Sabean Takes Lincecum/Cain Off The Table

ABOUT FREAKING TIME, NOW KEEP THEM OFF THE TABLE!!!!

How about Lowry, Hennessey, and Winn/Roberts for Rios?

Now if only any other team can sign Feliz, we might just have to consider this a successful offseason.

Its about time... one more good player and I'll be happy.

I never really thought they would deal either one of them. There isn't really a position playing young star avaliable out there that would be worth giving one of them up, so essentially there wasn't much motivation to move them. This was a decision Sabean should've made right after he turned down Delmon Young and didn't go hard enough for Cabrera.

Sabean made the right move in taking those two players off the table, but if he truley could have had Delmon young for either one of them, why not do that deal, you still have that young pitcher and zito and lowry, a makings of a decent rotation, and you also have your young stud to build the team around

You can keep those guys you mention Jimmie. The Jays won't be needing them.

Morgan Ensberg or Mike Lamb will do at 3rd and we give up NOTHING.

With Kuroda and Silva about to sign 10+ mill per contracts....

Cain and Lincecum staying give us a huge edge.

It's too bad they've got 2 of the best young pitchers in the majors since they have basically nothing to back them up. Maybe if Zito can have a decent year they can ride their 1-2-3 to some wins, but they'll have to score some runs. That will be pretty tough of course, since that lineup is pretty brutal... is he planning to bat Rowand cleanup or something?

I think there is the possibility for a few deals the Giants might be able to work out:

Lowry and Hennessey to the Mariners for Clement and Balentein or Morrow

or

Lowry and Hennessey to the Mets for Martinez and Mulvey/Pelfrey

or

Same package as above, but substitute Molina for Hennessey

or

Hennessey for Andy Marte

Maybe a deal for Edwin Encarnacion?

"How about Lowry, Hennessey, and Winn/Roberts for Rios?"

hahahaha, lets package up a bunch of garbage and trade for a young all star, uh huh

yeah plasticmorontree, I figured wishful thinking. Honestly don't know quite what the jays need right now. I think they're looking for starting and relieving help. Anyway, the 2 teams probably don't have much of a match at this point.

The Juice all of the trade offers you just made a 1 year old wouldn't accept. I mean seriously Hennessey for Marte?

Lowry and Hennessey for Clement and Balentein or morrow? you've got to be kidding me.

When did Hennessey and Lowry suddenly become that valuable. Lowry and Hennessey for Clement and Balentien or Morrow? The Mariners would never do that. Same with the Mets regarding Martinez and Mulvey. There is no way in hell that Lowry gets you a prospect on Fernando Martinez's level. You're talking about the best young players in each of these organizations, and you're offering a #3-4 starter?

I'm sorry but every single one of your ideas is simply preposturous. You must be a Giants fan.

Yeah... the Juice... No to everything you say.

Yes FineHam, Rowand will likely bat cleanup. That's a terrible lineup; probably the worst in major league baseball.

Zito, that's a great point. The Giants aren't going to contend for at least the next two-three years, you might as well hold onto to Cain/Lincecum. In a couple of years, they turn into Dan Harens or more and then you trade them for someone's farm system.

"yeah plasticmorontree, I figured wishful thinking. Honestly don't know quite what the jays need right now. I think they're looking for starting and relieving help. Anyway, the 2 teams probably don't have much of a match at this point."

The jays aren't looking for Pitching, more or less they were looking for an upgrade at SP and a downgrade in the OF. The jays have excellent Pitching from top to bottom they had the best staff in the league the 2nd half of the season.

The idea would of been Get Lincecum, then trade likely 2 others to replace Rios or upgrade somewhere else ie shortstop.

Now all depends on 3B... if they can get Joe Crede or Edwin Encarnacion, then it approaches an average NL offense, and if Caincecum continue to evolve, Zito rebounds somewhat and Lowry repeats his 14 win effort, they won't win the series but they might stick around

Based on the Yanks recent interest in Corey Patterson, I'm guessing they're thinking a Melky or Matsui deal is going to go through. That may mean a deal of Matsui for a package centered around J. Sanchez is in the works. Think the Giants waited too long on dealing Lowry and there is no way other teams value him they way some Giants fans seem to hope.

I'm tired of using statistics to prove Lowry's value. Hennessey has been a consistent asset in the Major Leagues, and has the closer role to add on his resume.

Last time I checked, out of all the trades suggested, only 2 of the players have proven themselves at the Major League level.

Get off the prospect bandwagon and smell the coffee, proven MLB stars win championships, not "prospect" heavy teams?

Well juice, the Giants philosophy on proven MLB talent has lead them to a lot of places, but not a championship. Maybe they should try to go young finally.

