NL West Links: Cain, Giants, Ethier, Quentin

On this date in 1999, the Diamondbacks acquired Tony Womack from the Pirates for Jason Boyd and a minor leaguer. Womack hit .269/.314/.362 in five seasons with the D'Backs, helping the club to the 2001 World Championship. Here's the latest from the NL West…

  • Giants CEO Larry Baer wouldn't give away much regarding contract talks with Matt Cain except to say that they are "back and forth" and "ongoing," tweets Andrew Baggarly of
  • "I'm going to be respectful of the process here," said Baer to reporters (including's Chris Haft) when asked about the Giants potentially relinquishing territorial rights to San Jose, allowing the Athletics to move. "You know, I think that's really important. The game is bigger than any internal machinations."
  • "I can't tell you what will happen with that," said Dodgers outfielder Andre Ethier to's Ken Gurnick when asked about signing a contract extension after the team is sold at the end of April. "The only thing I can change is the way I play. Today is today, and that's all I can handle. I'm here to play for today." Ethier can become a free agent after the season.
  • Carlos Quentin is returning home to Southern California following his trade to the Padres, and Don Norcross of The San Diego Union-Tribune wrote about the excitement he brings to the team.

11 Responses to NL West Links: Cain, Giants, Ethier, Quentin Leave a Reply

  1. corey23 3 years ago

    aka the San Jose A’s will happen soon.

  2. Vin23 3 years ago

    I don’t see why the Giants are being so adamant about keeping these rights. I remember reading in the 80’s or 90’s that the A’s gave the territorial right to the Giants. They have not moved in the 20+ years since and have no plans to do so. The A’s need to move, the Giants do not. I’m sure the A’s did not give the Giants such a hard time when the Giants asked them for the rights back then. Why are the Giants so possessive of something they are not using, do not plan to use, and that they didn’t originally have in the first place.

    • northsfbay 3 years ago

      It is about money. The Giants think they will make more money if the A’s are in Oakland. You are not going to change the Giants mind. The Giants were promised territorial rights to Santa Clara County as a condition of sale in 1992. Where did this A’s having territorial rights come from?

      • The A’s had to agree to give those rights to the Giants in order for that to be apart of the sale. It was a very quick decision that was put on Walter Haas. One writer quoted Haas as saying, “I’m probably going to regret this.” All A’s fans regret that decision. If not, we’d be talking about the Tampa Bay Giants.

      • thegoldenone 3 years ago

        It was not a condition of the sale. When the Giants wanted to move to San Jose. They were told they had to own the rights for the vote. It was shared by both the A’s and Giants like every other two team market. The Giants asked the A’s for the rights, haas said sure it’s for the better of baseball. The giants then lost the vote in San Jose , but it was kind of just forgotten to mention to put them back to the previous way. Later the Giants were sold and the new owners were like we’ll that’s how it was when we got it. Though at the time of the sale they didn’t care either way. Just now that they have a new park and making big dollars they don’t want the A’s prospering, they want them out of the bay area all together. Their o

        • thegoldenone 3 years ago

          There one team that doesn’t care about the better of the game but only their own pocketbooks. They don’t seem to notice a league takes multiple teams. Which is why other owners have come out saying they support the A’s

  3. Dave Pierce 3 years ago

    wrong jason boyd… just saying, lol.

  4. Vin23 3 years ago

    It comes from facts. MLB and the Giants asked the A’s to relinquish the rights to the Giants to keep them in California. Renovations and repurposing have removed almost 15,000 Seats (14,933) for baseball games in Oakland Coliseum since 1976, that’s a big revenue hit. The Giants have had 20 years to move to San Jose, they need to do the right thing and give the rights back. it shouldn’t be about money, it should be about ethics. If money changed hands back in 1992 then take that amount translate that into 2012 amounts and set that as the price the A’s must pay.

  5. corey23 3 years ago

    Regardless of whether the Giants want to give those rights up, MLB will make them do what is right for the league. 

    1.  No other team ‘owns’ territorial rights, something selig will be sure to tell the other owners isn’t fair to them.

    2.  San Jose A’s + SF Giants = more money for MLB than the Oakland A’s + San Francisco Giants.

    3.  San Jose A’s = more games on National TV for visiting teams and more sales for visiting teams as far as tickets, merchandise etc.

    4.  San Jose A’s = no more revenue sharing for the A’s which will make other teams happy.

    there are too many reasons that far outweigh, ‘the giants don’t want to give up the rights because they think they’ll lose money’

    Selig doesn’t care about 1 franchise he cares about MLB making money as a whole.  San Jose A’s are on their way and there isnt anything the Giants can do.

  6. corey23 3 years ago

    I agree… and that’s how selig is going to sell it to all the owners.  a’s in san jose = more money than the current situation so its good for everyone.

    can’t wait to buy tickets to cisco field!

  7. vikray 3 years ago

     I hope you guys get the move and stadium. As a Rays fan living in Tampa (Tropicana Field is across the Bay in St. Petersburg) we’re hoping for the same thing here with a move to Tampa. Who knows if it will happen, but I think both teams would be better off.

Leave a Reply