Welcome back to Part 2 of the year’s inaugural mailbag. In our last episode, we had some fairly in-depth and (let’s be honest) long-winded responses that were very seriously about “the state of the system” (say that like a grizzled politician to get the full weightiness of it).
Today, I’ll see if I can get a little more lightning round action going. I think we all know that lightning ain’t exactly my specialty, but maybe I can aim for something like a rhapsodo super high-speed camera shot of a lightning strike.
First, of course, we have a word from our sponsors….my wonderful readers, without whom I couldn’t do all of this!
And with that little business dispatched, let’s scrounge around in the bag a little more.
Just curious if anyone ever looks at median ERA. A pitcher can have eight scoreless one inning outings and then give up 4 runs in 0.2 innings and his ERA is north of 6. Is that why expected slugging against is mentioned more often than it used to be? I love that stat. You can take ERA and WHIP and flush them IMHO
Barry, you’ve definitely put your finger on an issue with looking at ERA, especially for relief pitchers, where it quickly becomes more or less a junk stat. ERA has its virtues — as does WHIP (there comes a point at which too many baserunners is almost impossible to overcome) — but plenty of underlying faults as well.
This doesn’t help fans much but, internally, most clubs just focus on process stats these days. They’re looking at the shape of pitches, the spin rates, the tunneling effect, the exact locations, and the quality of contact that pitchers give up on each specific pitch in their repertoire. With the help of the ubiquitous Hawk Eye systems installed at nearly every minor league stadium these days, they’re even looking at biomechanical mini-details like “how far from his body does Pitcher X have his elbow when he releases Pitch Y?” The idea of looking at “result” stats like ERA is pretty far removed from where the industry is at these days. (Indeed, one trend that we heard about last year at the major league level was teams using biomechanical imaging of pitchers (those throwing skeletons you might see around the internet sometimes) to detect minuscule deviations in deliveries that help batters pick up tipped pitches).
As I say, that’s not much help for fans, because we’re not privy to most or all of those stats on a minor league level, though I think the day is not far removed when the kinds of things we see on Baseball Savant are publicly available for the minor leagues. Not yet, however, which means we have to struggle along with things like K rate and walk rate and SLG against and such not — or seek out the insider crumbs that sometimes fall my way and, in turn, yours. Basically, K-BB% and GB% would be my go to for how a pitcher is performing much more than ERA.
Hi Roger. What do you think of the proposed prospect league in spring training, and what would your ideal lineup be (assuming those on 40-man are excluded?)
Mike, I think anybody who loves watching prospects play thinks this is an absolute slam dunk of a marketing idea! Giants’ prospects will face off against the A’s as part of a double header on March 15 — and as long as I can get through the rental car queue in a timely manner, I’m definitely planning to be there for it. From what I’ve read of the Spring Breakout series, it doesn’t look like there is any rule against including prospects who are on the 40-man — they just have to be prospects. So this would be my ideal lineup when the Giants line up at Ho Ho Kam Park:
CF: Grant McCray
LF: Wade Meckler
SS: Marco Luciano
1b: Bryce Eldridge
RF: Vaun Brown
3b: Walker Martin
DH: Rayner Arias
2b: Diego Velasquez
If you’re going to be a real Grinch and take my 40-man guys away from me, then I guess I’d substitute Aeverson Arteaga in for Luciano, and Carson Whisenhunt for Harrison. Hopefully, we’ll get an inning or two from Hayden Birdsong, Reggie Crawford, Mason Black, and Joe Whitman before the 7-inning game is over, with bench support from Victor Bericoto, Maui Ahuna and Onil Perez (as well as Tyler Fitzgerald if I can have my 40-man guys back). If my travel plans work out the way I think, this should be the very first thing I see on my spring training trip and I can’t wait to start things off with a bang!
Quick query - do the Giants get a compensation draft pick for Manaea signing with the Mets, akin to Rodon last year?
No, they don’t, Mike. In 2022, the Giants extended a Qualifying Offer to Carlos Rodón, which he then turned down. That resulted in the Giants receiving a compensation draft pick, which turned directly into Joe Whitman, and indirectly (through the additional bonus pool money) helped the Giants sign 2nd round pick Walker Martin.