For the record, I am all about hoarding your prospects under the belief that you are not a competing team. However, all the clubs I mention would more than likely consider their teams contenders (Mets, Indians, Mariners, and somewhat Reds).

If you have the ability to fill a gaping hole on your Major League team, which happens to be pitching in all these circumstances, why not trade a prospect or two to fill the void?

Personally if I was the Giants I would still try and make the Lowry for Matsui deal. Matsui is a Proven 300/30/100 guy, then try and flip Winn or Roberts onto someone. Then sign Mike Lamb?

I couldn't agree with your more bravesbeast. I think it is quite apparent that the Giants aren't quite a competing franchise at this current point. Why not sell some of their excess, proven MLB pitchers, for some younger positional talent? It is educated baseball business.

Maybe the Giants should trade Lowry and Hennessey to the Mets for David Wright and Jose Reyes. According to The Juice, that package is the gold mine.

"If you have the ability to fill a gaping hole on your Major League team, which happens to be pitching in all these circumstances, why not trade a prospect or two to fill the void?"

Well Lets examine your position, Mets delt Scott Kazmir for Victor Zambrano to fill a hole in their mlb roster. The Giants Delt Boof Bonser Fransico Lirano and uh someone else for AJ Pierzynski etc etc.

Just because you have a hole in your mlb team doesn't mean you deal any prospect to fill it.

Matsui 300/30/100? Maybe when he was with the other Giant team known as the Yomuri Giants of Tokyo.

Coming off knee surgery and in the Giants huge ballpark, Matsui would be lucky to see a 285/20/85 season

Lets just put it this way juice. This is coming from a Yankee fan, so I particularly hope the Mets would be stupid enough to make that deal. But if the Twins are entertaining a package of Martinez/Mulvey enough to actually continue negotiations with the Mets over Santana, why in the hell would the Mets trade those same two players for a few backenders, of whom the Mets currently have plenty. No offense meant, but most of those offers are laughable. Lowry and Hennessey would be lucky to land you the well-paid, injured knee of the soon to be a full-time DH Matsui. Mets have made some pretty awful deals in the past, but I don't think you'll get them to give up their only trade bait for two guys who aren't a guarantee to outperform what they currently have.

Agreed, Juice. That's definitely what I'd do if I was Sabean.

Ignorance is bliss. I love when NY fans write out of angst instead of inteligence. With the bad comes the good. There have been plenty of trades that have filled MLB club's positional voids that led to great success. If you are going to highlight the mistakes, it is imperative to point out the successes as well.

Ignorance is bliss. I love when NY fans write out of angst instead of intelligence. With the bad comes the good. There have been plenty of trades that have filled MLB club's positional voids that led to great success. If you are going to highlight the mistakes, it is imperative to point out the successes as well.

Juice-

Just cause a player is worth less to YOUR team because of your ballpark doesn't mean he's worth less to the team thats dealing him. In any case, Matsui for some combination of Lowry or Sanchez and some prospects might be enough. But don't go saying those same players are deserving of the same package that the Twins have at least somewhat considered for Santana (Mulvey/Martinez +)

the juice, no team will give them good younger positional talent for their unimpressive "proven" MLB pitchers. Generally talent supercedes anything, and the Giants don't have much of it. Just because a team is contending doesn't mean they'll just sell the farm to slightly improve. The guys who run these teams are fully aware of the value of young prospects, that's why Clay Buchholz won't be traded, or Jay Bruce. Regardless of how good your team is, you don't move elite prospects to make slight upgrades.

And based on what you've said so far, you would prefer major league talent to minor league talent, even if the minor league talent is far superior. You're saying you'd prefer Emil Brown to Fernando Martinez, simply because at this point Emil Brown is an "MLB-Ready" player? Your opinion on prospects is completely off, because young guys are what teams are built around.

Sabean is trying to keep his job and sell tickets, that's what he's doing.

Yea Devo, Matsui probably is not going to be a .300/30/100 Rbi guy again, he is going to a worse ballpark for hitters if he is traded, and will be in a far worse lineup, not really two ingredients you would want in hopes of having a career year, get a clue dude.

And juice, lowry maybe a decent starter, but no one is going to give up their top prospects to get him, if that were so, it would have already happened, it makes no since for anyone to give up their top prospects for a pitcher who may or may not help their team, it needs to be a definite that pitcher will help their team.

You want proof of how building around young talent can help you win, look at how the braves fared in the 90's and the early part of this decade.

I'm rather insulted, there's no way in hell I'm a NY fan of any type. However since I`m here I'll share a deal my team made with horrible results. Micheal Young for Estaban Loiza, also I agree there are some trades that go the other way, but name any that have made the impact some of the names I mentioned have?

Dealing away prospects recklessly can be far more harmful then dealing away a commodity you already know about.

