[Giants]

The Giants are a privately-held for-profit company.  The investors expect a return on their share.  Therefore, it is necessary to function within a budget.  Since no one outside the highest levels of the organization are privy to the numbers, anything anyone says is merely a guess.  

I read the Baggerly article and agree with much of what he said. It is interesting that his focus was less on on-field performance than the marketing shortfalls.  In essence, I think his message was never take your clientele for granted.  They need to be constantly reassured that you care about them.

[Giants]

The Giants are a privately-held for-profit company.  The investors expect a return on their share.  Therefore, it is necessary to function within a budget.  Since no one outside the highest levels of the organization are privy to the numbers, anything anyone says is merely a guess.  

I read the Baggerly article and agree with much of what he said. It is interesting that his focus was less on on-field performance than the marketing shortfalls.  In essence, I think his message was never take your clientele for granted.  They need to be constantly reassured that you care about them.

[Phogge]

Giants... Duh. Like most any other privately held company. Give em enough to get them in the door. They aren't Nordstrom's where employees sometimes ride bikes in the rain to deliver a dress or shoes (yep, we did a 60 Minutes piece about just that).

[Phogge]

Giants... Duh. Like most any other privately held company. Give em enough to get them in the door. They aren't Nordstrom's where employees sometimes ride bikes in the rain to deliver a dress or shoes (yep, we did a 60 Minutes piece about just that).

[lex24]

The Giants are a privately-held for-profit company.  The investors expect a return on their share.  Therefore, it is necessary to function within a budget.  Since no one outside the highest levels of the organization are privy to the numbers, anything anyone says is merely a guess.  

I read the Baggerly article and agree with much of what he said. It is interesting that his focus was less on on-field performance than the marketing shortfalls.  In essence, I think his message was never take your clientele for granted.  They need to be constantly reassured that you care about them.

Payroll is not a guess.  Overall budget, yes.  I’m sure the investors are doing just fine.  There are, I believe, tax benefits on top of everything else. 

As for OF, I don’t think there is any real question of who sets the budget - the owners.  It’s their money.  Zaidi runs the baseball operations.  I don’t think that includes setting the budget. I mean, why would Zaidi want a mid-level budget?  He’s competing against an organization that has a payroll that is $100,000,000 higher. I can’t conceive of a reason Zaidi wouldn’t want that type of budget.

[lex24]

The Giants are a privately-held for-profit company.  The investors expect a return on their share.  Therefore, it is necessary to function within a budget.  Since no one outside the highest levels of the organization are privy to the numbers, anything anyone says is merely a guess.  

I read the Baggerly article and agree with much of what he said. It is interesting that his focus was less on on-field performance than the marketing shortfalls.  In essence, I think his message was never take your clientele for granted.  They need to be constantly reassured that you care about them.

Payroll is not a guess.  Overall budget, yes.  I’m sure the investors are doing just fine.  There are, I believe, tax benefits on top of everything else. 

As for OF, I don’t think there is any real question of who sets the budget - the owners.  It’s their money.  Zaidi runs the baseball operations.  I don’t think that includes setting the budget. I mean, why would Zaidi want a mid-level budget?  He’s competing against an organization that has a payroll that is $100,000,000 higher. I can’t conceive of a reason Zaidi wouldn’t want that type of budget.

[OutsiderFan]

I think there is a grey area re: Giants spending and team building M.O.

First of all, what is the goal? To win, or generate revenue?  Obviously, you want to do both, but I don't think Zaidi's approach - constant roster churn and fielding uninspiring players to win at the margins - is the best way to goose revenue. 

If you want to inspire fans to be invested in your games, you pay for some shiny objects, like the Giants did before they won 3 WS in 5 years. First it was Bonds, then their new stadium. Then they leveraged the homegrown infield, and starting Pitcher phenoms (Lincecum, Cain, Mad Bum) by savvy free agent signings and trades, while building fan attachments to the players. 

The Giants Payroll rankings since 2000; [MLB Attendance ranking] (post season result)

2000: #17 [#3] (Lost NLDS) 
2001: #15 [#2]
2002: #10 [#3] (Lost World Series)
2003: #9 [#3] (Lost NLDS)
2004: #9 [#5]
2005: #7 [#5]
2006: #10 [#7]
2007: #12 [#7]
2008: #17 [#11]
2009: #14 [#10]
2010: #10 [#9] (Won World Series)
2011: #8 [#3]
2012: #8 [#4] (Won World Series)
2013: #6 [#3]
2014: #7 [#4] (Won World Series)
2015: #5 [#3]
2016: #5 [#4] (Lost NLDS)
2017: #7 [#3]
2018: #2 [#4]
2019: #5 [#11]
2020: #8 [No data - pandemic]
2021: #14 [#12] (Lost NLDS)
2022: #13 [#12]

The data shows the Giants must have a Top 10 payroll to win in the-layoffs.  The data shows the Giants must have a Top 10 payroll to have Top 10 attendance, after the novelty of the new stadium wore off. Fans aren't stupid. They can tell when the team is trying and when they should care. If the team doesn't care about winning, the fans won't show up. As it should be. Even when they don't win, fans show if they think the team is trying.

It is clear that the only big event that could explain the attendance drop after 2018 is the Giants beginning the Zaidi & Kapler era. That coincided with a roster full of old, uninspiring players, and the beginning of the high frequency player turnover to win at the margins era. The only year since 3rd & King opened that the Giants had a Top 10 payroll without Top 10 attendance was 2019, the year players became commodities.

Even winning 107 games didn't bring fans back, suggesting Giants fans want to go see stars, or at least want to see guys who have won before supplemented by spending on players who can help. This is exactly what the Giants didn't do after 2021. How interesting that the data actually backs up what most Giants fans commenting on the Baggarly piece said.

Every fan the Giants get in their stadium is worth $128 in marginal revenue. They are on pace to be down about 750k in attendance from 2018 to 2022. That means they are losing out on about $93M in revenue. I submit that if they spent $35M more on payroll this season, not only would they be a firm Wild Card contender, they would also be averaging at least 5k more per game and be on pace to generate more profit than they will going cheap.

Conclusions:

- The Giants aren't maximizing revenue by being frugal
- They may have found a frugal way to win more than they lose, but even winning 107 that way doesn't translate to butts in seats or playoff success
- The sweet spot for the Giants to contend for championships and Top 7 attendance is a payroll in the Top 5-8 in MLB

Investors know you make money by spending it wisely. All this is to say Farhan Zaidi very well might be the one who wants his frugal way to work and convinced the ownership to let him do it. Hell, they invested $70M in their Arizona Development facility, so it's not like the Giants aren't making investments to baseball operations. They seem to be making the ones preferred by the President of Baseball Operations, so I am not at all convinced Giants ownership is dictating a lower payroll as much as Farhan is just following his plan and the owners back him on it.

But at the end of the day, if the Giants owners in fact care about profits, Farhan is going to be faced with taking ownership of the attendance attrition sooner than later, and maybe realize that it takes spending money to make it, regardless of W-L record.

[OutsiderFan]

I think there is a grey area re: Giants spending and team building M.O.

First of all, what is the goal? To win, or generate revenue?  Obviously, you want to do both, but I don't think Zaidi's approach - constant roster churn and fielding uninspiring players to win at the margins - is the best way to goose revenue. 

If you want to inspire fans to be invested in your games, you pay for some shiny objects, like the Giants did before they won 3 WS in 5 years. First it was Bonds, then their new stadium. Then they leveraged the homegrown infield, and starting Pitcher phenoms (Lincecum, Cain, Mad Bum) by savvy free agent signings and trades, while building fan attachments to the players. 