This year, however, they chose not to extend a Qualifying Offer to Sean Manaea, and I would say, given the deal we saw Manaea sign with the Mets, that was probably the right decision. A QO would have committed the Giants to a one-year deal at $20.3 million dollars, well above the market for Manaea, who inked a deal for two-years at $28 million with an opt out. Really, Manaea signed a deal that almost exactly paralleled his previous deal with the Giants, adding one more guaranteed year in the process. Had the Giants extended a QO to Manaea, it’s likely that they would have ended up with a player accepting that offer for the fourth consecutive season. Kevin Gausman, Brandon Belt, and Joc Pederson each accepted a QO offer from the Giants in previous three years. The other 29 teams combined saw just two other players accept QOs in that same time (Martín Perez from the Rangers and Marcus Stroman from the Mets).
End result, no compensation pick for the Giants this year, and, if they sign one of the players who turned down a QO from their previous team (Cody Bellinger, Matt Chapman, or Blake Snell, for instance), they would lose their normal second round pick.
Happy 2024, Roger! I’m hoping to sneak in a late but timely free agency question. Signing Blake Snell, Cody Bellinger, and/or Matt Chapman would trigger a penalty for the Giants because those players declined the qualifying offer. I believe the Giants would lose their second pick in the 2024 draft (No. 51) and $500k of their international bonus pool next year. What’s your read on whether/how the QO penalty might impact the front office’s free agent pursuits? It sure seems like Farhan Zaidi would place a premium on that draft pick, in particular. But I suspect he’d be more likely to incur the penalty than in years past, perhaps even for a good-but-not-great player (which is how I see those three). Your thoughts?
I should add that the penalties that you mention would accrue if they signed multiple players who turned down QOs. So if their 2nd round pick has already been sacrificed to a Chapman signing, for instance, inking Bellinger to a deal would cost the 3rd rounder, etc.
As for how the front office weights those things, my understanding is that most front offices simply bake that into their contract offers. Typically, there’s something like an actuary table that assesses the expected value of each pick, and that value is then factored into a contract offer the same way teams try to match up value exchanged in trades. To smooth it down to its most simplistic terms (far too simplistic, but you get the gist), if you think Chapman is worth X amount of dollars, your offer then becomes something like X minus (xValue @2nd rd pick).
And yes, I think your view of their risk tolerance for losing picks is likely different this year than in years past due to their failure to hit expectations the past two seasons. All of that can be calculated as well (with maybe a little wiggle room depending on heat from above). A player who changes a team’s projections from, say, a 73-win team to a 77-win team is valued very differently from a player who can change the team’s projections from an 83-win team to an 87-win team. In a vacuum, both of those players might be considered 4-Win players, but the marginal value of the player in the second scenario is much higher, because he is potentially making the difference between a playoff caliber roster and not, and teams would be willing to pay more for that player because of the way he fits into the team-wide context.
Hello Roger. Just listened to the Mason Black conversation (great convo), and he certainly has a shot to make his MLB debut in 2024. Since Zaidi has apparently decided not to add any proven MLB starters to the staff, please share your opinion of which MiLB pitchers have the best shot of making it to SF this year. Please list in order of "best chance", in your opinion. Thanks in advance.
Thanks greatly! I really enjoyed the opportunity to chat with Black again. He’s definitely one of my favorite kids in the organization. If you haven’t listened to it yet, go ahead and fire it up now! We’ll be here waiting for you when you get back…
I think the first thing to say about this situation is that I wouldn’t be surprised to see quite a number of different pitchers be given opportunities to help cover innings in a variety of ways, much as we saw last year. Depending on when exactly Alex Cobb and Robbie Ray come back, how many innings Jordan Hicks can be stretched out to, and how effective Ross Stripling is this year, there could be somewhere between 400-600 innings up for grabs this year for the top minor league depth to take down (including Kyle Harrison, Keaton Winn, and Tristan Beck).
That’s a lot of innings! And it’s a big reason why I said at the top of Wednesday’s post that this is going to be a fascinating year for player development! Given that none of those youngsters has gone much over 100 innings in a season in their careers (Harrison’s career high, for instance, is 113 IP), you have to believe that revolving innings limits are going to keep Bob Melvin’s head spinning. How they manage it all will play a key role in how successful this team is going to become.
