The Giants Are Going Nowhere

(Photo: Arturo Pardavila III)
The 2018 season is looking like another one in which the Giants’ even-year magic has deserted them. Amid a barrage of bad news about Brandon Belt, Johnny Cueto, and Pablo Sandoval — not to mention unsettling signs regarding Madison Bumgarner and Buster Posey — they were inactive at the July 31 non-waiver trade deadline and now look ill-suited to leapfrog nearly half the league in order to get to October. After a crushing 3-1 loss to the Astros on Monday night via Marwin Gonzalez’s three-run homer off Will Smith with two out in the ninth inning, they’re 57-57, six games out of first place in the NL West and six back in the Wild Card hunt. Their playoff odds (2.8%) suggest they’re fated to play out the string.
Mind you, coming off a 64-98 season, the Giants never appeared to be a juggernaut. Offseason trades for Evan Longoria and Andrew McCutchen did fill a couple of obvious holes, albeit with players whose best years are probably behind them, but the team’s preseason odds (23.9%) still suggested more than a puncher’s chance at relevance. Yet the Giants haven’t been in first place in the NL West since March 31, and have spent just five days in second since I last checked in on them on June 7, two days after Bumgarner made his belated season debut. Then as now, they were a .500-ish team — 30-30 before Bum’s return, and 27-27 since — but as time has run off the clock, the hits have kept coming. Not the good kind, either.
On July 25, Belt hyperextended his right knee while legging out an infield single. When an MRI revealed a bone bruise, the team placed him on the disabled list for the second time this year; he had lost 13 games to an appendectomy at the start of June. Even having played in just 85 of the team’s 113 games, the 30-year-old first baseman has been the Giants’ most valuable player in terms of WAR (2.6), as well as their best hitter (.278/.372/.470, 129 wRC+), though he’s hit a meager .231/.321/.347 (83 wRC+) since his return from surgery. He’s unlikely to return before mid-August.
Sandoval, who since bottoming out in Boston has resuscitated his career by serving as a Panda of all trades — with innings spent on the mound and at second base, even — made just three starts in place of Belt before straining his right hamstring while tagging up in a July 29 game, that after having just hit his first triple since June 14, 2015. Via The Athletic’s Andrew Baggarly, the Giants downplayed the severity of the injury just prior to the trading deadline, which is laying it on a bit thick regarding a utilityman hitting .248/.310/.417 for a fourth-place club that last made a trade on July 8. On August 2, the team finally announced that Sandoval needed season-ending surgery.
Indeed, August 2 was a particularly bad day in San Francisco, for that’s when Cueto finally underwent Tommy John surgery, likely knocking him out until 2020. On the heels of a subpar 2017 season shortened by blisters and a flexor strain, the 32-year-old righty had been brilliant in March and April (0.84 ERA, 2.79 FIP) before suffering a UCL sprain that at the time wasn’t deemed severe enough to warrant surgery. After missing all of May and June while rehabbing the injury, he was a shadow of himself in four July starts (6.86 ERA, 7.64 FIP) amid diminishing velocity. When he complained of elbow pain following his 61-pitch July 28 outing against the Brewers, his date with a scalpel became increasingly clear. Major-league mounds will be substantially less colorful in his absence.
Cueto joined a disabled list that already included fellow starter Jeff Samardzija and reliever/oaf Hunter Strickland. The former, who has managed just a 6.25 ERA and 5.44 FIP in 10 turns totaling 44.2 innings this year, is down with a bout of right shoulder inflammation that required a platelet-rich plasma injection during the All-Star break, while the latter, who saved 13 games in the absence of Mark Melancon, has been out since fracturing his pitching hand while punching a door on June 19 following a blown save. Melancon, who’s been slow to return from last fall’s pronator surgery followed by a flexor strain, finally pitched in back-to-back games on August 2-3, but he’s striking out a career-low 16.1% of hitters these days and not yet back to regular closer duty. Hence Smith’s ill-fated ninth-inning appearance on Monday, where he yielded his first homer in 36.1 innings this year.
