There are 58 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

2013 San Francisco Giants Thread

Ehh, I hear what you are saying Ghost, but I dont necessarily agree. I would love Scutaro to come back as well. But 3 years is OD in my opinion. You and I know damn well he wont be an $8M player when he is 40.
meh. the giants have money to spend. It's overkill, but pagan's and scut's contract won't break their backs. At least they spend money to keep players around to make another world series run.

I guess I'm wrong about ownership being cheap. They don't spend wisely, but they're not the dodgers.
[ Edited by pdizo916 on Dec 4, 2012 at 2:35 PM ]
Now let's sign Greinke and Hamilton and call it an off-season.

Jesus, Victorino 3 for $39.
Originally posted by itlynstalyn:
Jesus, Victorino 3 for $39.

Getting Jesus for that price is an absolute bargain, which means Victorino is practically free. Of course I wouldn't want Jesus on the basepaths though. Dude can't steal. On the plus side, everyone at the stadium will have their sins forgiven though.
Andrew Baggarly ‏@CSNBaggs Without mentioning Swisher by name, I asked Evans if team would listen hard if a free agent wanted to play for them. Evans: yes, absolutely.

Alex Pavlovic ‏@AlexPavlovic Giants have wiggle room in budget if one more big name is available down the line. Wouldn't rule out a Swisher type
Originally posted by HaiGuise:
Originally posted by itlynstalyn:
Jesus, Victorino 3 for $39.

Getting Jesus for that price is an absolute bargain, which means Victorino is practically free. Of course I wouldn't want Jesus on the basepaths though. Dude can't steal. On the plus side, everyone at the stadium will have their sins forgiven though.


Originally posted by itlynstalyn:
Andrew Baggarly ‏@CSNBaggs Without mentioning Swisher by name, I asked Evans if team would listen hard if a free agent wanted to play for them. Evans: yes, absolutely.

Alex Pavlovic ‏@AlexPavlovic Giants have wiggle room in budget if one more big name is available down the line. Wouldn't rule out a Swisher type

Swisher woudl be interesting. How's his defense? I would like his bat.....
Originally posted by pdizo916:
Originally posted by itlynstalyn:
Andrew Baggarly ‏@CSNBaggs Without mentioning Swisher by name, I asked Evans if team would listen hard if a free agent wanted to play for them. Evans: yes, absolutely.

Alex Pavlovic ‏@AlexPavlovic Giants have wiggle room in budget if one more big name is available down the line. Wouldn't rule out a Swisher type

Swisher woudl be interesting. How's his defense? I would like his bat.....

Hasn't played LF in awhile, but his D in RF is above average according to fangraphs.
Originally posted by Ninerjohn:
Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:
Am I the only one thinking, "so what if we give Pagan a 4 year deal or Scoots a 3 year deal?" It's not my money...if people are worried about budgets, they shouldn't be. This franchise is flush with cash and obviously willing to shell out big bucks or they wouldn't be making these deals. I know this, if the Zito, Rowand and FreSanchez deals didn't hinder us from winning 2 titles in 3 years, I'm confident that signing Pagan and Scutaro won't either.

Plus, Scutaro's value goes beyond on-field performance. I don't know how he did it, but he managed to become the heart and soul of this team almost over night. That quality alone is worth another year to sweeten the deal, IMO.

I dont make posts thinking about whether its my money. I make them thinking about whether I think its a smart baseball move. Scutaro for 3 years isnt in my opinion.

What wouldn't be smart about it, if not for the money/investment piece? Will Scutaro be the same player in 2015 than he was in 2012, likely not at all. But if it takes giving him that third year of a contract to get another 1-2 solid years out of him (and/or 1 more title), I think it's a great business move. I acknowledge the risk, absolutely, but I don't see it as a risk that if it goes wrong, would undermine my franchise for years to come.

Btw, I'm in the talent acquisition business, and everyone that I work with agrees (especially the people putting up the money), if you have to pay a little extra for the talent YOU WANT, you do it. Because without the right talent, you can't achieve your goals...and that costs WAY more than giving someone extra.

So being "smart" about what/who you pay is all a matter of perspective.
[ Edited by GhostofFredDean74 on Dec 4, 2012 at 3:29 PM ]
Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:
Originally posted by Ninerjohn:
Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:
Am I the only one thinking, "so what if we give Pagan a 4 year deal or Scoots a 3 year deal?" It's not my money...if people are worried about budgets, they shouldn't be. This franchise is flush with cash and obviously willing to shell out big bucks or they wouldn't be making these deals. I know this, if the Zito, Rowand and FreSanchez deals didn't hinder us from winning 2 titles in 3 years, I'm confident that signing Pagan and Scutaro won't either.

Plus, Scutaro's value goes beyond on-field performance. I don't know how he did it, but he managed to become the heart and soul of this team almost over night. That quality alone is worth another year to sweeten the deal, IMO.

I dont make posts thinking about whether its my money. I make them thinking about whether I think its a smart baseball move. Scutaro for 3 years isnt in my opinion.

What wouldn't be smart about it, if not for the money/investment piece? Will Scutaro be the same player in 2015 than he was in 2012, likely not at all. But if it takes giving him that third year of a contract to get another 1-2 solid years out of him (and/or 1 more title), I think it's a great business move. I acknowledge the risk, absolutely, but I don't see it as a risk that if it goes wrong, would undermine my franchise for years to come.