The Giants Payroll rankings since 2000; [MLB Attendance ranking] (post season result)

2000: #17 [#3] (Lost NLDS) 
2001: #15 [#2]
2002: #10 [#3] (Lost World Series)
2003: #9 [#3] (Lost NLDS)
2004: #9 [#5]
2005: #7 [#5]
2006: #10 [#7]
2007: #12 [#7]
2008: #17 [#11]
2009: #14 [#10]
2010: #10 [#9] (Won World Series)
2011: #8 [#3]
2012: #8 [#4] (Won World Series)
2013: #6 [#3]
2014: #7 [#4] (Won World Series)
2015: #5 [#3]
2016: #5 [#4] (Lost NLDS)
2017: #7 [#3]
2018: #2 [#4]
2019: #5 [#11]
2020: #8 [No data - pandemic]
2021: #14 [#12] (Lost NLDS)
2022: #13 [#12]

The data shows the Giants must have a Top 10 payroll to win in the-layoffs.  The data shows the Giants must have a Top 10 payroll to have Top 10 attendance, after the novelty of the new stadium wore off. Fans aren't stupid. They can tell when the team is trying and when they should care. If the team doesn't care about winning, the fans won't show up. As it should be. Even when they don't win, fans show if they think the team is trying.

It is clear that the only big event that could explain the attendance drop after 2018 is the Giants beginning the Zaidi & Kapler era. That coincided with a roster full of old, uninspiring players, and the beginning of the high frequency player turnover to win at the margins era. The only year since 3rd & King opened that the Giants had a Top 10 payroll without Top 10 attendance was 2019, the year players became commodities.

Even winning 107 games didn't bring fans back, suggesting Giants fans want to go see stars, or at least want to see guys who have won before supplemented by spending on players who can help. This is exactly what the Giants didn't do after 2021. How interesting that the data actually backs up what most Giants fans commenting on the Baggarly piece said.

Every fan the Giants get in their stadium is worth $128 in marginal revenue. They are on pace to be down about 750k in attendance from 2018 to 2022. That means they are losing out on about $93M in revenue. I submit that if they spent $35M more on payroll this season, not only would they be a firm Wild Card contender, they would also be averaging at least 5k more per game and be on pace to generate more profit than they will going cheap.

Conclusions:

- The Giants aren't maximizing revenue by being frugal
- They may have found a frugal way to win more than they lose, but even winning 107 that way doesn't translate to butts in seats or playoff success
- The sweet spot for the Giants to contend for championships and Top 7 attendance is a payroll in the Top 5-8 in MLB

Investors know you make money by spending it wisely. All this is to say Farhan Zaidi very well might be the one who wants his frugal way to work and convinced the ownership to let him do it. Hell, they invested $70M in their Arizona Development facility, so it's not like the Giants aren't making investments to baseball operations. They seem to be making the ones preferred by the President of Baseball Operations, so I am not at all convinced Giants ownership is dictating a lower payroll as much as Farhan is just following his plan and the owners back him on it.

But at the end of the day, if the Giants owners in fact care about profits, Farhan is going to be faced with taking ownership of the attendance attrition sooner than later, and maybe realize that it takes spending money to make it, regardless of W-L record.

[BostonCard]

Hard to make any conclusions about 2021 attendance, given that the pandemic changed attendance patterns, with a wide variety of readiness to resume normal activities in a pandemic environment. I would venture that San Franciscans were disproportionately cautious about returning to an event that put them in contact with a large number of other people.

I’m pretty sure that in a normal year, 107 wins and a thrilling sprint to the finish against the Dodgers would have produced a top-5 attendance figure regardless of payroll.

BC

[BostonCard]

Hard to make any conclusions about 2021 attendance, given that the pandemic changed attendance patterns, with a wide variety of readiness to resume normal activities in a pandemic environment. I would venture that San Franciscans were disproportionately cautious about returning to an event that put them in contact with a large number of other people.

I’m pretty sure that in a normal year, 107 wins and a thrilling sprint to the finish against the Dodgers would have produced a top-5 attendance figure regardless of payroll.

BC

[Mick]

By 1972 the Giants were in the process of unloading salary, Mays first and finally the young core almost solely to save money... Goodson, Kingman, trade Maddox, lose Matthews. The budget was tiny because the attendance was meager. Horace had no other business.

Those were sad days. They lost McCovey, Marichal, George Foster (348 home runs).  Now THAT was a draft, 1968.  First three picks, three outfielders from SoCal high schools, Gary Matthews (RoY), Garry Maddox (8 gold gloves, 248 SBs), George Foster. Other losses...Kingman. Butch Metzger became RoY a year after the Giants got rid of him.  3x all-star, Chris Speier. Bobby Bonds. Dick Dietz, two years after an all star season. My buddy, Ken Henderson. Gaylord Perry, who won the Cy Young the year after SF sent him packing.  The Giants had declined so much by the end of the 1970s, and had lost their ability to score runs so much that three of their starters (Vida Blue, Bob Knepper and Ed Halicki) finished in the top 10 in the league in ERA (Ed Halicki led the league in WHIP and had a losing record at 9-10) that they finished 3rd in the West.

Papa is in love with one person...himself. He can rattle off the same point fifteen times in five minutes. I doubt that the fourth estate has relations with the highest echelons of team ownership.

I think I'm in the minority, but I'm not a Greg Papa fan at all...not remotely. His voice is grating to me.

[Mick]

By 1972 the Giants were in the process of unloading salary, Mays first and finally the young core almost solely to save money... Goodson, Kingman, trade Maddox, lose Matthews. The budget was tiny because the attendance was meager. Horace had no other business.

Those were sad days. They lost McCovey, Marichal, George Foster (348 home runs).  Now THAT was a draft, 1968.  First three picks, three outfielders from SoCal high schools, Gary Matthews (RoY), Garry Maddox (8 gold gloves, 248 SBs), George Foster. Other losses...Kingman. Butch Metzger became RoY a year after the Giants got rid of him.  3x all-star, Chris Speier. Bobby Bonds. Dick Dietz, two years after an all star season. My buddy, Ken Henderson. Gaylord Perry, who won the Cy Young the year after SF sent him packing.  The Giants had declined so much by the end of the 1970s, and had lost their ability to score runs so much that three of their starters (Vida Blue, Bob Knepper and Ed Halicki) finished in the top 10 in the league in ERA (Ed Halicki led the league in WHIP and had a losing record at 9-10) that they finished 3rd in the West.

Papa is in love with one person...himself. He can rattle off the same point fifteen times in five minutes. I doubt that the fourth estate has relations with the highest echelons of team ownership.

I think I'm in the minority, but I'm not a Greg Papa fan at all...not remotely. His voice is grating to me.

[lex24]

I think there is a grey area re: Giants spending and team building M.O.

First of all, what is the goal? To win, or generate revenue?  Obviously, you want to do both, but I don't think Zaidi's approach - constant roster churn and fielding uninspiring players to win at the margins - is the best way to goose revenue. 

If you want to inspire fans to be invested in your games, you pay for some shiny objects, like the Giants did before they won 3 WS in 5 years. First it was Bonds, then their new stadium. Then they leveraged the homegrown infield, and starting Pitcher phenoms (Lincecum, Cain, Mad Bum) by savvy free agent signings and trades, while building fan attachments to the players. 

The Giants Payroll rankings since 2000; [MLB Attendance ranking] (post season result)

2000: #17 [#3] (Lost NLDS) 
2001: #15 [#2]
2002: #10 [#3] (Lost World Series)
2003: #9 [#3] (Lost NLDS)
2004: #9 [#5]
2005: #7 [#5]
2006: #10 [#7]
2007: #12 [#7]
2008: #17 [#11]
2009: #14 [#10]
2010: #10 [#9] (Won World Series)
2011: #8 [#3]
2012: #8 [#4] (Won World Series)
2013: #6 [#3]
2014: #7 [#4] (Won World Series)
2015: #5 [#3]
2016: #5 [#4] (Lost NLDS)
2017: #7 [#3]
2018: #2 [#4]
2019: #5 [#11]
2020: #8 [No data - pandemic]
2021: #14 [#12] (Lost NLDS)
2022: #13 [#12]

The data shows the Giants must have a Top 10 payroll to win in the-layoffs.  The data shows the Giants must have a Top 10 payroll to have Top 10 attendance, after the novelty of the new stadium wore off. Fans aren't stupid. They can tell when the team is trying and when they should care. If the team doesn't care about winning, the fans won't show up. As it should be. Even when they don't win, fans show if they think the team is trying.