Given such a litany — as well as production at second base (Joe Panik and company) and left field (what’s left of Hunter Pence and friends) that would have qualified them for spots on their respective Replacement-Level Killers lists if the team had appeared to be a viable contender — it’s not hard to see why the Giants didn’t aggressively try to shore up their weak spots at the deadline. But as Dan Szymborski pointed out, they also didn’t do anything to improve their chances for 2019 or 2020, or at least try to give themselves more breathing room under the $197 million competitive-balance tax threshold. (The July 8 trade of Cory Gearrin and Austin Jackson to the Rangers shaved about $2 million off their tax payroll, trimming them to an estimated $196,712,834 according to Cot’s Contracts).
The August waiver period will provide general manager Bobby Evans a chance to further pare payroll, mainly in the form of McCutchen. The 31-year-old right fielder’s overall performance has been solid (.265/.358/.424, 117 wRC+, 1.5 WAR), but he’s been particularly hot since the All-Star break (.286/.397/.500, 147 wRC+), and it’s an open question as to whether that can last longer than the team’s ability to pretend they’re still in the running. And while it won’t do a whole lot for their payroll or add much more than a lottery ticket or two to a downtrodden farm system, the Giants also have other assets to consider moving, such as rejuvenated starter Derek Holland (3.88 ERA, 4.06 FIP), reliever Sam Dyson (two years of club control), and backup catcher Nick Hundley (lots of Killers on the loose).
Of course, the one move that would jump-start the system is a trade of Bumgarner, who has one more year of club control in the form of a $12 million club option and $1.5 million buyout — but a performance that’s trending the wrong way. While his 2.97 ERA is right in line with his career mark (3.01), the 29-year-old southpaw’s 3.72 FIP and 9.5% walk rate are both career worsts, while his 19.7% strikeout rate represents his lowest mark since his 2010 rookie season, and his K-BB% differential is about half of what it was in his 2014-16 heyday. Though his average fastball velocity is in line with what it was two years ago, before he sprained his shoulder in a dirt-bike accident, it’s down by about 1.4 mph from 2015, and batters are not only chasing it outside the zone with much less frequency, they’re rarely swinging and missing, and they’re hitting it HARD:
| Year | Avg Velo | O-Sw% | SwStr% | AVG | OBP | SLG | wOBA | xwOBA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 | 93.0 | 31.7% | 10.0% | .242 | .286 | .382 | .290 | .298 |
| 2016 | 91.7 | 30.3% | 9.7% | .236 | .302 | .439 | .310 | .335 |
| 2017 | 91.4 | 22.7% | 6.5% | .256 | .297 | .488 | .347 | .361 |
| 2018 | 91.6 | 20.9% | 4.4% | .288 | .356 | .513 | .379 | .393 |
Note that Pitch Info, the source of the first six columns of data above, classifies all of Bumgarner’s fastballs as four-seamers, while Baseball Savant shows him throwing both four-seamers and sinkers, though only 216 of the former last year, and none this year. The wOBA and xwOBA figures are for all classifications of his fastball, so even if the above numbers are an aggregation of multiple pitches, the trends are quite ominous.
That said, as a shorter-term investment with a below-market salary, Bumgarner could still be an appealing acquisition. After all, he’s probably still more effective than, say, Cole Hamels or Lance Lynn. He’s so economical, in fact, that he might not make it all the way through waivers and to an intended contender, so if the Giants are thinking about trading him — and there’s no real sign that they are — they might have to wait until winter.
Meanwhile, though Posey has avoided the disabled list this season, the 31-year-old backstop left Friday’s game in the third inning in order to be monitored for concussion symptoms; he had taken a hard foul ball off his mask in the first inning, then felt light-headed after hitting a single. He felt well enough to return to the lineup on Sunday, albeit at first base, and while that’s a relief, he’s in the midst of one of his less productive seasons, hitting .298/.372/.410 with just five homers and a 117 wRC+, two points below his career low, set just two years ago. His slugging percentage, meanwhile, is his lowest since his injury-abbreviated 2011 season. If the toll of his toil behind the plate is catching up to him in his early 30s — even with the Giants liberally using him at first base in order to keep his bat in the lineup around 140 times per year — he wouldn’t be the first. Still an excellent receiver and above-average contributor, Posey is signed through 2021, and while there’s no reason to cast him aside, the Giants will have to reckon with the reality that he’s no longer a centerpiece of the offense. In a lineup that’s already the league’s oldest, with a weighted age of 30.2 years, that’s not good news.
