The pathetic state of the Giants

by 3Com Park on Jun 7, 2005 1:26 PM EDT Comment 6 comments

The ugly underbelly of the Giants 30-something strategy:

They have no picks in the first three rounds of today's amateur draft because of their early signings of Benitez, Vizquel and Matheny. Sabean could have waited on all three until their teams failed to offer them arbitration (none would have been offered arbitration), and retained the farm picks. And this was after they gave away their first picks the last two years so they could make similar signings of Neifi Perez and Michael Tucker.

Meanwhile the Diamondbacks, Brewers and Rockies are building farm systems to die for.

Sabean's rationale is that he wants to spend his limited budget money on the big club in an effort to win now rather than invest it in the farm system. Well, the chickens are about to come.

The sad thing about this is that attendance is going to plummet as soon as Barry is gone for good, Sabean will be long gone, and the debt repayment is going to loom larger and larger as a percent of revenues, sending the available budget for player salaries into a downward spiral. At the same time, the farm system won't be producing quality inexpensive players, reducing the leverage of their available budget.

First Round
1. Diamondbacks
2. Royals
3. Mariners
4. Nationals
5. Brewers
6. Blue Jays
7. Rockies
8. Devil Rays
9. Mets
10. Tigers
11. Pirates
12. Reds
13. Orioles
14. Indians
15. White Sox
16. Marlins
17. Yankees (from Phillies for Type B Jon Lieber)
18. Padres
19. Rangers
20. Cubs
21. Athletics
22. Marlins (from Giants for Type A Armando Benitez)
23. Red Sox (from Angels for Type A Orlando Cabrera)
24. Astros
25. Twins
26. Red Sox (from Dodgers for Type A Derek Lowe)
27. Braves
28. Cardinals (from Red Sox for Type A Edgar Renteria)
29. Marlins (from Yankees for Type A Carl Pavano)
30. Cardinals

Second Round
70. Cardinals (from Giants for Matheny)

Third Round
102. Indians (from Giants for Vizquel)

0 recs | Comment 6 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

they went for it

For a long time, they seemed content to draw fans because of Barry, a nice stadium and being "in the race." This year, they finally decided to pick a year and try to win the World Series. I can't fault them for that. You certainly can't complain about the way Alou and Vizquel have played; hell, even Matheny has done much better than anyone would have thought, although of course I would never have signed him. I can't second-guess the other big signings or the overall strategy, though. If Bonds, Schmidt and Benitez hadn't gotten hurt, it probably would have worked.

by dcarrano on Jun 7, 2005 2:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

But, the real issue...

...is that they could have signed all three of those guys a week later and not have given up their pick. None of them were going to be offered arbitration (except maybe Matheny), and nobody else was going to make as big of an offer either, so they could have just signed those guys a few weeks down the road and kept all of their picks...

by Brickhaus on Jun 7, 2005 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well

Like the Michael Tucker signing last year, it is a deliberate strategy to forfeit the top picks. I remember reading that Sabean thought they were not worth the money. But you can't build a solid farm system hoping to get lucky in the midrounds year after year.

by Flynn Blake on Jun 7, 2005 5:46 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

The point is...

that is not worth to give upo a first round pick for Omar Vizquel, who shouldn be a Type A free agent in the first place. Nor should you give one up Mike Matheny... and the worst thing is that they didn't HAVE to. Heck! if you dont like developing these kids just draft somebody, wait a year and trade him for a better player, and possibly better value than the marginal players they signed (yes, vizquel and matheny are average at best.)

Julian de Lavalle

by jdelavalle on Jun 8, 2005 4:25 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Budget Decisions

It's not a baseball decision on the Giants part, it's a budget decision.

Sabean has decided (correctly or otherwise) that it's not worth it to pay millions of dollars in signing bonuses to top amateurs who have yet to play a game as a pro. He'd rather use that money to pay professional free agents. The early signings are just a way to get rid of the picks.

It's still a stupid decision, mind you -- he could have kept the picks, signed the free agents a week later, and simply drafted guys he had no intention or possibility of signing (Danks, Austin Jackson, Smoak etc.) That way he would at least be keeping the draft picks out of the hands of his competitors...

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

by ESiegrist on Jun 8, 2005 11:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

well, hmm.

Skipped over the part about how these guys were not likely to be offered arbitration anyway. (Guess that's why people read the articles. I'll have to try that sometime.) I would then say this... I definitely agree that a deliberate strategy of signing anyone you can just to get rid of picks is simply ignorant. And, I also agree that Alou, Benitez, and Vizquel are not must-have, don't-take-any-chances, sign-them-right-now players like a Carlos Beltran might be.

However, I do think that they are quality players who would be a big part of a successful 2005 Giant team, if the team were otherwise healthy. So my question would be, what other options did Sabean have to fill the team's huge holes at SS, RF, and closer in '05, that would have been as likely to work? I don't think you can say "just sign the same three guys later"; that's not really a fair answer. It's possible that one or more of them would have been offered arbitration after all, or that they would have gone to another team who would have entered the bidding now that they wouldn't lose a draft pick. If you can put yourself back in offseason '04-'05 and find a good alternative strategy that would have addressed the SS/RF/closer problems with as much certainty as Vizquel/Alou/Benitez did, then that's fine. If you can't provide that, then even though I disagree with Sabean's disdain for the draft in general, it'd be tough for me to criticize it in this instance.

by dcarrano on Jun 8, 2005 3:33 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs