2013 San Francisco Giants Thread

Originally posted by Niners99:
Its not about me, its about common sense. If you think signing two 32+ year old non closer RP to 3 year deals is a smart move, i dont know what to tell you.

Any signing comes with risk.
I think we know what we're going to get from Casilla and you know in a pinch he can close some games.

Whatever you think is a good or bad baseball move... well thats like, your opinion man. I respect it.
But well see in three years if this is a good move or not. He's earned the contract if you ask me.

Originally posted by Niners99:
RP can go from great to garbage year to year. Locking yourself into 2 RP for 3 years each was a mistake. You dont want to lock yourself into those kinds of players. I can see how a top tier closer would command 3 years due to the competitive market, but guys like Affeldt and Casilla, (both over age 32) shouldnt be given that many years.

Makes sense, but it's a seller's market. Trying get the most for least in an era of inflated prices. These guys tend to throw their arms out more often than starting pitchers. Or am I wrong?

Originally posted by RogerCraig:

Originally posted by Niners99:

RP can go from great to garbage year to year. Locking yourself into 2 RP for 3 years each was a mistake. You dont want to lock yourself into those kinds of players. I can see how a top tier closer would command 3 years due to the competitive market, but guys like Affeldt and Casilla, (both over age 32) shouldnt be given that many years.

Makes sense, but it's a seller's market. Trying get the most for least in an era of inflated prices. These guys tend to throw their arms out more often than starting pitchers. Or am I wrong?

RP are already kind of the scrap heap of major league pitching. Unless youre Aroldis Chapman, youre probably in the bullpen because you dont have what it takes to be a starter. Some are more consistent than others, but for the most part RP can turn in a great year one season, and a poor one the next, without any explanation.

Its hard to know what youre getting year to year, especially after age 30. Its not who we gave the 3 years to, its the fact that we did. Casilla and Affeldt are quality bullpen arms, but at their age, locking yourself into them for 3 more years is a foolish risk. Solid RP can come out of the woodwork. Its not like theyre irreplaceable. We got George Kontos for Chris Stewart, and he gave us a great season. 2.47 era, 1.05 whip, 9.1 k/9.

More often than not, baseball has shown giving more than 2 years to a RP ends up being a regret. Maybe it will, maybe not, but my argument is just that it wasnt a wise thing to do.

Congrats to the Crawford family!

Originally posted by Niners99:

Originally posted by RogerCraig:

Originally posted by Niners99:
RP can go from great to garbage year to year. Locking yourself into 2 RP for 3 years each was a mistake. You dont want to lock yourself into those kinds of players. I can see how a top tier closer would command 3 years due to the competitive market, but guys like Affeldt and Casilla, (both over age 32) shouldnt be given that many years.

Makes sense, but it's a seller's market. Trying get the most for least in an era of inflated prices. These guys tend to throw their arms out more often than starting pitchers. Or am I wrong?

RP are already kind of the scrap heap of major league pitching. Unless youre Aroldis Chapman, youre probably in the bullpen because you dont have what it takes to be a starter. Some are more consistent than others, but for the most part RP can turn in a great year one season, and a poor one the next, without any explanation.

Its hard to know what youre getting year to year, especially after age 30. Its not who we gave the 3 years to, its the fact that we did. Casilla and Affeldt are quality bullpen arms, but at their age, locking yourself into them for 3 more years is a foolish risk. Solid RP can come out of the woodwork. Its not like theyre irreplaceable. We got George Kontos for Chris Stewart, and he gave us a great season. 2.47 era, 1.05 whip, 9.1 k/9.

More often than not, baseball has shown giving more than 2 years to a RP ends up being a regret. Maybe it will, maybe not, but my argument is just that it wasnt a wise thing to do.

I think the problem is that the idiot Ned Coletti set the bar for set up guys when he gave League a 3 year 22 million dollar deal. Without that deal, I seriously doubt that Affeldt or Casilla would have gotten 3 years. I think a 2 year deal with a club option would have been the way to go on both guys.

I understand Affeldt but I didnt see the need to extend Casilla at this point for that length of time. Still, without a great lineup and with uncertainity in the starting staff I think Sabean felt he had to keep that pen in place.

The way Boch uses the bullpen, wasn't quite surprised this was done.
Still think eventually Hembree forces his way on the club and one of our RP's is used as trade bait.