Better yet Bravesbeast, if he wants proof of how ignoring young talent can run your team into the ground, have a look at what the Giants are doing. Aaron Rowand for five years? Laughable. I agree kdub, someone keeps trying to save his job by making one bad move after another and sinking that organization into an even bigger hole.

finite24: I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "my" team considering I don't recognize with any team. I am a fan of baseball, not teams.

scribbletone: I never mentioned Clay or Jay in a trade so I'm confused why you are attacking me based on those prospects? Furthermore, last time I checked Lowry was considered an above average MLB starter. Not to mention he is incredibly affordable in this current market.

bravesbeat: I agree that teams will not give away their top prospects for a player not guaranteed to help their team. However, when was the last time anything in baseball was for sure, maybe during the Kevin Brown or Carl Pavano signings a few years back. Or maybe when Mike Hampton joined your Braves? Things happen, and the chances these "top prospects" make an impact in the Majors is plausible, but not guaranteed. If Lowry can win 14 games on a losing team, why can't he win 15-17 on a winning team?

And I mean it continues to make no sense, why do you sign aaron rowand for 5 years at 65 million or so when you could have made the same offer to andruw, a guy who plays better defense, has more power, has been in more clutch situations. Grantin Rowand had a very good year compared to Andruw last year, but you should not ignore the previous years before 07, where andruw was clearly the better player. Come on sabean, get with the program.

Rowand was signed for 5 years 60 million. Just clarifying.

The reason why lowry cannot win 15-17 games on a winning team is because he got incredibly lucky last year. He has spotty control, and has to work out of jams 3 or 4 times a game. It is not the fact that he cannot win 15-17 games for a winning team, it is the fact that those winning teams can pay a free agent the money to come in and do a similar job that lowry could do. IF they can afford the money, which most winning teams can do, that is a far better move than trading for lowry and giving up a top prospect. Lowry could just as easily have had his best season ever last year, who knows. Lowry is not the type of difference maker that will warrent trading away a top prospect for. sabean should definitely try to get a top prospect, but any team dumb enough to give up a top positional prospect for lowry is stupid.

I keep trying to tell myself that Noah Lowry is an above average pitcher based on his ERA and wins, but his WHIP last year was 1.55, and he struck out only 87 guys, as well as walked 87 guys. Those are not above average numbers. Those aren't even average numbers. Yeah he's affordable, but not if it costs a top prospect, then he's not affordable. And I only referenced Bruce and Buchholz in that both of those teams are trying to acquire elite talent (Bedard/Santana), and yet they're still considered untouchable.

Fair enough response, but if I were a GM of a team in need of a proven Left handed starter, I would hold value in Lowry. There is something that goes unsaid for a guy who can flat out win at the big league level, terrible peripherals and all.

This is an awkward example, but look at Javier Vasquez's peripherals and notice that his record always seems to be a tick above average. His peripheral stats are amazing, but he doesn't have the "x" factor that proves he is a bona fide winner. I think both sides have legitimate arguements.

I agree that Lowry seems to win a lot, based on just good luck essentially. There is a bit of an x-factor, and I can see how he would have value, I just don't see any GM convincing himself that Lowry is worth a top prospect. The best you could get for him would likely be a guy like Wladimir Balentien. Not a top prospect, just a very good one.

And just to add, Javy Vazquez had a fantastic year for the Sox. He finally avoided having that one inning where he imploded, and managed to post some great numbers.

I disagree with that completely, because run support has a lot to do with a pitcher's win-loss record. I am a huge matt cain fan, and I cannot tell you how many times last year he got absolutely no run support. However, Cain still holds more value than lowry because of he is a better pitcher, the same reason that Vazquez is better than lowry, because he does his part, pitching, than lowry does.

Now yes, I agree with scibble tone, if the giants could get Wladimir Baletnin for Lowry, that would make great sense. the giants get a young middle of the order hitter, and the mariners get a lefty who can do decently in a pitcher's park, that is a good trade usggestion, even though i still think that balentin is too much for lowry

Cain and Lowry shouldn't even been put in the same sentence. Cain was absolutely dominant as a 23 year old last year in the majors. I can't remember seeing a pitcher I ever thought more promising than Cain besides a young Pedro Martinez.

I would also agree that Vasquez is better than Lowry, but check out his career track record and you can see he has had his fair share of ups and downs. Like I said, I think there is an argument to be made for both sides.

But win-loss records tend to be essentially meaningless. There are a million factors that go into it to the point where its a poor reflection of a pitchers quality.

And Vazquez is a far better pitcher than Lowry, W-L record aside. I'm not sure its even close. Look at their numbers last year:
Lowry: 14-8, 3.94 ERA, 1.55 WHIP, 87 K, 87 BB
Vazquez: 15-8, 3.74 ERA, 1.14 WHIP, 213 K, 50 BB
Honestly, those numbers don't even compare, and Vazquez played against better competition.