There’s not a whole lot the Giants can do about that right now, but as this season slips away, it’s clear that they need a new plan. The magic of 2010, 2012, and 2014 is long gone, the current core isn’t good enough in an increasingly competitive NL West, and the realities of a high payroll and a weak farm system can’t be ignored.
Brooklyn-based Jay Jaffe is a senior writer for FanGraphs, the author of The Cooperstown Casebook (Thomas Dunne Books, 2017) and the creator of the JAWS (Jaffe WAR Score) metric for Hall of Fame analysis. He founded the Futility Infielder website (2001), was a columnist for Baseball Prospectus (2005-2012) and a contributing writer for Sports Illustrated (2012-2018). He has been a recurring guest on MLB Network and a member of the BBWAA since 2011, and a Hall of Fame voter since 2021. Follow him on BlueSky @jayjaffe.bsky.social.
Very good stuff here. I believed the Giants should have sold a year ago at the deadline and/or this past offseason. They have a terrible farm system with very few bright spots. They have slim to none as far as young players on the MLB roster. Of players 27 or younger, the Giants are worth 1.4 fWAR for position players, 28th best in baseball. On the pitching side, they are worth 4.3 fWAR, 13th overall, but the overall numbers are very meh.
Instead of trying to find someone to take Cueto when he was still worth something, they waited for him to decline, pick up his option, and now he’s lost for almost 2 years. Instead of trading their most valuable trade chip in Bumgarner, a guy who could have brought a monster return a year or so ago, he’s now pitching merely good instead of great and has just a year and a half till he’s a free agent.
This is an aging club who look a year or two away from being a bottom-dweller once again. Posey is still good, but has a lot of mileage on him and is losing his power. Crawford is still a good player, but for how long can he stay that way. Belt is a good 1B, but continues to be plagued by injuries.
I can see them getting hot and making a run for the Wild Card this season, and possibly next as well, though it’s unlikely. From there, however, they are going to need some real help from their farm, and that doesn’t look promising.
I could be wrong, but wasn’t it Cueto who picked up his option (i.e. it was a player option not a team option)?
Yes, Cueto “opted in” to the remaining four years of his deal by virtue of not exercising his opt-out clause he had available to him after year 2 of that deal. Had it been the other way around, SF, frankly, would have been taking a huge risk in essentially opting into a 4 year, nearly $90 million deal with a pitcher who had just come off an injury plagued down year that was a more than 4 WAR decline from his previous baseline.
Sorry, I just worded it confusingly. By not trading him they essentially allowed him to pick up his option. Wouldn’t have been a problem if he pitched like his first season in SF, but I really didn’t see that continuing going forward. I was thrilled the Dodgers did not give him that deal.
Problem is that he got hurt in mid July last year and wasn’t tradable at that point. And wasn’t exactly lighting it up for another team to trade for him.
“Innings spent on the mound.”
I immediately looked up Sandoval’s pitching stats, and was disappointed that he only pitched that one time.
The media that covers the Giants consistently insists that the fanbase will not stand for a rebuild. The Giants fanbase is a lot smarter than that.
The longer the Giants attempt to put up a facade of competitiveness, and keep papering over the holes on their roster, the longer and more painful the rebuild will be. I have to think SF fans know this, and also probably don’t want Joey Bart’s career to be wasted on a stretch of 2012-’17 Phillies level bad teams.
