league in losses once and wins once.  7x all star.  Barely in top 300 in ERA.  Third in Cy Young voting in 1962 as SF Giant, no other honors.
Maury Wills - No.  One trick pony, and not that great of a trick.  Career .281, OPS of .330 which is average.  586 career steals, but led league in getting caught seven times.
Lefty O'Doul - Yes for me.  Not even a question, and an absolute travesty that he's not in the HoF.  half a career, but one of the very best hitters in the game.  Career .349 avg, would be fourth behind Cobb, Hornsby, Shoeless Joe if he had enough ABs.  Unlike other high average hitters, clobbered many home runs, career OPS of .945, better than Willie Mays, same as Cobb, just below Mel Ott.  Also baseball's best brand ambassador to Japan.

[lex24]

Jim Kaat, 283 wins but then again a few of you guys don't recognize wins, just WHIP and GETTING WHIPPED.

What about losses? Kaat was a starter for twenty seasons and lost 237 games, meaning that on average his record was 14-12 each season.

He pitched for 25 years overall and received Cy Young votes in exactly one season. During the first decade of his career, voters (two per city) could only list one pitcher on the ballot, thereafter they could list three pitchers per ballot (with a 5-3-1 point system). In 1975 Kaat received seven third place votes from 24 voters. The other 24 seasons not a single voter considered him as the top (or one of the top three) pitchers in the league.

I will dispense with the advanced metrics that are telling, but even standard statistics (3.45 career ERA in one of the lowest scoring eras in baseball history) are not kind. He was a good pitcher and great fielder and he played for a long time.

He wasn't even that good in the year he received Cy Young votes.  He led the league in hits allowed that year.  In fact, he led the league in hits allowed four separate times, only leading in innings pitched once.  To be fair, he didn't give up many walks.  But ERA-wise and WHIP-wise, he was pretty close to Jim Barr.

---

Some rumors re the Giants.

Verlander
Suzuki (Japan, But posted for USA) outfielder
Kluber
Belt accepting the Q offer, hoping for a healthy season and then entering FA market in 2023. But his agents have been talking to the Giants about a three year deal in the Crawford range per season.

I think I'd do that Belt deal.  Worry about his injuries, though.

Seiya Suzuki sounds strong, versus amazing.  His stat lines are more like Darren Ruf's than Ichiro Suzuki's.  For example, Suzuki had 38 home runs last year.  Tuffy Rhodes, six year MLB career with 13 HRs in 594 ABs had 40 HRs in the Japanese league.  

I wouldn't sign Verlander.  Too many injury and other issues.

Jackson played either with or against Suzuki and raves about him. His peripherals are also strong. 

Giants need to make inroads in the Pacific Rim. They have been abysmal on that front. Last player of any quasi consequence they signed was the very stylish, but weak hitting Shinjo.

---

What’s the market rate for Semien?

[lex24]

Jim Kaat, 283 wins but then again a few of you guys don't recognize wins, just WHIP and GETTING WHIPPED.

What about losses? Kaat was a starter for twenty seasons and lost 237 games, meaning that on average his record was 14-12 each season.

He pitched for 25 years overall and received Cy Young votes in exactly one season. During the first decade of his career, voters (two per city) could only list one pitcher on the ballot, thereafter they could list three pitchers per ballot (with a 5-3-1 point system). In 1975 Kaat received seven third place votes from 24 voters. The other 24 seasons not a single voter considered him as the top (or one of the top three) pitchers in the league.

I will dispense with the advanced metrics that are telling, but even standard statistics (3.45 career ERA in one of the lowest scoring eras in baseball history) are not kind. He was a good pitcher and great fielder and he played for a long time.

He wasn't even that good in the year he received Cy Young votes.  He led the league in hits allowed that year.  In fact, he led the league in hits allowed four separate times, only leading in innings pitched once.  To be fair, he didn't give up many walks.  But ERA-wise and WHIP-wise, he was pretty close to Jim Barr.

---

Some rumors re the Giants.