It is clear that the only big event that could explain the attendance drop after 2018 is the Giants beginning the Zaidi & Kapler era. That coincided with a roster full of old, uninspiring players, and the beginning of the high frequency player turnover to win at the margins era. The only year since 3rd & King opened that the Giants had a Top 10 payroll without Top 10 attendance was 2019, the year players became commodities.

Even winning 107 games didn't bring fans back, suggesting Giants fans want to go see stars, or at least want to see guys who have won before supplemented by spending on players who can help. This is exactly what the Giants didn't do after 2021. How interesting that the data actually backs up what most Giants fans commenting on the Baggarly piece said.

Every fan the Giants get in their stadium is worth $128 in marginal revenue. They are on pace to be down about 750k in attendance from 2018 to 2022. That means they are losing out on about $93M in revenue. I submit that if they spent $35M more on payroll this season, not only would they be a firm Wild Card contender, they would also be averaging at least 5k more per game and be on pace to generate more profit than they will going cheap.

Conclusions:

- The Giants aren't maximizing revenue by being frugal
- They may have found a frugal way to win more than they lose, but even winning 107 that way doesn't translate to butts in seats or playoff success
- The sweet spot for the Giants to contend for championships and Top 7 attendance is a payroll in the Top 5-8 in MLB

Investors know you make money by spending it wisely. All this is to say Farhan Zaidi very well might be the one who wants his frugal way to work and convinced the ownership to let him do it. Hell, they invested $70M in their Arizona Development facility, so it's not like the Giants aren't making investments to baseball operations. They seem to be making the ones preferred by the President of Baseball Operations, so I am not at all convinced Giants ownership is dictating a lower payroll as much as Farhan is just following his plan and the owners back him on it.

But at the end of the day, if the Giants owners in fact care about profits, Farhan is going to be faced with taking ownership of the attendance attrition sooner than later, and maybe realize that it takes spending money to make it, regardless of W-L record.

So, your suggestion is that a guy pulled from LA (which has had a payroll in the top 3 for years and always seems to have the money to get their guy) went to ownership and said something to the effect: “I don’t want a large payroll because….”  First explain the logic in that.  Why would any Baseball operations/GM NOT want a big budget to work with?  Second, provide the “because”.

Finally, perhaps some financial figures will help your analysis:

Dodgers. Value 4.07 Billion. ‘21 revenue 565 million. Operating income - loss of 7.9 Milllion.

Giants. Value. 3.5 Billion. Revenue. 384 Million. Operating income 32 million.

Dodgers have an enormous TV deal.

[lex24]

I think there is a grey area re: Giants spending and team building M.O.

First of all, what is the goal? To win, or generate revenue?  Obviously, you want to do both, but I don't think Zaidi's approach - constant roster churn and fielding uninspiring players to win at the margins - is the best way to goose revenue. 

If you want to inspire fans to be invested in your games, you pay for some shiny objects, like the Giants did before they won 3 WS in 5 years. First it was Bonds, then their new stadium. Then they leveraged the homegrown infield, and starting Pitcher phenoms (Lincecum, Cain, Mad Bum) by savvy free agent signings and trades, while building fan attachments to the players. 

The Giants Payroll rankings since 2000; [MLB Attendance ranking] (post season result)

2000: #17 [#3] (Lost NLDS) 
2001: #15 [#2]
2002: #10 [#3] (Lost World Series)
2003: #9 [#3] (Lost NLDS)
2004: #9 [#5]
2005: #7 [#5]
2006: #10 [#7]
2007: #12 [#7]
2008: #17 [#11]
2009: #14 [#10]
2010: #10 [#9] (Won World Series)
2011: #8 [#3]
2012: #8 [#4] (Won World Series)
2013: #6 [#3]
2014: #7 [#4] (Won World Series)
2015: #5 [#3]
2016: #5 [#4] (Lost NLDS)
2017: #7 [#3]
2018: #2 [#4]
2019: #5 [#11]
2020: #8 [No data - pandemic]
2021: #14 [#12] (Lost NLDS)
2022: #13 [#12]

The data shows the Giants must have a Top 10 payroll to win in the-layoffs.  The data shows the Giants must have a Top 10 payroll to have Top 10 attendance, after the novelty of the new stadium wore off. Fans aren't stupid. They can tell when the team is trying and when they should care. If the team doesn't care about winning, the fans won't show up. As it should be. Even when they don't win, fans show if they think the team is trying.

It is clear that the only big event that could explain the attendance drop after 2018 is the Giants beginning the Zaidi & Kapler era. That coincided with a roster full of old, uninspiring players, and the beginning of the high frequency player turnover to win at the margins era. The only year since 3rd & King opened that the Giants had a Top 10 payroll without Top 10 attendance was 2019, the year players became commodities.

Even winning 107 games didn't bring fans back, suggesting Giants fans want to go see stars, or at least want to see guys who have won before supplemented by spending on players who can help. This is exactly what the Giants didn't do after 2021. How interesting that the data actually backs up what most Giants fans commenting on the Baggarly piece said.

Every fan the Giants get in their stadium is worth $128 in marginal revenue. They are on pace to be down about 750k in attendance from 2018 to 2022. That means they are losing out on about $93M in revenue. I submit that if they spent $35M more on payroll this season, not only would they be a firm Wild Card contender, they would also be averaging at least 5k more per game and be on pace to generate more profit than they will going cheap.

Conclusions:

- The Giants aren't maximizing revenue by being frugal
- They may have found a frugal way to win more than they lose, but even winning 107 that way doesn't translate to butts in seats or playoff success
- The sweet spot for the Giants to contend for championships and Top 7 attendance is a payroll in the Top 5-8 in MLB

Investors know you make money by spending it wisely. All this is to say Farhan Zaidi very well might be the one who wants his frugal way to work and convinced the ownership to let him do it. Hell, they invested $70M in their Arizona Development facility, so it's not like the Giants aren't making investments to baseball operations. They seem to be making the ones preferred by the President of Baseball Operations, so I am not at all convinced Giants ownership is dictating a lower payroll as much as Farhan is just following his plan and the owners back him on it.

But at the end of the day, if the Giants owners in fact care about profits, Farhan is going to be faced with taking ownership of the attendance attrition sooner than later, and maybe realize that it takes spending money to make it, regardless of W-L record.

So, your suggestion is that a guy pulled from LA (which has had a payroll in the top 3 for years and always seems to have the money to get their guy) went to ownership and said something to the effect: “I don’t want a large payroll because….”  First explain the logic in that.  Why would any Baseball operations/GM NOT want a big budget to work with?  Second, provide the “because”.

Finally, perhaps some financial figures will help your analysis:

Dodgers. Value 4.07 Billion. ‘21 revenue 565 million. Operating income - loss of 7.9 Milllion.

Giants. Value. 3.5 Billion. Revenue. 384 Million. Operating income 32 million.

Dodgers have an enormous TV deal.

[Giants]

Any commentary regarding game attendance in 2021 (and to a lesser degree, 2022) without considering the pandemic’s influence is shortsighted.

[Giants]

Any commentary regarding game attendance in 2021 (and to a lesser degree, 2022) without considering the pandemic’s influence is shortsighted.

[OutsiderFan]

Any commentary regarding game attendance in 2021 (and to a lesser degree, 2022) without considering the pandemic’s influence is shortsighted.

100% bullshit. Every team faced restrictions on attendance in 2021. The Dodgers were down a lot too, but they still led MLB. The Giants aren't some special case. They simply didn't do enough to get the fans excited about the team before the season started. Imagine if they didn't have a historic season how far down they would have been.

Farhan Zaidi was hired based on a plan to jettison a lot of high salaries that weren't producing, and to invest in the farm system. The 2021 season was an anomaly he couldn't have predicted. But even after 107 wins, he didn't deviate from his plan. As I posted earlier, the Giants now have only $12M in current salary commitments in 2024. Farhan has done nearly the impossible, kept a team above .500 and arguably a second tier contender, while totally tearing it down to build what he REALLY wants.  

Comparing the Fodgers' spending habits in their situation to the Giants in their's is not realistic, for two primary reasons:

1. The Fodgers have had a productive farm system that the Giants haven't for a decade
2. The Fodgers have a bigger stadium and TV deal

The Giants didn't have the prospects to trade for Mookie Betts. The Dodgers did. Maybe the Giants pay for him if they could get him, we'll never know.

If we're still talking about the Giants having a less than Top 10 payroll in 2024, I'll completely buy into the notion ownership doesn't want to spend. But I just see a lot of reasons to believe this isn't the case, and they are more following a rebuilding plan that enhances long-term competitiveness than they are being cheap on purpose. 

This in no way diminishes my angst that they aren't spending more now, just looking at the available information and drawing conclusions. But I do think the attendance drop very well may lead to a bit of a deviation from the preferred rebuilding plan because it is pretty clear a star or two is needed on the team. 

The Giants may need to make a Manny Machado-type signing like the Padres did, perhaps has early as this off season, when they had a ton of top prospects on the verge of making the show, for fans to see the team was all in. Because even if Luciano and Harrison are going to be part of the team in 2023, the Giants are going to need a bit more than that to excite the fan base. Again, Trey Turner would be the perfect signing for 2023 season, then Shohei Ohtani in 2024?

[OutsiderFan]

Any commentary regarding game attendance in 2021 (and to a lesser degree, 2022) without considering the pandemic’s influence is shortsighted.

100% bullshit. Every team faced restrictions on attendance in 2021. The Dodgers were down a lot too, but they still led MLB. The Giants aren't some special case. They simply didn't do enough to get the fans excited about the team before the season started. Imagine if they didn't have a historic season how far down they would have been.

Farhan Zaidi was hired based on a plan to jettison a lot of high salaries that weren't producing, and to invest in the farm system. The 2021 season was an anomaly he couldn't have predicted. But even after 107 wins, he didn't deviate from his plan. As I posted earlier, the Giants now have only $12M in current salary commitments in 2024. Farhan has done nearly the impossible, kept a team above .500 and arguably a second tier contender, while totally tearing it down to build what he REALLY wants.  

Comparing the Fodgers' spending habits in their situation to the Giants in their's is not realistic, for two primary reasons:

1. The Fodgers have had a productive farm system that the Giants haven't for a decade
2. The Fodgers have a bigger stadium and TV deal

The Giants didn't have the prospects to trade for Mookie Betts. The Dodgers did. Maybe the Giants pay for him if they could get him, we'll never know.

If we're still talking about the Giants having a less than Top 10 payroll in 2024, I'll completely buy into the notion ownership doesn't want to spend. But I just see a lot of reasons to believe this isn't the case, and they are more following a rebuilding plan that enhances long-term competitiveness than they are being cheap on purpose. 

This in no way diminishes my angst that they aren't spending more now, just looking at the available information and drawing conclusions. But I do think the attendance drop very well may lead to a bit of a deviation from the preferred rebuilding plan because it is pretty clear a star or two is needed on the team. 

The Giants may need to make a Manny Machado-type signing like the Padres did, perhaps has early as this off season, when they had a ton of top prospects on the verge of making the show, for fans to see the team was all in. Because even if Luciano and Harrison are going to be part of the team in 2023, the Giants are going to need a bit more than that to excite the fan base. Again, Trey Turner would be the perfect signing for 2023 season, then Shohei Ohtani in 2024?

[Phogge]

Mick... I was there. Gaylord was traded for two reasons. Fox had scouted Sam McDowell in high school. This was before Sam roomed with a gin bottle. Fox hadn’t bothered to ask anybody about the later Sam. So on landing in Phoenix for spring training McDowell was arrested for drunkenness and disorder on the plane. It continued to go downhill from there.

The second reason was that Fox hated Gaylord. Some of it was because my dad and I accompanied him to his dad’s farm in Williamston N.C. in the middle of a road trip. Fox first blamed us but later went thermonuclear when he learned that Gaylord planned the trip. He couldn’t wait to trade Perry.

It was a sad time. Everybody but Jerry Donavan was filling Mr. Stoneham with half truths.
If Chub Feeney had not taken the NL presidency I think the club wouldn’t have sunk to the bottom.

[Phogge]

Mick... I was there. Gaylord was traded for two reasons. Fox had scouted Sam McDowell in high school. This was before Sam roomed with a gin bottle. Fox hadn’t bothered to ask anybody about the later Sam. So on landing in Phoenix for spring training McDowell was arrested for drunkenness and disorder on the plane. It continued to go downhill from there.

The second reason was that Fox hated Gaylord. Some of it was because my dad and I accompanied him to his dad’s farm in Williamston N.C. in the middle of a road trip. Fox first blamed us but later went thermonuclear when he learned that Gaylord planned the trip. He couldn’t wait to trade Perry.

It was a sad time. Everybody but Jerry Donavan was filling Mr. Stoneham with half truths.
If Chub Feeney had not taken the NL presidency I think the club wouldn’t have sunk to the bottom.

[Mick]

Mick... I was there. Gaylord was traded for two reasons. Fox had scouted Sam McDowell in high school. This was before Sam roomed with a gin bottle. Fox hadn’t bothered to ask anybody about the later Sam. So on landing in Phoenix for spring training McDowell was arrested for drunkenness and disorder on the plane. It continued to go downhill from there.

The second reason was that Fox hated Gaylord. Some of it was because my dad and I accompanied him to his dad’s farm in Williamston N.C. in the middle of a road trip. Fox first blamed us but later went thermonuclear when he learned that Gaylord planned the trip. He couldn’t wait to trade Perry.

It was a sad time. Everybody but Jerry Donavan was filling Mr. Stoneham with half truths.
If Chub Feeney had not taken the NL presidency I think the club wouldn’t have sunk to the bottom.

Was it true that Sam Malone of "Cheers" was based upon Sam McDowell?

[Mick]

Mick... I was there. Gaylord was traded for two reasons. Fox had scouted Sam McDowell in high school. This was before Sam roomed with a gin bottle. Fox hadn’t bothered to ask anybody about the later Sam. So on landing in Phoenix for spring training McDowell was arrested for drunkenness and disorder on the plane. It continued to go downhill from there.

The second reason was that Fox hated Gaylord. Some of it was because my dad and I accompanied him to his dad’s farm in Williamston N.C. in the middle of a road trip. Fox first blamed us but later went thermonuclear when he learned that Gaylord planned the trip. He couldn’t wait to trade Perry.

It was a sad time. Everybody but Jerry Donavan was filling Mr. Stoneham with half truths.
If Chub Feeney had not taken the NL presidency I think the club wouldn’t have sunk to the bottom.

Was it true that Sam Malone of "Cheers" was based upon Sam McDowell?

[Phogge]

That's the story I heard. I think McDowell was the most highly scouted high school player in history up to that point. He had the stuff, maybe better than Bob Feller but a ten cent head. Funny how things work out. I played with a fellow in HS who had an MLB arm. Fastball had very late movement and not many "barrel" balls off him in three years. He also had a breaking ball that the more I think about it was really a cutter. Very late movement and he threw it in to RH hitters who were about 90% of the guys we faced. Extremely professional on the hill with a brother who was one of the first $100,000 bonus babies. Had many college offers including from Paddy Cottrell at Santa Clara and at least a half dozen MLB teams followed him. Best stuff I ever saw at our level and more ball movement than the best pitcher I faced in college, Andy Messersmith. But he didn't want any of it. Never played again and had a good life. Alas.