I’m sure it’s a tough pill to swallow for everyone involved to go full rebuild when your franchise has 3 world series titles with 2 years left in the decade. I agree, all they are doing is prolonging the inevitable and it’s hurting the franchise. Sure the fans will show up if the team is around .500, maybe even for a while if they are bottom-dwellers. But 2014 will start to seem like a lifetime ago if they get overtaken by the Padres in the next couple of seasons.
The Padres could leapfrog everyone but the Dodgers very soon – the NL West is an oddly run unit, collectively.
I remember when the Royals had a million top 100 prospects and were terrible for years before that. It took a while, but finally, the talent all came together. I would be very surprised if the Padres don’t get pretty good by 2 or 3 seasons from now.
As a Giants fan, I assure you that the Giants’ fanbase is not smarter than that. I have given up trying to convince fellow Giants’ fans than anyone more significant than Hunter Pence should be traded. I have been booed down too many times.
“The Giants fanbase is a lot smarter than that.”
I used to live in San Francisco, and let me assure you that is simply not the case: the Giants fanbase is not even close to being that smart.
I’m a Dodgers fan who went to college in NoCal and I have tons of friends that are Giants fans. Of course my small sample of Giants fans are disproportionately Engineering and STEM majors so maybe my world view is skewed, I’ll admit it.
the problem that I see is that none of the Giants guys would make it thru waivers. They’re going to get claimed very quickly. Even McCutcheon with only about 2 million left for the deal.. So don’t see them getting any lottery tickets even for their guys.
A waiver claim doesn’t necessarily preclude a trade – the Giants can work out a deal with the claiming team, but it certainly doesn’t help, as many waiver claims are kind of spurious “prevent a rival from claiming him” type things.
I could see Pence, Melancon, Shark, Cueto, and *maybe* Longoria passing thru waivers, but Longo is the only one of those guys that is probably even worth so much as a lottery ticket prospect to anyone who’d want him. SF gets more value by just letting any of those other guys go to the claimant.
There’s generally an unwritten rule in baseball that if you don’t want to trade for a guy, you won’t put in a claim. This is because GMs don’t want someone else to block their player out of retribution because they put in a BS claim a year earlier or something.
This is kind of how Verlander made through to the Astros who at the time I think had 2nd to last waiver claim or something. I think the Giants can do some selling this August. But it may just be some of the fringier guys. McCutchen may pass waivers but Bumgarner almost certainly will not.
I don’t know how realistic that is. I mean last year the Mets got blocked from trading Jerry Blevins. Several guys got claimed and blocked- Kinsler was another one.. I’d say it’ll be especially bad for NL teams with so many teams in contention(there’s 10 teams within 5 games of the playoffs right now).
Verlander only made it through to the Astros because of his monster contract, not any good will between rival teams
Giants took Cody Ross on waivers in 2010 ,though they had no position opening for him at the time, in order to block him from going to the Padres. This turned out to be a pretty decent move in hindsight.
Jay has left out one very, very important point: All of the best trade chips (Belt, Crawford, Posey) have no-trade clauses. And so they, like the Giants, are going nowhere. I suspect he knows this, since he didn’t even bother to offer up any of them in trades in a full-scale rebuild.
Realistically, they should try to find homes for everyone who they can trade. I don’t think any of the no-trade guys are going to waive their clause unless they’re going where they live in the offseason or where their family lives or whatever. So they can’t do a full-scale rebuild, which is fine…winning games is good too. But they really should consider trading anyone who won’t be around in the Joey Bart/Heliot Ramos era.
Having a middling high revenue team may not appeal our sense of chasing championships but it is a valid business strategy. If fans watch it in person and on TV it could be the most value accretive way forward.
This.
Full no trades for Posey, Crawford, Melancon and partials for Belt and Samardzija, plus Pence has 10/5 rights. Of those 5, only Pence is gone before the end of 2020. Then you have Cueto who is untradeable now. And they are right up against the luxury tax and can’t add any salary this year.
There just isn’t a lot the Giants can do right no except run those guys out and try to compete.
And I doubt you could move Evan Longoria for anything of value. I think you’re stuck with all the guys you mentioned, plus Longoria, for a while. If they can fill out the outfield and rotation with budget signings, I think just south of .500 is where they’re going to stay.