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by Niners99:

Originally posted by RogerCraig:

Originally posted by Niners99:
RP can go from great to garbage year to year. Locking yourself into 2 RP for 3 years each was a mistake. You dont want to lock yourself into those kinds of players. I can see how a top tier closer would command 3 years due to the competitive market, but guys like Affeldt and Casilla, (both over age 32) shouldnt be given that many years.

Makes sense, but it's a seller's market. Trying get the most for least in an era of inflated prices. These guys tend to throw their arms out more often than starting pitchers. Or am I wrong?

RP are already kind of the scrap heap of major league pitching. Unless youre Aroldis Chapman, youre probably in the bullpen because you dont have what it takes to be a starter. Some are more consistent than others, but for the most part RP can turn in a great year one season, and a poor one the next, without any explanation.

Its hard to know what youre getting year to year, especially after age 30. Its not who we gave the 3 years to, its the fact that we did. Casilla and Affeldt are quality bullpen arms, but at their age, locking yourself into them for 3 more years is a foolish risk. Solid RP can come out of the woodwork. Its not like theyre irreplaceable. We got George Kontos for Chris Stewart, and he gave us a great season. 2.47 era, 1.05 whip, 9.1 k/9.

More often than not, baseball has shown giving more than 2 years to a RP ends up being a regret. Maybe it will, maybe not, but my argument is just that it wasnt a wise thing to do.

I think the problem is that the idiot Ned Coletti set the bar for set up guys when he gave League a 3 year 22 million dollar deal. Without that deal, I seriously doubt that Affeldt or Casilla would have gotten 3 years. I think a 2 year deal with a club option would have been the way to go on both guys.

I understand Affeldt but I didnt see the need to extend Casilla at this point for that length of time. Still, without a great lineup and with uncertainity in the starting staff I think Sabean felt he had to keep that pen in place.

IMO, the only way the Casilla deal makes sense is if they see him as THEE closer. Romo did a great job down the stretch, but isn't really built for the wear and tear of a closer role, and the bullpen by committee thing was brought on by necessity more than anything. So this looks like a commitment to Casilla (albeit a slightly risky one) to be our closer for the next 3-4 years....from that perspective, it's not a bad deal money-wise.

But yes, if he's a just a set-up a guy, I don't see the wisdom in that contract at all.

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:
IMO, the only way the Casilla deal makes sense is if they see him as THEE closer. Romo did a great job down the stretch, but isn't really built for the wear and tear of a closer role, and the bullpen by committee thing was brought on by necessity more than anything. So this looks like a commitment to Casilla (albeit a slightly risky one) to be our closer for the next 3-4 years....from that perspective, it's not a bad deal money-wise.

But yes, if he's a just a set-up a guy, I don't see the wisdom in that contract at all.

People keep saying that.

Why? Because hes skinny?

He seemed fine down the stretch and was used quite a bit.

Originally posted by Garcia:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:
IMO, the only way the Casilla deal makes sense is if they see him as THEE closer. Romo did a great job down the stretch, but isn't really built for the wear and tear of a closer role, and the bullpen by committee thing was brought on by necessity more than anything. So this looks like a commitment to Casilla (albeit a slightly risky one) to be our closer for the next 3-4 years....from that perspective, it's not a bad deal money-wise.

But yes, if he's a just a set-up a guy, I don't see the wisdom in that contract at all.

People keep saying that.

Why? Because hes skinny?

He seemed fine down the stretch and was used quite a bit.

His stuff (which overall, is pretty average with the exception of that slider) tends to flatten out and become more hittable with consistent use, especially over the course of a 6 month season. I'm not saying Romo can't do it for a full season plus playoffs, I really don't know that...I just like him better against right handers late in games as opposed to a full-time closer for an entire year.

We shoulda done Zito for Morales.

Morales at 1B, belt in LF. Now that's some pop!


I know he's more DH but dude can hit.

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by Garcia:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

IMO, the only way the Casilla deal makes sense is if they see him as THEE closer. Romo did a great job down the stretch, but isn't really built for the wear and tear of a closer role, and the bullpen by committee thing was brought on by necessity more than anything. So this looks like a commitment to Casilla (albeit a slightly risky one) to be our closer for the next 3-4 years....from that perspective, it's not a bad deal money-wise.