With that setup, let’s see if we can answer your question:
Without a doubt, Erik Miller and Kai-Wei Teng are the two most likely debuts — both are locks to pitch this year assuming reasonable health (knock on wood). Miller, in fact, is the #2 left-hander on the depth chart right now and seems like he could be part of the opening day roster if we don’t see any additions. Teng, meanwhile, is absolutely going to be used as an optionable swing man to come up and take on the Junis role at some point, possibly combining with Sean Hjelle in a tag-team Juniserrole.
Once we get off the 40-man options, I think the two most likely starting pitchers to get opportunities are, indeed, Black and Whisenhunt. Those two have, I think, separated themselves from most of the other arms in terms of near-readiness. After my podcast conversation with David Flemming, however, I am intrigued about the idea of Reggie Crawford getting pushed as a potential second half relief arm. His innings cap is obviously going to be very low this year anyway, after pitching just 18 innings last year, so why not get a few one-inning bursts out of him where it counts? Obviously, there are several other relievers who could come up: Randy Rodriguez is on the 40-man and in Triple-A. If R.J. Dabovich returns from hip surgery looking like his old self, I’d bet on him being part of the optionable relief mix before the end of the year. Nick Avila and Juan Sanchez are solid arms who could figure into the year. And, of course, young Trevor McDonald was added to the 40-man this winter. I suspect he begins the year in Double-A, so don’t discount him either. His case might be similar to Crawford’s however, in that he’d likely be looking at some sort of relief role if he came up to the majors this year.
The last sort of wild card I’ll throw in is Landen Roupp. A series of small injuries (arm strain, back strain, hip strain) limited him to just 31 innings last year, but they were pretty awesome innings against very good competition. If he’s healthy this year, he’s a guy who could move fast. Roupp’s primarily a two-pitch guy, so I’m not sure how they would want to use him (maybe another bulk inning pitcher?), but his curve is a plus pitch and he throws quality strikes with the sinker, so there’s a major leaguer of some stripe there. Hayden Birdsong is perhaps an even wilder card than Roupp. He has strides to make on his strike-throwing, and getting a more consistent feel for the slider to go with the curve is another development hurdle. Plus, there’s the whole question of whether he’ll ever try to pitch from a wind up to consider. But he throws some serious stuff, and if he can take the steps necessary to transition from “thrower” to “pitcher,” there’s no telling how good he can be. I think even he was surprised by his break out last year. Birdsong is probably the longest shot of all of these names, as another year of seasoning at the Double- and Triple-A levels is by far the likeliest move for him, but if you want to dream big….
There could always be pop ups, of course, but I think those guys, along with minor league free agents like Spencer Howard (who I think is a real sleeper candidate to have some impact this year), are the names to know, with Black and Whisenhunt being, in my mind, the first line of moves behind Harrison, Winn, and Beck for taking down needed starts.
Hi Roger, thanks as always for taking these questions. One unaddressed hole on the Giants 40-man is a security blanket for shortstop in case the Luciano experiment goes sideways. We are now just weeks from spring training, and no apparent movement. What do you think of signing Brandon Crawford to take on that role? He apparently wants more time, and it seems like he brings more to the table than most names being floated. What are the pros and cons of that as opposed to maybe going all in on youth and tapping Tyler Fitzgerald instead?
Joseph, your point is well taken. In some ways, Crawford is the ideal example of the kind of player that the Giants are seeking. We’ve even heard, from that ubiquitous and mysterious internet presence known as “Bay Area Bob,” that the Giants have thought about it as well:
I do think we have to be clear-eyed about the potential complications of a reunion with the last remaining member of the championship core, however. Because Crawford is a legacy player, one thing he really can’t bring to the team is flexibility — precisely the thing that teams look for in a utility player. Crawford is one of a small handful of players who have spent their entire career playing one defensive position (not counting his pitching performance), and by all accounts that fact is important to him. Obviously, that can’t be a concern for the utilization of a utility infielder. Of course, if Crawford were to sign a deal to be a bench player, he’d sign it understanding that he’d have to give up concerns like that.
Still, the fact is that Crawford on the Giants isn’t just any other player and couldn’t be treated as such. Having a player with so much history attached to him is different than having a generic player picked up from the Mariners on your team. You might recall that the Giants received a good bit of blowback from fans when they released Hunter Pence back in 2020. I think we can all understand that it’s a different story for a club when they have to release a player who comes with deep connections to the fanbase like Pence, than when they release an A.J. Pollock for instance. For us old timers, we can remember how upsetting it was when the Giants essentially forced Willie McCovey into an awkward midseason retirement under similar circumstances (though that final celebratory day was certainly magnificent).
Fans like us see a sentimental value in continuing a long-lasting relationship with a player we love that is lacking from the executive’s point of view. For them, the relationship comes with strings attached that they’d probably rather avoid being tied down by. Of course, if other areas of pursuit fail to offer a solution to a clear need, then facts on the ground could change their view of things by spring.
As a quick tease, I have another KROG podcast coming out later this morning, and Kerry and I discuss the idea of a Crawford reunion, among many other topics.
(I see that even my attempt at super slo mo lightning isn’t working thus far, so let me try to hustle things along…)
Hey, since it’s international signing season (formerly known as J2), I was wondering, why do teams like the Padres and Yankees seem to always be in on the top dudes? Larger scouting network? More investment in relationships with trainers?
I think those things could have something to do with it. Padres’ GM, A.J. Preller, was the Rangers’ International Scouting Director for a long while, and definitely has many long-held relationships in that theater.
But, to be honest, I think willingness and a history of spending at the top of the market plays a large role. I would imagine that when the Yankees’ or Padres’ interest in a player becomes known, their presence alone might cause asking rates to spike upwards, since every trainer knows those clubs have pushed their spending to the limits (and beyond) before. And those teams like splashy moves, and don’t mind sacrificing depth in their classes for top name brands.
The Giants’ appetite for top bonuses seems to top out a little below $3 million — their big signings are normally in the $2.5m range (with Lucius Fox being the only exception to that). Generally, my guess is that they are reluctant to burn their entire pool, or nearly their entire pool, on a single player, as they know well how many good players come from mid- and lower-tier price ranges. Ronald Acuńa, Jr. was a $100,000 signing after all, and Camilo Doval signed for less than that. While top talents have been delivering real impact with greater consistency over the last decade, keeping some eggs in a reserve basket is a smart approach to the market as well. These are kids whose ceilings are changing as rapidly as their bodies, after all, and today’s million-dollar signing can often become tomorrow’s mildly interesting waiver wire transaction.
Of course, it is certainly exciting when your team gets in on the top dollar signings. The Padres’ most recent “best in class” international signing ended up at the end of Baseball America’s Top 100 less than a week after he inked his signature! For those pining for the Giants to get in on that kind of action, it looks like you might get your wish a year from now. One of the players whom Joe Salermo mentioned as being “on the Giants radar” in this week’s podcast is a Dominican shortstop named Joshuar de Jesus Gonzalez, and friend of the site GPT reported yesterday that de Jesus Gonzalez is expected to be in the mix of the top two or three players in next year’s international rankings. (While Salermo was naturally reluctant to be particularly definitive in his public comments for a variety of very good reasons, I’d encourage you to pay close attention to the young man’s uniform in the clips below).
I read the Fangraphs piece on Reggie Crawford. He didn’t seem quite as into numbers and the pitch lab as I’ve read from other SF pitching prospects. Is Crawford’s approach to these things more common than i thought? Not suggesting its a bad thing. Just caught me by surprise is all.
It really varies player to player. If you listen to my player interviews during the season, I try always slip in a question about how players use the steady flow of data available to them, and if you listen carefully, you’ll hear a fairly wide spread of enthusiasm. Some players I speak to are very engaged with data and very specific in what they like to look for in the numbers. Others are clearly less so.
The same goes for pitchers and pitch design sessions. Some are very much into them and constantly seeking newer and better shapes, while others are a little more laissez faire. That said, I wouldn’t be surprised if somebody, somewhere deep inside the Giants’ organization might have been less than thrilled to see such a response, because obviously the team is eager to see all of their players make use of all available resources for improving their game — resources which are expanding all the time.