I still think they should try and trade the guys Jay mentioned in the article, though.
Which may be just fine with their fans
Eat enough payroll to get a real return, and you will save enough to spend on fliers to rebuild with. Once you trade away a bunch of guys the ones with no trade will reconsider there position since the team is not competitive. You have to start down that path for anything to happen though, and I wouldnt be shocked if SF trades more prospects away this offseason then offers Bum a ton of money next year. This could be way worse then the Phils, SF is already deep into the denying a rebuild is necessary but they have yet to even start it.
Haha screw the hard fought for rights of ballplayers! Make their workplaces so unpleasant they want to be traded!
even there it might not work. See Jones,Adam Baltimore.
“There just isn’t a lot the Giants can do right no except run those guys out and fail to compete.”
Fixed that for you.
“There just isn’t a lot the Giants can do right no except run those guys out and try to compete.”
There is a ton they could do. Clubs can offer incentives to get players to waive 10/5 rights. Bad contracts could be attached to assets and moved a la the Kemp deal. Certain traditional clubs simply don’t like those types of transactions. The WS lore, for such clubs, cements the reluctance to surrender assets in order to lose popular and formerly good or great players.
Similarly KC would be not even consider attaching assets to dump Salvador Perez’s contract- whereas more progressive clubs would not be so sentimental.
As far as adding assets without a ton of tradable assets, the Giants could start their rebuild really well (as Milwaukee did) by targeting blocked AAAA types with great data profiles but lagging scouting profiles, pedigree and reputation.
The Indians have 26 year old 3B Yandy Diaz still in the minors, despite a Brandon Nimmo-like OBP ability. The Phililes have 1B Joey Meneses, at 26 unlikely to have much opportunity in Phily, has a .400 wOBA at AAA Or Danny Vogelbach, could perhaps be had cheap despite his 164 RC+ at AAA this season at age 25. The Red Sox have Rusney Castillo obviously, who the Giants could hope to feature and then trade if his quality AAA performance translates to the bigs. Another old vet who could likely be had cheap, see his value jump quickly, and then traded in the coming year (as Carson flagged up): 30 year old Angels 1B Jose Ferndandez- with a wOBA ~.390 since joining pro US ball in 2017.
Roster churn, moving every underwater asset, and upgrading the #26-100 ‘roster spots’ in the organization could turn the Giants around somewhat quickly- but not if the club is a museum to it’s early-2010s success.
This is true but on the other hand, as the team collapses completely, I could see someone like Posey saying ‘sure I’ll make the sacrifice of going to the Yankees and maybe playing in a World Series or two rather than play out my career on a team losing 95 games a year’. But the Giants won’t suggest it.
“increasingly competitive NL West”
Trying to assess whether the NL West will be harder or easier to compete in a couple years. Dodgers will be the Dodgers, and Padres’ farm system should make them pretty good in a couple years. But the division had three playoff teams last year and could possibly get 2 or 3 in this year too. If the division loses stars like Goldy, Pollock and Arenado, NL West might actually get less competitive because ARI and COL don’t have awesome farm systems.
Agree it may not be more competitive 2-3 years from now than it is right now and last season, but it is now and likely to be in the future, more competitive than it was when the Giants won those three titles. In that era the division was relatively weak; the Dodgers were still hampered by McCourt ownership, ARI/COL’s current cores were not yet assembled, and the Padres were rudderless.
Going forward as you note, the Dodgers will be competitive and the Padres will likely as well once that farm produces fruit. Just having two teams likely to win 90+ makes the division look tough for anyone else.
What do they have that other teams would want? Posey, future hall of famer and face of the franchise, isn’t going anywhere. Bumgarner likely not either for similar reasons. If they did sell Bumgarner now, they would be selling low. Why not see if he can recover velocity the farther he gets from injury?
Can they get a compensatory pick by giving a qualifying offer to McCutchen? That would be a good enough reason not to sell him now.
Let’s not forget that the Giants were the best club in baseball halfway through 2016 and won playoff games less than two years ago. The magic was there not that long ago.
They were the best team for the first half of 2016. But then they were the worst team in baseball for the next year and a half.
2 years is a really long time in sports.
Cutch may accept a QO at this point.
Yeah if Im him I take a raise on this years while probably getting what 2 years worth of pay on any deal for him would be. He is not 100MM contract player anymore and knows what 1/18 is compared to his market.
It’s such a tough choice for them. Your two most valuable trade pieces are SF heroes. These two brought 3 titles in 5 seasons after 0 in SF before that. Yet, neither player is going to help much for a middling or worse Giants team going forward.
Still, I see the value in keeping franchise greats when it doesn’t make the most sense to. If the Dodgers have to pay 35M+ for 5 or 6 seasons to keep Kershaw beyond this season, I’d do it. I understand the Lakers keeping Kobe, Yankees keeping Jeter, etc… I love history and sometimes history is worth paying the price for.
This directly conflicts with my thoughts on getting as much value as you can for a player when you can. If you’re not a winning team and you’re not close, trade your good older players for good prospects. Some teams can afford a middle ground here. I’m not sure the Giants can sustain a middle ground between keeping Posey and Bumgarner and actually making a competitive team over the next few seasons.
Definitely not an easy thing.
I like that the Giants value continuity on their club and promote individual players to fans outside of their on-field value. Players aren’t just “assets” or “contracts” to fans, and aren’t treated as though they are by the Giants — see Pablo Sandoval and Ryan Vogelsong. If Posey and Bumgarner are willing to play on crappy teams during their last good years, I don’t really have a problem with letting them be the reason fans watch those crappy teams. I’d fire sale everyone else without an NTC though.
And that right there is your catch 22 nobody else is worth much so your sucking for a while or sucking even more for longer but you get to watch Bum throw to Posey.
Yes and the fans may prefer the second over the first. Posey and Bumgarner may or may not prefer to play with a winner.
Players aren’t just “assets” or “contracts” to fans, and aren’t treated as though they are by the Giants
That is counter-factual member-berry nonsense. Keeping around fan favorites isn’t done for humane reasons.
The Giants cling to old veterans and dated reputations, just as do the Royals, but its not out of some valuation for people. They simply aren’t data savvy so they share the lowest-common-denominator sentiment of traditional fans. The result is that ‘names’ get kept and treated well if they have awards and the like.
Parra gets treated well by Colorado, not because they are humanists and care about his soul, but because they are not very smart and overvalue batting average, undervalue defense, and haven’t figured out how to deal with their park factor yet.
The Giants are similar to the position of the Phillies in 2012/2013. The Phillies ignored it, and it cost them about 5 years of ineptitude. The Giants would be well served to start the rebuild/retool.
High payroll, old roster, weak farm system. That’s a scary setup. The Mariners seem to be in the same boat, but at least they are truly hunting for the playoffs.
Bumgarner “might” not make it all the way through waivers?
That is a massive understatement.
Aside from the Marlins, I can’t think of a single National League team that would pass on claiming Bumgarner. He’s controllable for next year too.
Agreed; I also did a double-take that he *might* be more effective than Cole Hamels (!) or Lance Lynn (!!).
Yeah, he just might be, indeed…
I think it comes down to the fact that Bochy won’t wave the white flag because that would mean having to play with inexperienced players, which he refuses to do, and the Giants won’t fire Bochy because they’ve won 3 World Series with him. And I can’t see Bochy quitting.
Remember the Giants literally had to TRADE AWAY Bengie Molina for Bochy to put Posey in the everyday lineup in 2010. Bochy is not the manager I’d like to have during a rebuild/retool period.