Verlander
Suzuki (Japan, But posted for USA) outfielder
Kluber
Belt accepting the Q offer, hoping for a healthy season and then entering FA market in 2023. But his agents have been talking to the Giants about a three year deal in the Crawford range per season.

I think I'd do that Belt deal.  Worry about his injuries, though.

Seiya Suzuki sounds strong, versus amazing.  His stat lines are more like Darren Ruf's than Ichiro Suzuki's.  For example, Suzuki had 38 home runs last year.  Tuffy Rhodes, six year MLB career with 13 HRs in 594 ABs had 40 HRs in the Japanese league.  

I wouldn't sign Verlander.  Too many injury and other issues.

Jackson played either with or against Suzuki and raves about him. His peripherals are also strong. 

Giants need to make inroads in the Pacific Rim. They have been abysmal on that front. Last player of any quasi consequence they signed was the very stylish, but weak hitting Shinjo.

---

What’s the market rate for Semien?

[Phogge]

Semien is probably going to LA so a big contract. They lose Seager who is not worth a brobdingnagian deal IMO. If Verlander is reasonably healthy then take that and stick it in your ear Dodgers.

[Phogge]

Semien is probably going to LA so a big contract. They lose Seager who is not worth a brobdingnagian deal IMO. If Verlander is reasonably healthy then take that and stick it in your ear Dodgers.

[DC 86]

Semien is probably going to LA so a big contract. They lose Seager who is not worth a of immense proportions deal IMO. If Verlander is reasonably healthy then take that and stick it in your ear Dodgers.

Semien to the Dodgers is highly unlikely. The big contract part is accurate, though.

Verlander has pitched in one game since 2019 and will be 39 years old at the start of next season. Certainly could return to form but just a gamble.

[DC 86]

Semien is probably going to LA so a big contract. They lose Seager who is not worth a of immense proportions deal IMO. If Verlander is reasonably healthy then take that and stick it in your ear Dodgers.

Semien to the Dodgers is highly unlikely. The big contract part is accurate, though.

Verlander has pitched in one game since 2019 and will be 39 years old at the start of next season. Certainly could return to form but just a gamble.

[Phogge]

Why unlikely? There are at least three Semien to Dodgers reports I have seen in the past two days. I have no idea how to link them. I barely know how to add an attachment and as a plus 75 year old I don't particularly care.

[Phogge]

Why unlikely? There are at least three Semien to Dodgers reports I have seen in the past two days. I have no idea how to link them. I barely know how to add an attachment and as a plus 75 year old I don't particularly care.

[DC 86]

Why unlikely? There are at least three Semien to Dodgers reports I have seen in the past two days. I have no idea how to link them. I barely know how to add an attachment and as a plus 75 year old I don't particularly care.

We shall see; happy to bet if you like. My opinion is not based on reading blogs in this case. The Dodgers definitely were very interested a year ago, it's a long shot this year. Of course anything is possible in the world given the CBA-related uncertainty.

75 is the new 55! You can link by just using copy-and-paste.

[DC 86]

Why unlikely? There are at least three Semien to Dodgers reports I have seen in the past two days. I have no idea how to link them. I barely know how to add an attachment and as a plus 75 year old I don't particularly care.

We shall see; happy to bet if you like. My opinion is not based on reading blogs in this case. The Dodgers definitely were very interested a year ago, it's a long shot this year. Of course anything is possible in the world given the CBA-related uncertainty.

75 is the new 55! You can link by just using copy-and-paste.

[Giants]

Why unlikely? There are at least three Semien to Dodgers reports I have seen in the past two days. I have no idea how to link them. I barely know how to add an attachment and as a plus 75 year old I don't particularly care.

I don’t think Semien will sign with LA because the Dodgers have awarded only two (Greinke and Jansen) long term contracts (5+ years) under the current ownership and I think Siemen is looking for a long term deal.  We shall see if LA makes an exception for Semien.

[Giants]

Why unlikely? There are at least three Semien to Dodgers reports I have seen in the past two days. I have no idea how to link them. I barely know how to add an attachment and as a plus 75 year old I don't particularly care.