[Phogge]

That's the story I heard. I think McDowell was the most highly scouted high school player in history up to that point. He had the stuff, maybe better than Bob Feller but a ten cent head. Funny how things work out. I played with a fellow in HS who had an MLB arm. Fastball had very late movement and not many "barrel" balls off him in three years. He also had a breaking ball that the more I think about it was really a cutter. Very late movement and he threw it in to RH hitters who were about 90% of the guys we faced. Extremely professional on the hill with a brother who was one of the first $100,000 bonus babies. Had many college offers including from Paddy Cottrell at Santa Clara and at least a half dozen MLB teams followed him. Best stuff I ever saw at our level and more ball movement than the best pitcher I faced in college, Andy Messersmith. But he didn't want any of it. Never played again and had a good life. Alas.

[Mick]

That's the story I heard. I think McDowell was the most highly scouted high school player in history up to that point. He had the stuff, maybe better than Bob Feller but a ten cent head. Funny how things work out. I played with a fellow in HS who had an MLB arm. Fastball had very late movement and not many "barrel" balls off him in three years. He also had a breaking ball that the more I think about it was really a cutter. Very late movement and he threw it in to RH hitters who were about 90% of the guys we faced. Extremely professional on the hill with a brother who was one of the first $100,000 bonus babies. Had many college offers including from Paddy Cottrell at Santa Clara and at least a half dozen MLB teams followed him. Best stuff I ever saw at our level and more ball movement than the best pitcher I faced in college, Andy Messersmith. But he didn't want any of it. Never played again and had a good life. Alas.

Love those bonus baby stories. My SCU  roommate beat Mike Witt, 1-0 in a 1978 SoCal HS all star game.  Witt went on to play 12 years in the bigs (two all star games), my roommate had rotator cuff surgery as a freshman, one of the nastiest scars I've ever seen.  Didn't pitch again after that.

[Mick]

That's the story I heard. I think McDowell was the most highly scouted high school player in history up to that point. He had the stuff, maybe better than Bob Feller but a ten cent head. Funny how things work out. I played with a fellow in HS who had an MLB arm. Fastball had very late movement and not many "barrel" balls off him in three years. He also had a breaking ball that the more I think about it was really a cutter. Very late movement and he threw it in to RH hitters who were about 90% of the guys we faced. Extremely professional on the hill with a brother who was one of the first $100,000 bonus babies. Had many college offers including from Paddy Cottrell at Santa Clara and at least a half dozen MLB teams followed him. Best stuff I ever saw at our level and more ball movement than the best pitcher I faced in college, Andy Messersmith. But he didn't want any of it. Never played again and had a good life. Alas.

Love those bonus baby stories. My SCU  roommate beat Mike Witt, 1-0 in a 1978 SoCal HS all star game.  Witt went on to play 12 years in the bigs (two all star games), my roommate had rotator cuff surgery as a freshman, one of the nastiest scars I've ever seen.  Didn't pitch again after that.

[Phogge]

My teammate's brother took the 100 grand and invested in real estate. Became a 60's multi millionaire.

[Phogge]

My teammate's brother took the 100 grand and invested in real estate. Became a 60's multi millionaire.

[lex24]

Any commentary regarding game attendance in 2021 (and to a lesser degree, 2022) without considering the pandemic’s influence is shortsighted.

100% bullshit. Every team faced restrictions on attendance in 2021. The Dodgers were down a lot too, but they still led MLB. The Giants aren't some special case. They simply didn't do enough to get the fans excited about the team before the season started. Imagine if they didn't have a historic season how far down they would have been.

Farhan Zaidi was hired based on a plan to jettison a lot of high salaries that weren't producing, and to invest in the farm system. The 2021 season was an anomaly he couldn't have predicted. But even after 107 wins, he didn't deviate from his plan. As I posted earlier, the Giants now have only $12M in current salary commitments in 2024. Farhan has done nearly the impossible, kept a team above .500 and arguably a second tier contender, while totally tearing it down to build what he REALLY wants.  

Comparing the Fodgers' spending habits in their situation to the Giants in their's is not realistic, for two primary reasons:

1. The Fodgers have had a productive farm system that the Giants haven't for a decade
2. The Fodgers have a bigger stadium and TV deal

The Giants didn't have the prospects to trade for Mookie Betts. The Dodgers did. Maybe the Giants pay for him if they could get him, we'll never know.

If we're still talking about the Giants having a less than Top 10 payroll in 2024, I'll completely buy into the notion ownership doesn't want to spend. But I just see a lot of reasons to believe this isn't the case, and they are more following a rebuilding plan that enhances long-term competitiveness than they are being cheap on purpose. 

This in no way diminishes my angst that they aren't spending more now, just looking at the available information and drawing conclusions. But I do think the attendance drop very well may lead to a bit of a deviation from the preferred rebuilding plan because it is pretty clear a star or two is needed on the team. 

The Giants may need to make a Manny Machado-type signing like the Padres did, perhaps has early as this off season, when they had a ton of top prospects on the verge of making the show, for fans to see the team was all in. Because even if Luciano and Harrison are going to be part of the team in 2023, the Giants are going to need a bit more than that to excite the fan base. Again, Trey Turner would be the perfect signing for 2023 season, then Shohei Ohtani in 2024?

Attendance across baseball is down about 5% from pre-pandemic.  So, that is one of the factors.  Giants are 12th in attendance.  Down to about 30,000 a game. In ‘19 33,000.  Last year, despite 107 wins and a thrilling pennant race, they were, just as they are now, 12th. I think the pandemic plays some role.  Bay Area probably being a bit more cautious.  

But certainly there are other reasons.  I’ll let the marketers figure that out. But in general, I don’t think this team, with its revolving door and general list of quasi no names, has captured the imagination.  Go to a game.  The players that will get the loudest cheers are Crawford and Belt.  Throughout their run, the Giants marketed their players.  Now they market the uniform. Bochy was beloved. Kaplers kind of a funny duck. 

As for spending, there is an element of truth in what you say.  But it does not explain why the Giants passed on all of the major FA’s. Signing one would have done nothing to upset the plan.  And SUPPOSEDLY, they tried and failed to sign several.  I capitalized supposedly cause I question the validity of whether they truly were in the big FA market.  Next year will tell us the story, I think.  Rodon will be gone.  Longoria bought out for 5 Million. Belt won’t get close to 18 million - he certainly won’t get a qualifying offer. Giants will again need to sign a top end starting pitcher. Can’t blame the ballpark if they don’t. And if Judge or Turner are out, both should be gone after, hard.  If not, we have our answer.

Giant fans are not a patient lot.  Hopefully what this year shows the owners is they have to spend more to make more.  It’s a star oriented marketplace.  Has been as long as I can remember.

[lex24]

Any commentary regarding game attendance in 2021 (and to a lesser degree, 2022) without considering the pandemic’s influence is shortsighted.

100% bullshit. Every team faced restrictions on attendance in 2021. The Dodgers were down a lot too, but they still led MLB. The Giants aren't some special case. They simply didn't do enough to get the fans excited about the team before the season started. Imagine if they didn't have a historic season how far down they would have been.

Farhan Zaidi was hired based on a plan to jettison a lot of high salaries that weren't producing, and to invest in the farm system. The 2021 season was an anomaly he couldn't have predicted. But even after 107 wins, he didn't deviate from his plan. As I posted earlier, the Giants now have only $12M in current salary commitments in 2024. Farhan has done nearly the impossible, kept a team above .500 and arguably a second tier contender, while totally tearing it down to build what he REALLY wants.  

Comparing the Fodgers' spending habits in their situation to the Giants in their's is not realistic, for two primary reasons:

1. The Fodgers have had a productive farm system that the Giants haven't for a decade
2. The Fodgers have a bigger stadium and TV deal

The Giants didn't have the prospects to trade for Mookie Betts. The Dodgers did. Maybe the Giants pay for him if they could get him, we'll never know.

If we're still talking about the Giants having a less than Top 10 payroll in 2024, I'll completely buy into the notion ownership doesn't want to spend. But I just see a lot of reasons to believe this isn't the case, and they are more following a rebuilding plan that enhances long-term competitiveness than they are being cheap on purpose. 