But yes, if he's a just a set-up a guy, I don't see the wisdom in that contract at all.

People keep saying that.

Why? Because hes skinny?

He seemed fine down the stretch and was used quite a bit.

His stuff (which overall, is pretty average with the exception of that slider) tends to flatten out and become more hittable with consistent use, especially over the course of a 6 month season. I'm not saying Romo can't do it for a full season plus playoffs, I really don't know that...I just like him better against right handers late in games as opposed to a full-time closer for an entire year.

Yea, but as the closer, he should only see 55-75 innings per year. That isnt that bad. You dont use the kid if you dont need him. As the set up man or regular reliever, you may pitch the same innings or more, but can be used anytime. I think one inning a night that have a save opportunity will be ok with him.

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

Originally posted by Garcia:

Originally posted by GhostofFredDean74:

IMO, the only way the Casilla deal makes sense is if they see him as THEE closer. Romo did a great job down the stretch, but isn't really built for the wear and tear of a closer role, and the bullpen by committee thing was brought on by necessity more than anything. So this looks like a commitment to Casilla (albeit a slightly risky one) to be our closer for the next 3-4 years....from that perspective, it's not a bad deal money-wise.

But yes, if he's a just a set-up a guy, I don't see the wisdom in that contract at all.

People keep saying that.

Why? Because hes skinny?

He seemed fine down the stretch and was used quite a bit.

His stuff (which overall, is pretty average with the exception of that slider) tends to flatten out and become more hittable with consistent use, especially over the course of a 6 month season. I'm not saying Romo can't do it for a full season plus playoffs, I really don't know that...I just like him better against right handers late in games as opposed to a full-time closer for an entire year.

Romo's filthy slider that is thrown for a strike almost 100% of the time >>> Casilla's 95-97mph fastball with control issues.

Casilla just cant be trusted as anything more than a fill in closer. If Romo doesnt work out, Casilla is merely a place holder until we find one.

The Giants just like retaining players that they know, and are safe. they lock them up over market value to eliminate the risk of a free agent, and theres nothing wrong with that, but i take issue with the 3 years for a guy i already dont really trust. If we were going to spend money on an aging RP, i wouldve rather retained Wilson.

Originally posted by Niners99:
Romo's filthy slider that is thrown for a strike almost 100% of the time >>> Casilla's 95-97mph fastball with control issues.

Casilla just cant be trusted as anything more than a fill in closer. If Romo doesnt work out, Casilla is merely a place holder until we find one.

The Giants just like retaining players that they know, and are safe. they lock them up over market value to eliminate the risk of a free agent, and theres nothing wrong with that, but i take issue with the 3 years for a guy i already dont really trust. If we were going to spend money on an aging RP, i wouldve rather retained Wilson.

Thats what I expect Casilla to be a 8th inning guy. Occaisional spot closer.

Originally posted by Garcia:

Originally posted by Niners99:

Romo's filthy slider that is thrown for a strike almost 100% of the time >>> Casilla's 95-97mph fastball with control issues.

Casilla just cant be trusted as anything more than a fill in closer. If Romo doesnt work out, Casilla is merely a place holder until we find one.

The Giants just like retaining players that they know, and are safe. they lock them up over market value to eliminate the risk of a free agent, and theres nothing wrong with that, but i take issue with the 3 years for a guy i already dont really trust. If we were going to spend money on an aging RP, i wouldve rather retained Wilson.

Thats what I expect Casilla to be a 8th inning guy. Occaisional spot closer.

Krukow was on KNBR this morning and basically echoed your sentiment. Reason being I think is because a typical closer usually has more natural strength, like Wilson, unlike Romo.

The question is can Romo go potentially 4 times a week for entire season. I would hope he could, but I doubt it.

Originally posted by AXEGRINDER:
Krukow was on KNBR this morning and basically echoed your sentiment. Reason being I think is because a typical closer usually has more natural strength, like Wilson, unlike Romo.

The question is can Romo go potentially 4 times a week for entire season. I would hope he could, but I doubt it.

with our bullpen I don't think he needs to.

Casilla, Affeldt, Romo, and Lopez are all capable of closing out games.
Give Romo the ball most of the time and when he needs to rest - rest him. They are more than capable of doing that.

Hopefully Hembree comes up and adds some depth.