I don’t think Semien will sign with LA because the Dodgers have awarded only two (Greinke and Jansen) long term contracts (5+ years) under the current ownership and I think Siemen is looking for a long term deal.  We shall see if LA makes an exception for Semien.

[Phogge]

Only bet on the horses. I gave you guys the lock of the year in another thread... Life is Good in the Dirt Mile. They are building him up to run the Classic next year. Will point to the Pegasus or the Saudi Cup. Then a spring race and some tuneups before next November at Keenland. IMO would have won the Triple Crown this year if not for a minor injury.

Baffert lost him to Pletcher but has the Juvenile winner in Corniche. Derby favorite but Baffert can’t run at Churchill Downs.

As for Semian who do the Dodgers go after if the experts are wrong. None of them think Seager is returning.

[Phogge]

Only bet on the horses. I gave you guys the lock of the year in another thread... Life is Good in the Dirt Mile. They are building him up to run the Classic next year. Will point to the Pegasus or the Saudi Cup. Then a spring race and some tuneups before next November at Keenland. IMO would have won the Triple Crown this year if not for a minor injury.

Baffert lost him to Pletcher but has the Juvenile winner in Corniche. Derby favorite but Baffert can’t run at Churchill Downs.

As for Semian who do the Dodgers go after if the experts are wrong. None of them think Seager is returning.

[Giants]

delete (duplicate post)

---

Only bet on the horses. I gave you guys the lock of the year in another thread... Life is Good in the Dirt Mile. They are building him up to run the Classic next year. Will point to the Pegasus or the Saudi Cup. Then a spring race and some tuneups before next November at Keenland. IMO would have won the Triple Crown this year if not for a minor injury.

Baffert lost him to Pletcher but has the Juvenile winner in Corniche. Derby favorite but Baffert can’t run at Churchill Downs.

As for Semian who do the Dodgers go after if the experts are wrong. None of them think Seager is returning.

Trea Turner moves back to SS…

[Giants]

delete (duplicate post)

---

Only bet on the horses. I gave you guys the lock of the year in another thread... Life is Good in the Dirt Mile. They are building him up to run the Classic next year. Will point to the Pegasus or the Saudi Cup. Then a spring race and some tuneups before next November at Keenland. IMO would have won the Triple Crown this year if not for a minor injury.

Baffert lost him to Pletcher but has the Juvenile winner in Corniche. Derby favorite but Baffert can’t run at Churchill Downs.

As for Semian who do the Dodgers go after if the experts are wrong. None of them think Seager is returning.

Trea Turner moves back to SS…

[DC 86]

As for Semian who do the Dodgers go after if the experts are wrong. None of them think Seager is returning.

Who are these "experts"? Agree on Seager not returning. Dodgers are set with Turner and Lux.

---

I don’t think Semien will sign with LA because the Dodgers have awarded only two (Greinke and Jansen) long term contracts (5+ years) under the current ownership and I think Siemen is looking for a long term deal.  We shall see if LA makes an exception for Semien.

Actually there's Mookie Betts and A.J. Pollock also.

But it's significant that Greinke, Jansen and Betts were all under 30, whereas the Pollock signing was the exception and has proved to be a mistake.

[DC 86]

As for Semian who do the Dodgers go after if the experts are wrong. None of them think Seager is returning.

Who are these "experts"? Agree on Seager not returning. Dodgers are set with Turner and Lux.

---

I don’t think Semien will sign with LA because the Dodgers have awarded only two (Greinke and Jansen) long term contracts (5+ years) under the current ownership and I think Siemen is looking for a long term deal.  We shall see if LA makes an exception for Semien.

Actually there's Mookie Betts and A.J. Pollock also.

But it's significant that Greinke, Jansen and Betts were all under 30, whereas the Pollock signing was the exception and has proved to be a mistake.

[Giants]

As for Semian who do the Dodgers go after if the experts are wrong. None of them think Seager is returning.

Who are these "experts"? Agree on Seager not returning. Dodgers are set with Turner and Lux.