It’s one reason why most teams have gradually been going to bigger and bigger staffs, with floating coordinators and “special assistants” in the development mix as well. Teams understand that when it comes to communicating with players, one size (or one voice) doesn’t fit all, and you have to send messages in many different forms to see what sticks with any given player.
One constant for the cutting-edge front offices is that they seem to always be adding in outside voices so that they aren't losing track of what other teams are doing or getting stuck in their ways, such as Chris Archer joining the Dodgers out of nowhere or the Rays hiring the Angels’ assistant pitching coach who was fired for his familiarity with iPads. The Giants have hired from the outside for notable positions (manager, GM), but is that also true of the less public positions? In short, do you think they're falling behind/at risk of it?
I think the Dodgers do that extremely well — better than anybody in the industry in my opinion, and I’ve said for a few years that I would love to see Farhan Zaidi bring in more “Special Assistant” types, as Andrew Friedman often does or as we recently saw the Cardinals do bringing former Red Sox PoBO Chaim Bloom in as an advisor to John Mozeliak. I’m happy to see Dusty Baker back in the fold, but I think there are other voices out there currently unemployed who might make for good baseball sounding boards for the Giants’ braintrust (former Rangers GM Jon Daniels, for instance, or former Marlins GM Kim Ng).
I think it will be very interesting to see the Giants’ organizational staff when it’s announced this winter (if it is at all — last year they forgot to do so), because there are a few positions that might need filling. The Giants have seen a lot of their coaching and player development staff poached the last few years without necessarily filling those positions. To my knowledge, Brian Bannister’s Director of Pitching position remains open, as does Dustin Lind’s old title of Director of Hitting. As far as I know, they also never filled Matt Daniels’ old position, Director of Pitching Sciences.
Of course, some of those spots may simply be renamed, but I do think there are places where some backfilling is necessary. Two years ago, for instance, Michael Brdar was the Hitting Coordinator for the minor leagues, with Ed Lucas his assistant. Brdar was hired (by Bob Melvin actually) to be part of the major league staff in San Diego, and now works with the Tigers. Lucas served last year as Kyle Haines Assistant Farm Director, leaving just Jacob Cruz as the “hitting department” for the system.
But from a bottom-line perspective, yes, the team does bring in coaches and personnel from other organizations. Old friend Tommy Joseph was hired last year to be hitting coach for Eugene (introducing Wade Meckler to the overdrive bat in the process) after having been a Double-A coach in the Phillies’ system prior to that. Both Cruz and Lucas came into the org from Milwaukee (as has much of the pro scouting department), with Cruz having previously worked for the Pirates and D’backs. The Giants have also frequently dipped into the well of Indy ball, which is a fertile ground for innovation, made hires from international leagues, and brought in staff from private facilities both big (Driveline, for instance) and small (DSL hitting coach Rob Riggins essentially built his own lab in Texas to help local kids improve their game).
Long answer short: now is probably a good time for a fresh wave of incoming talent as there have been a few organizational losses recently. There has been a steady stream of personnel coming into the organization from elsewhere over the last few years, but as folks move up and out, new blood needs to come in and replace the old. The Giants under Zaidi have consistently shown an interest in bringing in staff from diverse perspectives (I know one strength coordinator in the system who used to be a financial analyst). It will be good to see that continue this year as they look to backfill a few of those open spots.
How much do major league struggles hurt a prospect’s status by illustrating long-term limitations? How much can they hinder development? For example, would we be talking about guys like Matos, Meckler, or even Schmitt differently if they never got to the big leagues and thus we never saw them struggle?
Evaluations are based on data, and the more data we have to draw conclusions the better. So yes, it matters that the quality of Matos’ and Meckler’s contact was generally low for major league hitters. It matters that Meckler posted an .000/.000/.000 slash line against breaking balls with a 60% whiff rate. It matters that Schmitt was swinging outside the zone more than 50% of the time over his first month in the majors. All of that feeds into evaluations that are being made about those players — and evaluations of major league hitters are as constant as waves coming into the shore. They are a day by day, game by game thing, even though they only provide meaning in the aggregate over a long haul.