This in no way diminishes my angst that they aren't spending more now, just looking at the available information and drawing conclusions. But I do think the attendance drop very well may lead to a bit of a deviation from the preferred rebuilding plan because it is pretty clear a star or two is needed on the team. 

The Giants may need to make a Manny Machado-type signing like the Padres did, perhaps has early as this off season, when they had a ton of top prospects on the verge of making the show, for fans to see the team was all in. Because even if Luciano and Harrison are going to be part of the team in 2023, the Giants are going to need a bit more than that to excite the fan base. Again, Trey Turner would be the perfect signing for 2023 season, then Shohei Ohtani in 2024?

Attendance across baseball is down about 5% from pre-pandemic.  So, that is one of the factors.  Giants are 12th in attendance.  Down to about 30,000 a game. In ‘19 33,000.  Last year, despite 107 wins and a thrilling pennant race, they were, just as they are now, 12th. I think the pandemic plays some role.  Bay Area probably being a bit more cautious.  

But certainly there are other reasons.  I’ll let the marketers figure that out. But in general, I don’t think this team, with its revolving door and general list of quasi no names, has captured the imagination.  Go to a game.  The players that will get the loudest cheers are Crawford and Belt.  Throughout their run, the Giants marketed their players.  Now they market the uniform. Bochy was beloved. Kaplers kind of a funny duck. 

As for spending, there is an element of truth in what you say.  But it does not explain why the Giants passed on all of the major FA’s. Signing one would have done nothing to upset the plan.  And SUPPOSEDLY, they tried and failed to sign several.  I capitalized supposedly cause I question the validity of whether they truly were in the big FA market.  Next year will tell us the story, I think.  Rodon will be gone.  Longoria bought out for 5 Million. Belt won’t get close to 18 million - he certainly won’t get a qualifying offer. Giants will again need to sign a top end starting pitcher. Can’t blame the ballpark if they don’t. And if Judge or Turner are out, both should be gone after, hard.  If not, we have our answer.

Giant fans are not a patient lot.  Hopefully what this year shows the owners is they have to spend more to make more.  It’s a star oriented marketplace.  Has been as long as I can remember.

[Giants]

Any commentary regarding game attendance in 2021 (and to a lesser degree, 2022) without considering the pandemic’s influence is shortsighted.

100% bullshit. Every team faced restrictions on attendance in 2021. The Dodgers were down a lot too, but they still led MLB. The Giants aren't some special case. They simply didn't do enough to get the fans excited about the team before the season started. Imagine if they didn't have a historic season how far down they would have been.

Farhan Zaidi was hired based on a plan to jettison a lot of high salaries that weren't producing, and to invest in the farm system. The 2021 season was an anomaly he couldn't have predicted. But even after 107 wins, he didn't deviate from his plan. As I posted earlier, the Giants now have only $12M in current salary commitments in 2024. Farhan has done nearly the impossible, kept a team above .500 and arguably a second tier contender, while totally tearing it down to build what he REALLY wants.  

Comparing the Fodgers' spending habits in their situation to the Giants in their's is not realistic, for two primary reasons:

1. The Fodgers have had a productive farm system that the Giants haven't for a decade
2. The Fodgers have a bigger stadium and TV deal

The Giants didn't have the prospects to trade for Mookie Betts. The Dodgers did. Maybe the Giants pay for him if they could get him, we'll never know.

If we're still talking about the Giants having a less than Top 10 payroll in 2024, I'll completely buy into the notion ownership doesn't want to spend. But I just see a lot of reasons to believe this isn't the case, and they are more following a rebuilding plan that enhances long-term competitiveness than they are being cheap on purpose. 

This in no way diminishes my angst that they aren't spending more now, just looking at the available information and drawing conclusions. But I do think the attendance drop very well may lead to a bit of a deviation from the preferred rebuilding plan because it is pretty clear a star or two is needed on the team. 

The Giants may need to make a Manny Machado-type signing like the Padres did, perhaps has early as this off season, when they had a ton of top prospects on the verge of making the show, for fans to see the team was all in. Because even if Luciano and Harrison are going to be part of the team in 2023, the Giants are going to need a bit more than that to excite the fan base. Again, Trey Turner would be the perfect signing for 2023 season, then Shohei Ohtani in 2024?

Attendance across baseball is down about 5% from pre-pandemic.  So, that is one of the factors.  Giants are 12th in attendance.  Down to about 30,000 a game. In ‘19 33,000.  Last year, despite 107 wins and a thrilling pennant race, they were, just as they are now, 12th. I think the pandemic plays some role.  Bay Area probably being a bit more cautious.  

But certainly there are other reasons.  I’ll let the marketers figure that out. But in general, I don’t think this team, with its revolving door and general list of quasi no names, has captured the imagination.  Go to a game.  The players that will get the loudest cheers are Crawford and Belt.  Throughout their run, the Giants marketed their players.  Now they market the uniform. Bochy was beloved. Kaplers kind of a funny duck. 

As for spending, there is an element of truth in what you say.  But it does not explain why the Giants passed on all of the major FA’s. Signing one would have done nothing to upset the plan.  And SUPPOSEDLY, they tried and failed to sign several.  I capitalized supposedly cause I question the validity of whether they truly were in the big FA market.  Next year will tell us the story, I think.  Rodon will be gone.  Longoria bought out for 5 Million. Belt won’t get close to 18 million - he certainly won’t get a qualifying offer. Giants will again need to sign a top end starting pitcher. Can’t blame the ballpark if they don’t. And if Judge or Turner are out, both should be gone after, hard.  If not, we have our answer.

Giant fans are not a patient lot.  Hopefully what this year shows the owners is they have to spend more to make more.  It’s a star oriented marketplace.  Has been as long as I can remember.

Just curious….

Knowing what you know today (that most of the nine figure free agents signed during the off-season have not lived up to their billing), who do you still wish SF had signed?

Note: This is not meant to stir things up. I am just curious if you think any of the guys we discussed throughout the off-season are players who would have been a good move by SF.

My take (speaking strictly in hindsight) - If (a very big if) SF signs a significant free agent in the upcoming off-season, perhaps it was wise to pass on last year’s class.

[Giants]

Any commentary regarding game attendance in 2021 (and to a lesser degree, 2022) without considering the pandemic’s influence is shortsighted.

100% bullshit. Every team faced restrictions on attendance in 2021. The Dodgers were down a lot too, but they still led MLB. The Giants aren't some special case. They simply didn't do enough to get the fans excited about the team before the season started. Imagine if they didn't have a historic season how far down they would have been.

Farhan Zaidi was hired based on a plan to jettison a lot of high salaries that weren't producing, and to invest in the farm system. The 2021 season was an anomaly he couldn't have predicted. But even after 107 wins, he didn't deviate from his plan. As I posted earlier, the Giants now have only $12M in current salary commitments in 2024. Farhan has done nearly the impossible, kept a team above .500 and arguably a second tier contender, while totally tearing it down to build what he REALLY wants.  

Comparing the Fodgers' spending habits in their situation to the Giants in their's is not realistic, for two primary reasons:

1. The Fodgers have had a productive farm system that the Giants haven't for a decade
2. The Fodgers have a bigger stadium and TV deal

The Giants didn't have the prospects to trade for Mookie Betts. The Dodgers did. Maybe the Giants pay for him if they could get him, we'll never know.

If we're still talking about the Giants having a less than Top 10 payroll in 2024, I'll completely buy into the notion ownership doesn't want to spend. But I just see a lot of reasons to believe this isn't the case, and they are more following a rebuilding plan that enhances long-term competitiveness than they are being cheap on purpose. 

This in no way diminishes my angst that they aren't spending more now, just looking at the available information and drawing conclusions. But I do think the attendance drop very well may lead to a bit of a deviation from the preferred rebuilding plan because it is pretty clear a star or two is needed on the team. 