And the bullpen is yet again in the midst of blowing a magnificent performance by a starter against the defending champs…
I think all of this is pretty much right, but just to play devil’s advocate: basically everything that could go wrong for the Giants this year has gone wrong, yet they are still a .500 team despite playing in a tough division. Maybe next year Panik bounces back to league average. Maybe MadBum doesn’t have a freak accident and gets back to the 3-4 WAR level. Maybe Belt doesn’t have to have emergency surgery and settles in around 4 WAR. Maybe Posey’s power comes back a little and he’s more like 4 WAR than 3 WAR. Maybe Shark is healthy and gets back to the 3 WAR level. Maybe Duggar and Slater are average in the OF, and Suarez and Rodriguez are average in the rotation.
Are all of those gonna happen? Probably not. But if a few of them do then you’re looking at an 83-85 win team that can compete for a WC. Do you blow that up? No, since of the guys you might want to move most have NTC and few would bring back all that much in return. If you can’t move all of them then there’s probably not much point in moving any of them. Pence and McCutcheon come off the books, so there will be room in the payroll to look for a starter and some OF help, and there’s a good chance that some of this year’s WC contenders (COL, ARI, WAS, MIL) fall back a bit next year.
If I was Sabean I’d… well, I’d do a lot of things differently. But given the situation as it stands, and given that 2019 is the final year on *his* contract, I’d expect him to go for it.
Well, the preseason projection for Giants was 49.7% win percentage and they are currently at…. 49.6%.
So some big things obviously went wrong but there were certainly some smaller things that did go right (Crawford, Smith, Holland, Watson, Rodriguez, Hundley, Hanson, etc.)
I do agree with your conclusion that they will (and to some extent should) be making a final push next year.
Some projections had them around 82-83 wins. I believe the more pessimistic ones factored in Bumgarner breaking his hand in ST. But I wouldn’t quibble with a win or two in any direction. The point is that this team is close enough that selling everything won’t be appealing, especially given the low return most of their “assets” would bring.
Well, I think the analysis is basically correct. What’s odd are the prescriptions.
Yes, the Giants are no longer a great team, they are an average team with the salary overhang of a lot of old timers on the last legs of their contracts, and some bad luck with Cueto’s elbow and Samardzija’s shoulder, together with an unexpected decline in McCutchen and Longoria’s performance, although some decline was expected.
With all of that, they are just a normal baseball club, which I guess is now the source of terrible dread and gloom. The only thing that makes the Giants not normal is all the bad money on the payroll, most of which will roll off over the next two years.
But according to the new thinking, if you are not a good team you should sell off all your assets and lose as many games as possible, so that the league will consist of 10 “competing” teams and 20 teams each vying to lose 100 games and sell off all their veterans to the remaining ten.
There are a number of reasons, both economic and mathematical, why that will never happen. Especially in a large market team.
I must have fallen asleep and woke up in a new reality when a .500 team is pure torture. To me, it’s just the normal course of affairs, what most teams are, and what most teams will be most of the time.
I’m sure to some people it is torture, but the sport as a whole can’t cater to those people. There are 30 teams and only one champion. To ascend the summit, they will need to get lucky with drafting, have some oddballs turn in career years, and have a few others peak at the same time. If you wait long enough, that will happen. Being a “competing” team is a happy accident that you get for a stretch or two every 30 years when a whole bunch of things fall in place.
You can speed the process along by blowing everything up, but that’s a recipe for losing a lot of money in order to get back to the podium a bit faster. The amount of money that you gain will generally be less than what you lose, unless you are receiving some big external subsidies.
It is also a recipe to make most fans miserable most of the time and to shrink your fanbase. In extreme, look at the Marlins, who won two world series and play to empty stadiums. The Astros used to draw 2.5 million regularly, and 3 million when they made the playoffs (but never won the world series). During rebuilding, they were drawing 1.5 million and only drew 2.5 million the year they won the world series. They made it work with cable TV money that was guaranteed without the cable TV execs ever signing off on all those 100 loss seasons. But if a lot of teams start taking the same approach, cable TV is not gonna keep subsidizing teams that will be tanking most years and selling off their stars.