---

I don’t think Semien will sign with LA because the Dodgers have awarded only two (Greinke and Jansen) long term contracts (5+ years) under the current ownership and I think Siemen is looking for a long term deal.  We shall see if LA makes an exception for Semien.

Actually there's Mookie Betts and A.J. Pollock also.

But it's significant that Greinke, Jansen and Betts were all under 30, whereas the Pollock signing was the exception and has proved to be a mistake.

Thanks for the corrections.

Pollock signed a four year deal plus a one year player option so essentially it is a five year deal.
I don’t know how I missed Betts.  An egregious oversight given his contract.  I guess that proves the point LA will make exceptions.

Nine years under current ownership and four 5+ year contracts. That reflects an intelligent approach to building a winning organization.

I think we can use this model as a primer on how Zaidi will function with the Giants - don’t look for significant dollar/years contracts unless the player is an exception to the rule.

[Giants]

As for Semian who do the Dodgers go after if the experts are wrong. None of them think Seager is returning.

Who are these "experts"? Agree on Seager not returning. Dodgers are set with Turner and Lux.

---

I don’t think Semien will sign with LA because the Dodgers have awarded only two (Greinke and Jansen) long term contracts (5+ years) under the current ownership and I think Siemen is looking for a long term deal.  We shall see if LA makes an exception for Semien.

Actually there's Mookie Betts and A.J. Pollock also.

But it's significant that Greinke, Jansen and Betts were all under 30, whereas the Pollock signing was the exception and has proved to be a mistake.

Thanks for the corrections.

Pollock signed a four year deal plus a one year player option so essentially it is a five year deal.
I don’t know how I missed Betts.  An egregious oversight given his contract.  I guess that proves the point LA will make exceptions.

Nine years under current ownership and four 5+ year contracts. That reflects an intelligent approach to building a winning organization.

I think we can use this model as a primer on how Zaidi will function with the Giants - don’t look for significant dollar/years contracts unless the player is an exception to the rule.

[lex24]

As for Semian who do the Dodgers go after if the experts are wrong. None of them think Seager is returning.

Who are these "experts"? Agree on Seager not returning. Dodgers are set with Turner and Lux.

---

I don’t think Semien will sign with LA because the Dodgers have awarded only two (Greinke and Jansen) long term contracts (5+ years) under the current ownership and I think Siemen is looking for a long term deal.  We shall see if LA makes an exception for Semien.

Actually there's Mookie Betts and A.J. Pollock also.

But it's significant that Greinke, Jansen and Betts were all under 30, whereas the Pollock signing was the exception and has proved to be a mistake.

Thanks for the corrections.

Pollock signed a four year deal plus a one year player option so essentially it is a five year deal.
I don’t know how I missed Betts.  An egregious oversight given his contract.  I guess that proves the point LA will make exceptions.

Nine years under current ownership and four 5+ year contracts. That reflects an intelligent approach to building a winning organization.

I think we can use this model as a primer on how Zaidi will function with the Giants - don’t look for significant dollar/years contracts unless the player is an exception to the rule.

And I’m fine with that.  As long as IF they target an exception, they actually get him. I agree that will be the rare player.  

I think the days of long term contracts  for starting pitchers is done.  Maybe the extremely rare exception- i.e. a Kershaw in his youth.  But with starting pitching being a 5 inning proposition for most  (6 is the new 9) the increase in usage of bullpens (with pitching staffs being about 20 deep - each team having its AAA shuttle), and the emphasis on pure power pitching from pitch 1 (meaning 30 year old starting pitchers are “old”) I see almost no reason to sign a pitcher for more than 3 years. Again, with the extremely rare exception.

[lex24]

As for Semian who do the Dodgers go after if the experts are wrong. None of them think Seager is returning.

Who are these "experts"? Agree on Seager not returning. Dodgers are set with Turner and Lux.

---

I don’t think Semien will sign with LA because the Dodgers have awarded only two (Greinke and Jansen) long term contracts (5+ years) under the current ownership and I think Siemen is looking for a long term deal.  We shall see if LA makes an exception for Semien.

Actually there's Mookie Betts and A.J. Pollock also.

But it's significant that Greinke, Jansen and Betts were all under 30, whereas the Pollock signing was the exception and has proved to be a mistake.

Thanks for the corrections.

Pollock signed a four year deal plus a one year player option so essentially it is a five year deal.
I don’t know how I missed Betts.  An egregious oversight given his contract.  I guess that proves the point LA will make exceptions.

Nine years under current ownership and four 5+ year contracts. That reflects an intelligent approach to building a winning organization.

I think we can use this model as a primer on how Zaidi will function with the Giants - don’t look for significant dollar/years contracts unless the player is an exception to the rule.

And I’m fine with that.  As long as IF they target an exception, they actually get him. I agree that will be the rare player.  

I think the days of long term contracts  for starting pitchers is done.  Maybe the extremely rare exception- i.e. a Kershaw in his youth.  But with starting pitching being a 5 inning proposition for most  (6 is the new 9) the increase in usage of bullpens (with pitching staffs being about 20 deep - each team having its AAA shuttle), and the emphasis on pure power pitching from pitch 1 (meaning 30 year old starting pitchers are “old”) I see almost no reason to sign a pitcher for more than 3 years. Again, with the extremely rare exception.

[Phogge]

I like Pollack. Love to have him. I don't give a schit about his contract or anybody else either. Use the GD money Farhan and build a f****** WS winner.

[Phogge]

I like Pollack. Love to have him. I don't give a schit about his contract or anybody else either. Use the GD money Farhan and build a f****** WS winner.

[Mick]

I think we can use this model as a primer on how Zaidi will function with the Giants - don’t look for significant dollar/years contracts unless the player is an exception to the rule.

Ironically, that was the only real issue I'd ever had with Farhan, which was his (borderline nonsensical) pursuit of Bryce Harper.  Harper is exactly where he should be, in Philly's bandbox of a park.  Historically speaking, Harper did better in Philadelphia than anywhere else and did worst at AT&T in SF but Farhan offered Harper 12 years at $310 million.  That was a terrible deal, I thought.  Sure, he's doing well in Philly (1.103 in 2021) and not-so-great at oracle (.697).  Harper's career-best OPS at ballparks where he's had at least 100 plate appearances (13 ballparks) is at Coors field (1.107), then Wrigley (1.053), then Philadelphia/Citizen's Bank (.999).  His worst OPS is still at AT&T (.669).

[Mick]

I think we can use this model as a primer on how Zaidi will function with the Giants - don’t look for significant dollar/years contracts unless the player is an exception to the rule.

Ironically, that was the only real issue I'd ever had with Farhan, which was his (borderline nonsensical) pursuit of Bryce Harper.  Harper is exactly where he should be, in Philly's bandbox of a park.  Historically speaking, Harper did better in Philadelphia than anywhere else and did worst at AT&T in SF but Farhan offered Harper 12 years at $310 million.  That was a terrible deal, I thought.  Sure, he's doing well in Philly (1.103 in 2021) and not-so-great at oracle (.697).  Harper's career-best OPS at ballparks where he's had at least 100 plate appearances (13 ballparks) is at Coors field (1.107), then Wrigley (1.053), then Philadelphia/Citizen's Bank (.999).  His worst OPS is still at AT&T (.669).

[lex24]

I think we can use this model as a primer on how Zaidi will function with the Giants - don’t look for significant dollar/years contracts unless the player is an exception to the rule.

Ironically, that was the only real issue I'd ever had with Farhan, which was his (borderline nonsensical) pursuit of Bryce Harper.  Harper is exactly where he should be, in Philly's bandbox of a park.  Historically speaking, Harper did better in Philadelphia than anywhere else and did worst at AT&T in SF but Farhan offered Harper 12 years at $310 million.  That was a terrible deal, I thought.  Sure, he's doing well in Philly (1.103 in 2021) and not-so-great at oracle (.697).  Harper's career-best OPS at ballparks where he's had at least 100 plate appearances (13 ballparks) is at Coors field (1.107), then Wrigley (1.053), then Philadelphia/Citizen's Bank (.999).  His worst OPS is still at AT&T (.669).