Which is to say, if the Giants were discussing any of these players in a trade, their major league data would be part of the consideration for the team on the other side of the phone. But it isn’t to say that anybody thinks that Chapter 1 on a player’s career tells the entire story. Matos can get stronger. Meckler can take hacks off the slider machine for hours on end. Schmitt can refine his swing decisions. Players get better.
I use this example all the time — but it truly is one of the best examples in the world. In nearly 100 PA in his rookie year, Aaron Judge hit .179/.263/.345 and struck out 44% of the time. It was hard to watch, and Yankees’ fans who watched were loudly unimpressed by this highly touted 24-year-old. But it wasn’t the end of the story.
WILL any of the baby Giants find ways to cover the weaknesses they displayed in their first taste of MLB? This remains to be seen. Sometimes struggles hint at things that can’t be corrected, and sometimes they just show players the path to improvement, and there’s no real way to know which is which until we get to the end of the tale.
I do always caution prospect followers against over-rating players whom they haven’t seen fail yet (Rayner Arias!), and under-rating players who they have (Wade Meckler!). But our dumb brains will forever insist on believing that the last thing they saw is the truth forever more, and that tricks us into alls orts of over-reactions. Still, I come back to what I said at the top: evaluations are based on data, and the more data we have, the more informed those evaluations should be.
In your opinion, Roger, which player currently in the Seattle system is most likely to be in the Giants organization on Opening Day?
In between the time that Lyle sent in this joking question and my sitting down to half-jokingly respond to it, the Giants claimed Cooper Hummel on waivers. They claimed him from the Mets, but just a month ago he was in the employ of, naturally, the Mariners. That is, of course, on top of the Giants’ acquisitions of both former Mariners’ catcher Tom Murphy and former Mariners’ pitcher Robbie Ray this offseason.
It might have set me up for the perfect punchline had Donovan Walton returned to Seattle this off-season, rather than re-signing with the Giants. He could have given a whole new meaning to “Donnie Two-Times,” amirite?
Ironically, the Mariners actually did have a player who might have made for a perfect acquisition for the Giants — backup shortstop José Caballero, who was a 2 Win player in his rookie year, based largely on his outstanding glove. He might have provided the ideal insurance for Luciano’s rookie season. Sadly, the Rays, who find themselves quite shockingly thin at the position (thanks to the appalling behavior of Wander Franco, in addition to Taylor Walls’ injury), jumped at the opportunity to acquire Caballero, sending big bopper Luke Raley to Seattle in return.
But let me stay in that same sort of middle infield realm for an answer. I really liked what I saw of Ryan Bliss in the AFL, but as the Mariners just acquired him as the primary return for Paul Sewald last trade deadline, he’s probably a little too high profile for the sort of deals the M’s and Giants have perfected. Let’s tab instead Leo Rivas, a 26-year old middle infielder who has already worked his way through the Angels’ and Reds’ organizations prior to finding himself in the Mariners’ system. He walks a LOT, makes a decent amount of contact, plays all over the infield, and is a switch hitter. That seems like a reasonable fit.
In return, maybe we could send them Devin Sweet who perchance could be the victim when the Giants need to find a 40-man spot for recently (but not officially) signed, Jordan Hicks. Sweet, of course, was claimed off waivers from the A’s this winter, but up until last August he had spent his entire professional career with…..the Mariners, of course.
[EDITOR’S NOTE: The Giants had to go and ruin my punchline by DFA’ing Sweet a day early. Thanks a lot guys!]
And with that, let us close up the ol’ mailbag for this month. We’ll be back somewhere around Valentine’s Day with our next addition. But on Monday, it’s time to get started in earnest on the major project of the winter, There R Giants’ 2024 Top 50. We’ll see you with the “just missed” list Monday morning. Have a great weekend everybody!
Be on the lookout for a little KROG action to polish off your week. Should be in your inbox in about an hour.
Thanks for the Loupp reminder. I was super excited about him this time last year - hopefully he hits ST with a clean bill of health
I had hoped to set you up for the perfect kicker, but alas…