The Giants may need to make a Manny Machado-type signing like the Padres did, perhaps has early as this off season, when they had a ton of top prospects on the verge of making the show, for fans to see the team was all in. Because even if Luciano and Harrison are going to be part of the team in 2023, the Giants are going to need a bit more than that to excite the fan base. Again, Trey Turner would be the perfect signing for 2023 season, then Shohei Ohtani in 2024?

Attendance across baseball is down about 5% from pre-pandemic.  So, that is one of the factors.  Giants are 12th in attendance.  Down to about 30,000 a game. In ‘19 33,000.  Last year, despite 107 wins and a thrilling pennant race, they were, just as they are now, 12th. I think the pandemic plays some role.  Bay Area probably being a bit more cautious.  

But certainly there are other reasons.  I’ll let the marketers figure that out. But in general, I don’t think this team, with its revolving door and general list of quasi no names, has captured the imagination.  Go to a game.  The players that will get the loudest cheers are Crawford and Belt.  Throughout their run, the Giants marketed their players.  Now they market the uniform. Bochy was beloved. Kaplers kind of a funny duck. 

As for spending, there is an element of truth in what you say.  But it does not explain why the Giants passed on all of the major FA’s. Signing one would have done nothing to upset the plan.  And SUPPOSEDLY, they tried and failed to sign several.  I capitalized supposedly cause I question the validity of whether they truly were in the big FA market.  Next year will tell us the story, I think.  Rodon will be gone.  Longoria bought out for 5 Million. Belt won’t get close to 18 million - he certainly won’t get a qualifying offer. Giants will again need to sign a top end starting pitcher. Can’t blame the ballpark if they don’t. And if Judge or Turner are out, both should be gone after, hard.  If not, we have our answer.

Giant fans are not a patient lot.  Hopefully what this year shows the owners is they have to spend more to make more.  It’s a star oriented marketplace.  Has been as long as I can remember.

Just curious….

Knowing what you know today (that most of the nine figure free agents signed during the off-season have not lived up to their billing), who do you still wish SF had signed?

Note: This is not meant to stir things up. I am just curious if you think any of the guys we discussed throughout the off-season are players who would have been a good move by SF.

My take (speaking strictly in hindsight) - If (a very big if) SF signs a significant free agent in the upcoming off-season, perhaps it was wise to pass on last year’s class.

[lex24]

Any commentary regarding game attendance in 2021 (and to a lesser degree, 2022) without considering the pandemic’s influence is shortsighted.

100% bullshit. Every team faced restrictions on attendance in 2021. The Dodgers were down a lot too, but they still led MLB. The Giants aren't some special case. They simply didn't do enough to get the fans excited about the team before the season started. Imagine if they didn't have a historic season how far down they would have been.

Farhan Zaidi was hired based on a plan to jettison a lot of high salaries that weren't producing, and to invest in the farm system. The 2021 season was an anomaly he couldn't have predicted. But even after 107 wins, he didn't deviate from his plan. As I posted earlier, the Giants now have only $12M in current salary commitments in 2024. Farhan has done nearly the impossible, kept a team above .500 and arguably a second tier contender, while totally tearing it down to build what he REALLY wants.  

Comparing the Fodgers' spending habits in their situation to the Giants in their's is not realistic, for two primary reasons:

1. The Fodgers have had a productive farm system that the Giants haven't for a decade
2. The Fodgers have a bigger stadium and TV deal

The Giants didn't have the prospects to trade for Mookie Betts. The Dodgers did. Maybe the Giants pay for him if they could get him, we'll never know.

If we're still talking about the Giants having a less than Top 10 payroll in 2024, I'll completely buy into the notion ownership doesn't want to spend. But I just see a lot of reasons to believe this isn't the case, and they are more following a rebuilding plan that enhances long-term competitiveness than they are being cheap on purpose. 

This in no way diminishes my angst that they aren't spending more now, just looking at the available information and drawing conclusions. But I do think the attendance drop very well may lead to a bit of a deviation from the preferred rebuilding plan because it is pretty clear a star or two is needed on the team. 

The Giants may need to make a Manny Machado-type signing like the Padres did, perhaps has early as this off season, when they had a ton of top prospects on the verge of making the show, for fans to see the team was all in. Because even if Luciano and Harrison are going to be part of the team in 2023, the Giants are going to need a bit more than that to excite the fan base. Again, Trey Turner would be the perfect signing for 2023 season, then Shohei Ohtani in 2024?

Attendance across baseball is down about 5% from pre-pandemic.  So, that is one of the factors.  Giants are 12th in attendance.  Down to about 30,000 a game. In ‘19 33,000.  Last year, despite 107 wins and a thrilling pennant race, they were, just as they are now, 12th. I think the pandemic plays some role.  Bay Area probably being a bit more cautious.  

But certainly there are other reasons.  I’ll let the marketers figure that out. But in general, I don’t think this team, with its revolving door and general list of quasi no names, has captured the imagination.  Go to a game.  The players that will get the loudest cheers are Crawford and Belt.  Throughout their run, the Giants marketed their players.  Now they market the uniform. Bochy was beloved. Kaplers kind of a funny duck. 

As for spending, there is an element of truth in what you say.  But it does not explain why the Giants passed on all of the major FA’s. Signing one would have done nothing to upset the plan.  And SUPPOSEDLY, they tried and failed to sign several.  I capitalized supposedly cause I question the validity of whether they truly were in the big FA market.  Next year will tell us the story, I think.  Rodon will be gone.  Longoria bought out for 5 Million. Belt won’t get close to 18 million - he certainly won’t get a qualifying offer. Giants will again need to sign a top end starting pitcher. Can’t blame the ballpark if they don’t. And if Judge or Turner are out, both should be gone after, hard.  If not, we have our answer.

Giant fans are not a patient lot.  Hopefully what this year shows the owners is they have to spend more to make more.  It’s a star oriented marketplace.  Has been as long as I can remember.

Just curious….

Knowing what you know today (that most of the nine figure free agents signed during the off-season have not lived up to their billing), who do you still wish SF had signed?

Note:  This is not meant to stir things up.  I am just curious if you think any of the guys we discussed throughout the off-season are players who would have been a good move by SF.

My take (speaking strictly in hindsight) - If (a very big if) SF signs a significant free agent in the upcoming off-season, perhaps it was wise to pass on last year’s class.

You cannot take 70 games of a FA contract and say bust.  Many who struggle early will turn it around.  This has also been a weird year as it appears changes to the baseball has had an impact. Hindsight is 20/20 anyway.  But to answer

Marte
Suzuki
Gausman
Story

If you notice the three regulars all are athletic and excellent defensively, along with what they bring offensively.  Any one of the three.  

I get why they didn’t resign Gausman. Long term with pitchers is riskier. But I sure like the idea of a front end rotation of Webb, Gausman and Rodon.

To a lesser extent Castellanos - he’s just a bat.  No value defensively or athletically.  

I would not have gone after Schwarber, Bryant, Seager (not at that price) Semien (ditto) or Freeman (doesn’t fit positionally) 

I think you go to games, occasionally, as do I.  My latest was Friday vs. Reds.  I expected the offensive struggle - they just finished a grueling 4 day series in Hotlanta and had no travel off day. Due to be flat.  What struck me in watching the game was the incredible lack of speed. And the impact that has. The players I’d have gone after would bring added speed and defense.  Giants need both. So even if Marte, for example  isn’t tearing it up offensively, he’d  have helped this team.  Suzuki got hurt.  No way to account for that in advance (assuming a lack of prior injuries ).

[lex24]

Any commentary regarding game attendance in 2021 (and to a lesser degree, 2022) without considering the pandemic’s influence is shortsighted.

100% bullshit. Every team faced restrictions on attendance in 2021. The Dodgers were down a lot too, but they still led MLB. The Giants aren't some special case. They simply didn't do enough to get the fans excited about the team before the season started. Imagine if they didn't have a historic season how far down they would have been.