Btw, I'm in the talent acquisition business, and everyone that I work with agrees (especially the people putting up the money), if you have to pay a little extra for the talent YOU WANT, you do it. Because without the right talent, you can't achieve your goals...and that costs WAY more than giving someone extra.

So being "smart" about what/who you pay is all a matter of perspective.

Ghost, I have been a very successful headhunter for the past 13 years myself and I have a pretty strong idea when it comes to negotiation. I also know that it cant JUST be about the money.

Scutaro has never had a place where he was so appreciated and had this success. He is loved in SF. It should not JUST be about the money. I tell candidates that all the time. GO where you will be happy. I dont think Scutaro would leave the Giants if he had a fair 2 year deal on the table with an option year. Maybe I'm wrong but that would be as far as I would go with him. We arent talking Robinson Cano here. We are talking about a guy who has had a decent career and got hot for a couple of months. Do I want Scutaro to stay? Sure. DO I think he should get 3 years? Hell no. Not at his age and not at the level he has produced for the majority of his career.
  • Garcia
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 22,325
Pagan for 4 Years 40 mill
or
Victorino for 3 years 39 mil

whats better?
Originally posted by Garcia:
Pagan for 4 Years 40 mill
or
Victorino for 3 years 39 mil

whats better?

Neither are great. Boston is just stupid.
Originally posted by Ninerjohn:
Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:
Originally posted by Ninerjohn:
Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:
Am I the only one thinking, "so what if we give Pagan a 4 year deal or Scoots a 3 year deal?" It's not my money...if people are worried about budgets, they shouldn't be. This franchise is flush with cash and obviously willing to shell out big bucks or they wouldn't be making these deals. I know this, if the Zito, Rowand and FreSanchez deals didn't hinder us from winning 2 titles in 3 years, I'm confident that signing Pagan and Scutaro won't either.

Plus, Scutaro's value goes beyond on-field performance. I don't know how he did it, but he managed to become the heart and soul of this team almost over night. That quality alone is worth another year to sweeten the deal, IMO.

I dont make posts thinking about whether its my money. I make them thinking about whether I think its a smart baseball move. Scutaro for 3 years isnt in my opinion.

What wouldn't be smart about it, if not for the money/investment piece? Will Scutaro be the same player in 2015 than he was in 2012, likely not at all. But if it takes giving him that third year of a contract to get another 1-2 solid years out of him (and/or 1 more title), I think it's a great business move. I acknowledge the risk, absolutely, but I don't see it as a risk that if it goes wrong, would undermine my franchise for years to come.

Btw, I'm in the talent acquisition business, and everyone that I work with agrees (especially the people putting up the money), if you have to pay a little extra for the talent YOU WANT, you do it. Because without the right talent, you can't achieve your goals...and that costs WAY more than giving someone extra.

So being "smart" about what/who you pay is all a matter of perspective.

Ghost, I have been a very successful headhunter for the past 13 years myself and I have a pretty strong idea when it comes to negotiation. I also know that it cant JUST be about the money.

Scutaro has never had a place where he was so appreciated and had this success. He is loved in SF. It should not JUST be about the money. I tell candidates that all the time. GO where you will be happy. I dont think Scutaro would leave the Giants if he had a fair 2 year deal on the table with an option year. Maybe I'm wrong but that would be as far as I would go with him. We arent talking Robinson Cano here. We are talking about a guy who has had a decent career and got hot for a couple of months. Do I want Scutaro to stay? Sure. DO I think he should get 3 years? Hell no. Not at his age and not at the level he has produced for the majority of his career.

You have a fair point and agree that the law of averages/age aren't on his side. I think of both Pagan and Scutaro when I say this...they were really only worth 3 and 2 year deals respectively, but they both got an extra year for what they did in 2012. Call it, a signing bonus if you will. It's for services already rendered and not just for what they will do in the future. Both these guys were absolutely crucial to winning that second title, and will almost assuredly play key roles next year and in 2014 as go for our 3rd/4th titles.

That extra year for both? Just a sweetener, and from a business standpoint, that creates goodwill in the clubhouse knowing that if you contribute to winning it all, you'll get paid by this front office (within the parameters of their annual budget, of course). I don't know about you, but that's a STRONG incentive to give my heart and soul.

So from a pure business standpoint (black and white, profit and loss), I completely get what you're saying. And I've been with companies who believe what you're saying to their core....and as successful as they are, they garner little or no loyalty from the staff. They do what they have to stay employed, but little more. I've also been (and currently am with) a company that is generous to a fault, and that spirit permeates the entire organization. You want to run through brick walls for your employer when they go above and beyond to take care of you and your family.

So I get it, but there's a flip-side.
[ Edited by GhostofFredDean74 on Dec 4, 2012 at 4:02 PM ]
Btw....

Andrew Baggarly ✔@CSNBaggs Must've gotten wires crossed on Scutaro. I am hearing definitively now that 2 years plus vesting option is what the #SFGiants last offered.
Search Podcast Draft Forum Commentary News Shop Home
Get the Latest News at Giants365.com