And don't forget Lowry posted a 4.75 ERA in 2006, so you could say he's had his fair share of ups and downs as well.

Why is Sabean trying to win next year? He's making the same mistakes that made the Giants a losing team. At some point, he needs to just give in and understand that the Giants are a losing team, and there is no quick fix. He certainly won't fix the team just by signing Rowand and a below average 3B!

To me; today was great because it rekindled the debate as to who the worst GM in the NL is: Sabean or Purpura (hon. mention to Ned Colletti - however that is spelled)

I'd throw Ed Wade in there too

Yea, ed wade should be thrown in here. fast future, umm ed wade is the houston gm, not purpura

I'm glad I'm not the only one wondering about this move. It's too bad, I was looking forward to seeing if Schierholtz, Lewis and Davis could become everyday players. It's unlikely they would all make it, but I was hoping at least one could break into the starting lineup.

For some reason, the spam filter is preventing me to post my full post, so I'm posting in pieces.

Yes to the question of whether Sabean is trying to be competitive in 2008. He announced this in his first press conference after the season ended. And it fits with what has been said before about the Giants ownership, that they need to put people in the seats to pay the mortgage and it is winning teams that do that in SF.

About the OF situation, I expect that Winn might be dealt for a 3B. Since the Giants management wants to do their best to win, they needed someone with middle of lineup ability and Rowland batted 5th most of 2007, so that's why they got him. I wanted Schierholtz to get a chance to play, but if it was a choice of costing Schierholtz a chance to play or trading Lincecum for Rios, I prefer to make Schierholtz wait another year. But hopefully the Giants will be able to trade Winn and open up RF for Schierholtz.

About Andruw, it is possible that it was a fluke year, but the 30's start when a player might hit the decline phase of his career and he flat out flatlined in 2007 for no apparent reason. The Giants management probably was afraid of that possibility. If he had hit well, I think the Giants would have been first in line for him.

Also, they gushed about his leadership qualities as well, and the example he sets, is Andruw known for that?

About Lowry, if you look at his 2006 season when he had a 4.75 ERA, you will see that his ERA was under 4 until September then he had horrible games, then was shut down for an injury, making it look like he tried to pitch with the injury and failed.

Besides that one month, Lowry has been a consistent, year by year, sub-4 ERA pitcher, and there are not that many pitchers in the majors who can say that, particularly over the past 3.5 seasons. One can call that lucky, but at what point is that skill? Two years, three years, career?

Despite the DIPS theory, there are still pitchers who don't fit that theory who do perfectly well. What I've discovered is that - if you follow Ron Shandler's Baseball Forecaster - pitchers who can avoid the Disaster starts (starts with 0 or 1 PQS) and keep their DIS% down in the teens area, can keep their overall ERA low as well. Lowry has been one of those pitchers for 3.5 years now, except for that one month.

That's not top of the rotation, but most teams can use a sub-4 ERA pitcher, no matter how he does it; in fact, a sub-4 ERA qualifies Lowry to be in the top 2 starters among the 30 teams. But whatever, I'm more than happy if the Giants keep him, makes our rotation that much more solid.

Why should the Giants not trade Lincecum or Cain? Because they have the potential to be among the great tandems in history if they can stay healthy and productive. Asking why don't they trade Lincecum and be satisfied with a good rotation of Cain, Zito, Lowry, etc., would be like saying why didn't the Dodgers trade away Koufax a year after he figured things out, and get a better offense. They had Drysdale and other good pitchers, but needed more offense. Well, Lincecum isn't there yet, but he shows all signs of being able to perform at the level of the best pitchers in the league if he can continue doing what he did.

I understand that Sabean is committed to building a winning club, but signing Rowand just isn't the way to do it. Rowand gives the club essentially the same amount of offense that it had last year, when it finished last. Rowand certainly doesn't hurt the team in 2008, but he may in 2009. Next year's potential free agent class features a lot of legitimate stars, but because of the Giants' obsessive commitment to "winning now" in the hopes of putting fans in the seats, they signed Zito and Rowand to long, heavy contracts. I'd be very surprised if the Giants had enough money to sign a true star next offseason, because they continue to try to make splash signings like Rowand.

Why should the Giants trade Cain or Lincecum?

Because the rest of the team is garbage; and there are no guarantees with pitcher's developmental curves.

yes, i love you Sabean! the jays are close to signing eckstein which will make them so much better with a good SS. The jays are looking pretty good right now.
but they should trade johnson for a decent pitcher and let lind take over the starting role from now on....
GO JAYS GO! 2008 is ours