2011-12 Hot Stove Thread

Re: 2011 Hot Stove Thread

/retires to the garage to pound a case of beer

 

Re: 2011 Hot Stove Thread

I'm not entirely clear on why a guy who has a bad start then a great finish is somehow less valuable than a guy who is okay in both halves, when their total contributions are the same.

 

Re: 2011 Hot Stove Thread

In the case of good start, bad finish, it's bad from the perspective that when the bottom does finally fall out, you probably won't know it until you've given the guy 300 to 500 ABs. I also imagine that for game theory purposes, if you know a guy is a cold performer to start the year, it makes you more likely to issue IBB to get to him early in the year, and more likely to bypass him later in the year.

 

Re: 2011 Hot Stove Thread

Cubs send Marshall to the Reds for Travis Wood, Dave Sappelt and minor-leaguer Ronald Torreyes.

I won't go into all the stathead-y details why I think this is a massive coup for the Cubs (though the Reds get betteri in 2012, which is all they seem to want out of the deal, which is fine), but I love it.

 

Re: 2011 Hot Stove Thread

Agreed. Much as I like Marshall, this is way too much to give up to get him.

 

Re: 2011 Hot Stove Thread

With the steep prices pitchers are going for in trades, I wish my Atlanta Braves would deal a pitcher or two for some everyday help. Another bat would be nice.

 

Re: 2011 Hot Stove Thread

Thirded. Has Wood fallen that much as a prospect? He's only 24 / 25, and he's held his own for two years in the majors already. Wood for Marshall by itself would seem like a decent challenge trade on the Cubs part, so adding in two other guys just seems like gravy.

 

Re: 2011 Hot Stove Thread

As a Moneyball fanboi and a Cubs fanboi, it's hard for me not to make the parallels on this trade. All three guys the Cubs got have a label on them, but the stats say they are better than that label.

Wood is labeled as a "back-of-the-rotation starter." But he's a 24-year-old lefty who throws 90 with a career average ERA and slightly above-average peripherals (in all three categories, interestingly enough). Throw in that he's a fly ball pitcher who gave up twice as many HRs in GABP as he did on the road, and I really don't see why the Cubs shouldn't expect him to be a decent No. 3 starter. I know the Reds like their rotation, but Bronson Arroyo being given a spot over Travis Wood is everything I don't miss about Dusty Baker.

 

Re: 2011 Hot Stove Thread

This flew under the radar because it broke late on Christmas eve, but Bob Nightengale reports that the Oakland Athletics will soon be granted permission to move to San Jose, though they'd still need to build a stadium:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/al/athletics/notes.htm

https://twitter.com/#/BNightengale/status/150631294253006849

 

Re: 2011 Hot Stove Thread

Good for the A's. A new stadium and location might give them a chance to survive with the big-money teams in their division (Rangers and Angels). I think it's somewhat b.s. that the Giants will reap a big windfall from this (I don't buy this territory crap), but I have respected the Giants since they largely financed their stadium on their own. They didn't bleed the public dry like so many franchises do anymore. Maybe this is karma.

 

Re: 2011 Hot Stove Thread

A little bit of background:
The Hass family (of Levis and Haas Pavilion at Cal fame), when it owned the A's, gave territorial right to the South Bay to the Giants while they were seeking financing for what's now AT&T Park back in the 1990s. The Giants also have a piece of the Cal League team that plays in a city-owned park near San Jose State's Spartan Stadium and adjacent to the Sharks' practice facility. So, yeah, the Giants are within their right to demand a bit of change.

The new yard (Cisco Field) would be located near the Amtrak Station in the downtown area, very close to the Shark Tank, aka HP Pavilion. A's owner Lew Wolff, I believe, still has a piece of the MLS's Earthqakes, which currentlly play at Buck Shaw Stadium at Santa Clara. Don't know if this means the Quakes would also play in the new yard ... but Wolff has been hoping for a soccer-specific stadium along the likes of Home Depot Center or the stadium in Columbus, since MLS Quakes v. 1.0 took off for Houston and he got the rights. Talks on partnering with San Jose State about five years ago on renovating Spartan Stadium were broken off, at the university's request.

What's not to like about this? For starters, I think the plan presupposes San Jose fans will flock to the San Jose A's instead of taking the drive to San Francisco to watch the Giants. There will be some, but not in droves. The civic pride angle helps keep the Tank sold out for the Sharks, but remember too, they were a noob, and there hadn't been an NHL team in the area since the Seals split for Cleveland in the mid-70s. That, and have you read the transactions lately? The Giants' Cal League team may have better talent than the current A's! Unless Wolff plans on pulling a Loria the year before the team moves.

 

Re: 2011 Hot Stove Thread

That isn't why the Giants got territorial rights to San Jose. That's what they say happened now, and that's the basis of any legal action they might threaten or attempt, but the Giants got territorial rights in connection with their attempt to build a stadium in San Jose in 1992. When that ballot measure failed, that's when the previous ownership group planned to move the team to Florida, until MLB forced them to take a lesser offer to keep the team in SF. Now they're saying it was part of MLB recognizing that the Bay Area as a whole is one entity, but that's bunk.

The rest of the stuff -- Wolff buying the MLS team, the Giants buying part of their Class A affiliate -- has been the sustained back-and-forth about getting enough proxies to sway San Jose. The lander one yet is the Giants starting a "grass roots" campaign through a PR firm to make it look like people in San Jose (many of whom are untraceable) oppose the new stadium.