Farhan Zaidi was hired based on a plan to jettison a lot of high salaries that weren't producing, and to invest in the farm system. The 2021 season was an anomaly he couldn't have predicted. But even after 107 wins, he didn't deviate from his plan. As I posted earlier, the Giants now have only $12M in current salary commitments in 2024. Farhan has done nearly the impossible, kept a team above .500 and arguably a second tier contender, while totally tearing it down to build what he REALLY wants.  

Comparing the Fodgers' spending habits in their situation to the Giants in their's is not realistic, for two primary reasons:

1. The Fodgers have had a productive farm system that the Giants haven't for a decade
2. The Fodgers have a bigger stadium and TV deal

The Giants didn't have the prospects to trade for Mookie Betts. The Dodgers did. Maybe the Giants pay for him if they could get him, we'll never know.

If we're still talking about the Giants having a less than Top 10 payroll in 2024, I'll completely buy into the notion ownership doesn't want to spend. But I just see a lot of reasons to believe this isn't the case, and they are more following a rebuilding plan that enhances long-term competitiveness than they are being cheap on purpose. 

This in no way diminishes my angst that they aren't spending more now, just looking at the available information and drawing conclusions. But I do think the attendance drop very well may lead to a bit of a deviation from the preferred rebuilding plan because it is pretty clear a star or two is needed on the team. 

The Giants may need to make a Manny Machado-type signing like the Padres did, perhaps has early as this off season, when they had a ton of top prospects on the verge of making the show, for fans to see the team was all in. Because even if Luciano and Harrison are going to be part of the team in 2023, the Giants are going to need a bit more than that to excite the fan base. Again, Trey Turner would be the perfect signing for 2023 season, then Shohei Ohtani in 2024?

Attendance across baseball is down about 5% from pre-pandemic.  So, that is one of the factors.  Giants are 12th in attendance.  Down to about 30,000 a game. In ‘19 33,000.  Last year, despite 107 wins and a thrilling pennant race, they were, just as they are now, 12th. I think the pandemic plays some role.  Bay Area probably being a bit more cautious.  

But certainly there are other reasons.  I’ll let the marketers figure that out. But in general, I don’t think this team, with its revolving door and general list of quasi no names, has captured the imagination.  Go to a game.  The players that will get the loudest cheers are Crawford and Belt.  Throughout their run, the Giants marketed their players.  Now they market the uniform. Bochy was beloved. Kaplers kind of a funny duck. 

As for spending, there is an element of truth in what you say.  But it does not explain why the Giants passed on all of the major FA’s. Signing one would have done nothing to upset the plan.  And SUPPOSEDLY, they tried and failed to sign several.  I capitalized supposedly cause I question the validity of whether they truly were in the big FA market.  Next year will tell us the story, I think.  Rodon will be gone.  Longoria bought out for 5 Million. Belt won’t get close to 18 million - he certainly won’t get a qualifying offer. Giants will again need to sign a top end starting pitcher. Can’t blame the ballpark if they don’t. And if Judge or Turner are out, both should be gone after, hard.  If not, we have our answer.

Giant fans are not a patient lot.  Hopefully what this year shows the owners is they have to spend more to make more.  It’s a star oriented marketplace.  Has been as long as I can remember.

Just curious….

Knowing what you know today (that most of the nine figure free agents signed during the off-season have not lived up to their billing), who do you still wish SF had signed?

Note:  This is not meant to stir things up.  I am just curious if you think any of the guys we discussed throughout the off-season are players who would have been a good move by SF.

My take (speaking strictly in hindsight) - If (a very big if) SF signs a significant free agent in the upcoming off-season, perhaps it was wise to pass on last year’s class.

You cannot take 70 games of a FA contract and say bust.  Many who struggle early will turn it around.  This has also been a weird year as it appears changes to the baseball has had an impact. Hindsight is 20/20 anyway.  But to answer

Marte
Suzuki
Gausman
Story

If you notice the three regulars all are athletic and excellent defensively, along with what they bring offensively.  Any one of the three.  

I get why they didn’t resign Gausman. Long term with pitchers is riskier. But I sure like the idea of a front end rotation of Webb, Gausman and Rodon.

To a lesser extent Castellanos - he’s just a bat.  No value defensively or athletically.  

I would not have gone after Schwarber, Bryant, Seager (not at that price) Semien (ditto) or Freeman (doesn’t fit positionally) 

I think you go to games, occasionally, as do I.  My latest was Friday vs. Reds.  I expected the offensive struggle - they just finished a grueling 4 day series in Hotlanta and had no travel off day. Due to be flat.  What struck me in watching the game was the incredible lack of speed. And the impact that has. The players I’d have gone after would bring added speed and defense.  Giants need both. So even if Marte, for example  isn’t tearing it up offensively, he’d  have helped this team.  Suzuki got hurt.  No way to account for that in advance (assuming a lack of prior injuries ).

[Giants]

Fair enough…

My read of the strategy going into the season was wringing one last year out of Longoria, hoping that Crawford and Belt would stay healthy, Ruf would have an impact and Bart would hit for power with an average above the Mendoza line. Unfortunately, none of that has transpired.  Thus, a season that has been spent spinning wheels.  

I’ll give the front office a pass this time but I would expect a lot of action in the upcoming off-season to address the shortcomings (particularly, speed and defense).  In other words, next year will tell the tale.  If SF doesn’t spend, it will give us a big clue regarding what to expect under Johnson/Zaidi.

[Giants]

Fair enough…

My read of the strategy going into the season was wringing one last year out of Longoria, hoping that Crawford and Belt would stay healthy, Ruf would have an impact and Bart would hit for power with an average above the Mendoza line. Unfortunately, none of that has transpired.  Thus, a season that has been spent spinning wheels.  

I’ll give the front office a pass this time but I would expect a lot of action in the upcoming off-season to address the shortcomings (particularly, speed and defense).  In other words, next year will tell the tale.  If SF doesn’t spend, it will give us a big clue regarding what to expect under Johnson/Zaidi.

[lex24]

Fair enough…

My read of the strategy going into the season was wringing one last year out of Longoria, hoping that Crawford and Belt would stay healthy, Ruf would have an impact and Bart would hit for power with an average above the Mendoza line. Unfortunately, none of that has transpired.  Thus, a season that has been spent spinning wheels.  

I’ll give the front office a pass this time but I would expect a lot of action in the upcoming off-season to address the shortcomings (particularly, speed and defense).  In other words, next year will tell the tale.  If SF doesn’t spend, it will give us a big clue regarding what to expect under Johnson/Zaidi.

I never give owners a pass for being cheap…. :).  

But you perhaps laid out this off seasons strategery.  Which comes down to - let’s hope and pray (or the secular equivalence).  Cause it was highly likely that much of that list was not going to happen.

I agree, we will learn a lot next winter.  

The story of the Giants June:  3-8 in one run games.  A lot of lost opportunities.  Today another one.

[lex24]

Fair enough…

My read of the strategy going into the season was wringing one last year out of Longoria, hoping that Crawford and Belt would stay healthy, Ruf would have an impact and Bart would hit for power with an average above the Mendoza line. Unfortunately, none of that has transpired.  Thus, a season that has been spent spinning wheels.  

I’ll give the front office a pass this time but I would expect a lot of action in the upcoming off-season to address the shortcomings (particularly, speed and defense).  In other words, next year will tell the tale.  If SF doesn’t spend, it will give us a big clue regarding what to expect under Johnson/Zaidi.

I never give owners a pass for being cheap…. :).  

But you perhaps laid out this off seasons strategery.  Which comes down to - let’s hope and pray (or the secular equivalence).  Cause it was highly likely that much of that list was not going to happen.

I agree, we will learn a lot next winter.  

The story of the Giants June:  3-8 in one run games.  A lot of lost opportunities.  Today another one.

[OutsiderFan]

Giants finish June 13-13 and fall from the #2 Wild Card spot to 1.5 GB from the #3 Wild Card spot in the process.

[OutsiderFan]

Giants finish June 13-13 and fall from the #2 Wild Card spot to 1.5 GB from the #3 Wild Card spot in the process.