For most teams, the correct course of action is to try to win as many games as possible each year. Only in exceptional circumstance — if you are awful — do you blow up the team. Or in exceptional circumstances — if you are great — do you empty the farm. The Giants fall into neither category, and so they are doing what you would expect them to do. Maybe the Giants should have flipped a reliever or two before the deadline. Stuff like that. It wouldn’t have significantly affected their arc either way, but it’s a legit argument to make.
The AL has some serious attendance problems now with four tanking teams. And if teams continue to use these strategies it’s going to start hitting league revenue as the tv contracts are rolled over and there are fewer subsidies available. What if the other .500 teams decided to go the same route? That type of thinking would devastate the league’s revenues. You could expect some emergency action like randomizing draft picks, penalties attached to selling similar to those attached to buying, and other measures to try to encourage each team to win as many games as possible every year to prevent the audience of the sport from shrinking.
Trying to win the most games they can each year is all the Giants are doing now — the best they can do while they wait for another series of happy accidents in drafting and good fortune. The only thing they are really guilty of is some drafting misses and one really awful contract (*cough*Melancon*cough*). Other than that, the only people they are hurting are the ones who, if they had their way, would hurt the sport.
The Giants only became good because they were bad for a while.
Posey, Baumgartner & Lincecum were all top 10 picks, and another top 10 pick Zach Wheeler was traded to land Carlos Beltran.
If the Giants make smart decisions, they can have a short rebuild. Such a rebuild would involve cashing in on players with current value, and therefore knowingly having a temporarily low win projection. This was the Milwaukee rebuild- trading away dead weight, focusing on a portfolio approach towards scrap heap types who could be discarded, flipped or maybe kept if they develop into assets. This sort of rebuild doesn’t have to take more than 1-2 years or so- as it allows a club to return to .500-ish level unburdened by poor contracts, declining players and barren farm systems.
The longer intentional rebuilds, like Houston and Chicago, involve lowering projected wins for 4-5 years, stockpiling top picks, and then competing for championships. This style is more painful than the Milwaukee style- and involves alot of roster churn as well, but both teams that took this course have championships already.
The third choice, where SF is heading, is the accidental 10 year rebuild. It’s the Ruben Amaro path, where the attempt to compete becomes a bit of a charade. The club does actually lower it’s projected win total just the same as if it were intentionally doing so- it’s just not quite as intentional. This is what KC has been doing- while mocking the idea that their club was declining. These types of rebuild end when the front office is cleaned out after 5 or so really bad seasons, and a new more data savvy front office is brought in and given a few years’ leeway to turn around the mess left behind.
SF is ignoring the 10-years of losing plan it is half-wittingly choosing, and the only benefit is 1 or 2 seasons of .500 ball for a club with some fan favorites.
The first thing they need to is fire Evans/.Sabean and get a smart GM.who can improve their player evaluation. Selling off for prospect won’t work if the team has poor player evaluation.
Won’t help if the new GM is also overawed by Bochy.
Really, my concerns are mostly with Baer. Baer is the one in charge of this team, as ownership is pretty hands off and has put Baer in charge. It’s up to him to bring accountability to the team. Metrics for evaluating the performance of scouting and player development when compared with other teams. That’s something they need to do.
Can’t dispute the conclusion. But the Giants have played a BRUTAL schedule this year, the toughest in MLB — thanks to not just the depth of their division, but also tackling the AL West in interleague play. Through Aug. 9, they lead MLB with:
— 90 games against teams now over .500 — 2 more than anyone else, 24 over the median. Their .467 W% in those games is ABOVE the median, and much better than AL playoff teams Cleveland and Oakland.
— 80 games against teams now over .520 — 8 more than anyone else, 27 over the median. Their .463 W% in those games is well above the median, better then OAK, CLE and SEA, way better than the paper tiger Nats, and just behind Philly despite 31 more such games.
I’m not a Giants fan, and this is not a complaint; these things are cyclical. But I have no doubt that they’re better than their record suggests. They’re 26-23 vs. the 6 NL teams currently in playoff spots, leading the season series with both co-leaders of their division. What’s sunk them is largely a 2-8 mark vs. Houston and Oakland. Flip that around, they’d be 63-53, one game back in the division.