SSS. I’m assuming if he played 81 at Oracle, he’d put up good numbers. The issue is not the contract itself.  It’s whether the contract ties the Org’s hands moving forward. It may have done that. But I don’t think so.  Having Harper in RF everyday would have been nice.

[lex24]

I think we can use this model as a primer on how Zaidi will function with the Giants - don’t look for significant dollar/years contracts unless the player is an exception to the rule.

Ironically, that was the only real issue I'd ever had with Farhan, which was his (borderline nonsensical) pursuit of Bryce Harper.  Harper is exactly where he should be, in Philly's bandbox of a park.  Historically speaking, Harper did better in Philadelphia than anywhere else and did worst at AT&T in SF but Farhan offered Harper 12 years at $310 million.  That was a terrible deal, I thought.  Sure, he's doing well in Philly (1.103 in 2021) and not-so-great at oracle (.697).  Harper's career-best OPS at ballparks where he's had at least 100 plate appearances (13 ballparks) is at Coors field (1.107), then Wrigley (1.053), then Philadelphia/Citizen's Bank (.999).  His worst OPS is still at AT&T (.669).

SSS. I’m assuming if he played 81 at Oracle, he’d put up good numbers. The issue is not the contract itself.  It’s whether the contract ties the Org’s hands moving forward. It may have done that. But I don’t think so.  Having Harper in RF everyday would have been nice.

[Mick]

I think we can use this model as a primer on how Zaidi will function with the Giants - don’t look for significant dollar/years contracts unless the player is an exception to the rule.

Ironically, that was the only real issue I'd ever had with Farhan, which was his (borderline nonsensical) pursuit of Bryce Harper.  Harper is exactly where he should be, in Philly's bandbox of a park.  Historically speaking, Harper did better in Philadelphia than anywhere else and did worst at AT&T in SF but Farhan offered Harper 12 years at $310 million.  That was a terrible deal, I thought.  Sure, he's doing well in Philly (1.103 in 2021) and not-so-great at oracle (.697).  Harper's career-best OPS at ballparks where he's had at least 100 plate appearances (13 ballparks) is at Coors field (1.107), then Wrigley (1.053), then Philadelphia/Citizen's Bank (.999).  His worst OPS is still at AT&T (.669).

SSS. I’m assuming if he played 81 at Oracle, he’d put up good numbers. The issue is not the contract itself.  It’s whether the contract ties the Org’s hands moving forward. It may have done that. But I don’t think so.  Having Harper in RF everyday would have been nice.

I don't disagree, particularly if the batting coaches could work the same magic on Harper that they did on the other starters.  Basically, all of the starters had career OPS years either this year or last year.  For Harper, that would mean in the area of 42 HRs, 34 doubles, 1.109 OPS, 100 RBIs, 119 runs scored.  I'd take it.  But it's nearly $30 million a year for 12 years...

[Mick]

I think we can use this model as a primer on how Zaidi will function with the Giants - don’t look for significant dollar/years contracts unless the player is an exception to the rule.

Ironically, that was the only real issue I'd ever had with Farhan, which was his (borderline nonsensical) pursuit of Bryce Harper.  Harper is exactly where he should be, in Philly's bandbox of a park.  Historically speaking, Harper did better in Philadelphia than anywhere else and did worst at AT&T in SF but Farhan offered Harper 12 years at $310 million.  That was a terrible deal, I thought.  Sure, he's doing well in Philly (1.103 in 2021) and not-so-great at oracle (.697).  Harper's career-best OPS at ballparks where he's had at least 100 plate appearances (13 ballparks) is at Coors field (1.107), then Wrigley (1.053), then Philadelphia/Citizen's Bank (.999).  His worst OPS is still at AT&T (.669).

SSS. I’m assuming if he played 81 at Oracle, he’d put up good numbers. The issue is not the contract itself.  It’s whether the contract ties the Org’s hands moving forward. It may have done that. But I don’t think so.  Having Harper in RF everyday would have been nice.

I don't disagree, particularly if the batting coaches could work the same magic on Harper that they did on the other starters.  Basically, all of the starters had career OPS years either this year or last year.  For Harper, that would mean in the area of 42 HRs, 34 doubles, 1.109 OPS, 100 RBIs, 119 runs scored.  I'd take it.  But it's nearly $30 million a year for 12 years...

[DC 86]

I think we can use this model as a primer on how Zaidi will function with the Giants - don’t look for significant dollar/years contracts unless the player is an exception to the rule.

Ironically, that was the only real issue I'd ever had with Farhan, which was his (borderline nonsensical) pursuit of Bryce Harper.  Harper is exactly where he should be, in Philly's bandbox of a park.  Historically speaking, Harper did better in Philadelphia than anywhere else and did worst at AT&T in SF but Farhan offered Harper 12 years at $310 million.  That was a terrible deal, I thought.  Sure, he's doing well in Philly (1.103 in 2021) and not-so-great at oracle (.697).  Harper's career-best OPS at ballparks where he's had at least 100 plate appearances (13 ballparks) is at Coors field (1.107), then Wrigley (1.053), then Philadelphia/Citizen's Bank (.999).  His worst OPS is still at AT&T (.669).

SSS. I’m assuming if he played 81 at Oracle, he’d put up good numbers. The issue is not the contract itself.  It’s whether the contract ties the Org’s hands moving forward. It may have done that. But I don’t think so.  Having Harper in RF everyday would have been nice.

I don't disagree, particularly if the batting coaches could work the same magic on Harper that they did on the other starters.  Basically, all of the starters had career OPS years either this year or last year.  For Harper, that would mean in the area of 42 HRs, 34 doubles, 1.109 OPS, 100 RBIs, 119 runs scored.  I'd take it.  But it's nearly $30 million a year for 12 years...

$25.8 million/year - which could be dead money toward the end of the contract but which would currently be a bargain.

[DC 86]

I think we can use this model as a primer on how Zaidi will function with the Giants - don’t look for significant dollar/years contracts unless the player is an exception to the rule.

Ironically, that was the only real issue I'd ever had with Farhan, which was his (borderline nonsensical) pursuit of Bryce Harper.  Harper is exactly where he should be, in Philly's bandbox of a park.  Historically speaking, Harper did better in Philadelphia than anywhere else and did worst at AT&T in SF but Farhan offered Harper 12 years at $310 million.  That was a terrible deal, I thought.  Sure, he's doing well in Philly (1.103 in 2021) and not-so-great at oracle (.697).  Harper's career-best OPS at ballparks where he's had at least 100 plate appearances (13 ballparks) is at Coors field (1.107), then Wrigley (1.053), then Philadelphia/Citizen's Bank (.999).  His worst OPS is still at AT&T (.669).

SSS. I’m assuming if he played 81 at Oracle, he’d put up good numbers. The issue is not the contract itself.  It’s whether the contract ties the Org’s hands moving forward. It may have done that. But I don’t think so.  Having Harper in RF everyday would have been nice.

I don't disagree, particularly if the batting coaches could work the same magic on Harper that they did on the other starters.  Basically, all of the starters had career OPS years either this year or last year.  For Harper, that would mean in the area of 42 HRs, 34 doubles, 1.109 OPS, 100 RBIs, 119 runs scored.  I'd take it.  But it's nearly $30 million a year for 12 years...

$25.8 million/year - which could be dead money toward the end of the contract but which would currently be a bargain.

[Mick]

Giants added two years to Kapler's contract, which is now through 2024.  Not bad for a manager who isone of three manager of the year candidates.

And Posey won the silver slugger award, his fifth.

[Mick]

Giants added two years to Kapler's contract, which is now through 2024.  Not bad for a manager who isone of three manager of the year candidates.

And Posey won the silver slugger award, his fifth.