Tuesday, July 21, 2009

Bullpen meltdown

It was bound to happen. Sergio Romo has under 50 IP of MLB experience, and I imagine we will get some rocky outings now and again. 18 hits in 13 innings is a little scary, but he also has 17 strikeouts. Reminds me of a certain young, mercurial starting pitcher--just keep saying "upside" over and over again.

I want to throw out a trade name. We could use help at 1B, 2B, SS and the OF. If we had real hitters there instead of below-average production, we would likely win more games. What if Milwaukee wanted to part with Ryan Braun? I don't know if they want to, but they might, and I'm going to imagine they need pitching in return. According to FanGraphs, Braun is worth 3.2 WAR already this season. That's about where they have Pablo Sandoval ranked. Tim Lincecum and Matt Cain are rated at 5.5 and 2.1 respectively. Jonathan Sanchez comes in at 1.0. Braun would be a good fit in LF, and would give our lineup one hell of a bat. If I'm Milwaukee's GM, I'd want equivalent value (or at least potential value) in return. Do we dangle Sanchez, Valdez and Alderson and see if they'll bite? Would you, if you were in Milwaukee? Are the Giants that close? Would one big hitter push us over the top?

Here's a little backgorund on WAR. It is the 21st century, buckos, we can't talk about baseball without some sabermetrics. Get used to it.


Ron said...

Great player, but unavailable, as Milwaukee fancies their chances at this time, & he one of their cornerstones. Milwaukee are 'buyers'. This is a player who might be available in the off-season, but in my book, in no way merits 3 of our prime pitchers.

JC Parsons said...

Trade suggestions are tough; hard to come up with but easy t shoot down. You aimed a litle too high on Braun - he would take Cain + and they still wouldn't go for it. Stick with clear sellers (like Nats, Pirates) or desperate big spenders (like the Mets, Yanks). Next look for blocked players, like whoever is behind Wright. I don't think we should be so afraid of rental types, it is not impossible to resign them and they try hard.

M.C. O'Connor said...

If we "need" a big bat, then we have to get a big bat. Not a prospect. Not an "up-and-comer," but a genuine ML bat. Thus I picked Braun.

How about Grady Sizemore? He's a stud (5.3-7.5 WAR last 4 years), and Cleveland is in last place. What would you give up for him (contract issues aside)?

The Braves have a highly-regarded OF in AA named Jason Heyward. Would you give up Madison Bumgarner for him? Would he help?

This is a silly exercise. Trades are based on so many things, not just value, but availibility, contract issues, etc. The 2009 Giants are what they are--so far I have not seen a single name or trade idea out there that works.


Oh, and read Grant Bisbee's take on trades (McCoven) for a good laugh and perspective.

Zo said...

Gosh, I'm totally confused. I thought the link was to: www.wartheband.com.

JC Parsons said...

I don't see why MOC is so hesitant to think trades. The first few are pretty good targets; pricey but If Heyward was blocked that might be a great choice although he would take MadBum and more. He is the next Chipper after all. Sizemore is very tradeable and interesting as well (however an OFer). This link shows that you picked well; everyone is in the top 50 of this guys list. Take a look and make some more suggestions. It is not rocket science; its more risk/reward analysis.

JC Parsons said...

BTW that McCoven post you sited was funny and well written, of course, but just more of the same cop out. Isn't he really making fun of ALL YOU GUYS that are waiting for the perfect no risk trade? Until everyone values and evaluates talent the same way, trades are great way to meet both long and short term goals.

M.C. O'Connor said...

Cop-out, schmop-out.

I want some NAMES.