Wednesday, July 16, 2008

Brian Giles

There have been a number of comments concerning Brian Giles, so I thought he should be the topic of a post.

In my previous posting regarding our potential free agents and the trading deadline, I did not include Brian. I did not include him principally because he's not a free agent at the end of this season should the Club decide to exercise the option, so he automatically falls into the category of "less likely to be traded". Furthermore, at this stage we're just not terribly interested in trading him.

Before anyone gets upset at that statement, I will say that we would entertain trading anybody if we felt it would make us better - I don't believe in the concept of "untouchable". Every player has a threshold that would force our hand. Certain players may very well have a threshold that is completely unrealistic, so for all intents and purposes, they're untouchable, but nobody is truly untouchable. Anything can happen.

Many of the arguments in favor of trading Brian suggested that the chances are slim for the Padres in 2009. Given the current state of the NL West, our history the past four seasons, the continued maturity of our young players, and payroll flexibility this winter, nobody at the Padres is ready to acquiesce to such an outlook. Don't misunderstand me, we will always attempt to be prudent as we assess the balance of short-term and long-term, but I don't believe any team in baseball should be ready to give up on a season nine months before it even begins, especially with the parity in today's game.

The second reason, and the more important one, is very simply that Brian is the type of player we want our young position players to emulate. It's one thing for us or our coaches to try to explain our philosophy, but it's quite another, and much more powerful, to have a working example. I don't think I can emphasize this enough, especially considering the number of young position players currently on the team and expected to be on the team going forward.

In the current season Brian is hitting .301 with a .394 obp and a .433 slg. His .394 obp stands 6th in the NL, and it's the best on the Padres by a wide margin. Furthermore, Brian has walked more than he has struck out so far this year, which would mark the 10th consecutive season of that accomplishment. Though the slugging percentage is below his .512 career mark, it is the highest in his past three seasons and his ISO has been very steady over the past three years. In short, throughout his career Brian has personified the patience with power philosophy - posting quality at-bats in seemingly every plate appearance. He has been precisely what we want our young hitters to become.

In addition to his performance on the field (and in the outfield, for that matter), Brian also brings a number of intangibles to our team. First and foremost, Brian plays hard and plays through pain. Before banging his knee into the wall last season he had played in at least 158 games for three consecutive seasons. He wants to be on the field, and he wants to win. As many of you know, Brian is also a bit, how shall I say, irreverant in the clubhouse, which is incredibly helpful over the course of a long season. He loves playing the game, and it shows.

Brian may be the elder statesman among our position players at this point, but that leadership role could positively impact the Padres in 2008, 2009, and well beyond.

34 comments:

John McGillivray said...

I agree. You should keep Giles.

He gets on base around 9 out of every 10 games played.

You need more steady OBP per game players like him.

B.E. Earl said...

Giles might not be the monster he was from 1999-2002, but he is exactly the kind of guy I would want on my team.

Great post.

deathlydemise666 said...

Forget emulation,

Folks just need to realize that he's still an All Star away from Petco.

Just compare road splits 2005-2007
Matt Holliday -
854 AB, 127R, 240H, 54 2B, 7 3B, 30HR, 73BB, 126RBI, .281/.346/.466 BA/OBP/Slug

Brian Giles -
850 AB, 151R, 253H, 63 2B, 3 3B, 29HR, 150BB, .298/.404/.481 BA/OBP/Slug

And that trend has continued into 08.

Steve24 said...

Also, if I'm not mistaken there is a 3 million dollar kicker in his contract should he be traded.

That makes it all the more unlikely that a team would give up equal value to acquire Brian right now (or at least enough to match his current value at a lower salary with the Padres right now). So basically if the Padres were to move Brian they'd get back $0.75 on the dollar (my best guess since I'm not a front office guy).

I'm all for elder statesmen and guys who can set an example for younger players. Thats one reason the Tony Clark signing made sense (since well knew he wouldn't play as much as he did in Arizona and unfortunately without the ab's he's just not as effective this year). But that just seems like spin to me. In this case I don't see that as being the major factor in keeping him (especially with guys like Maddux/Clark/Hoffman currently on the team and veteran options that could be brought in, like a Tony Clark or L.Gonzalez with FLA and a much lesser price than Giles is currently making).

To me moving Brian would make more sense if the Padres had a minor leaguer in AAA and Brian was blocking his development at the major league level. At that time it just doesn't seem that is the case (with Headley & Hairston already getting ab's in the OF).

When you factor in -

a.) The lack of other major league ready options in the system to play in the OF this year and next

with

b.) the value you'd get in return (or lack thereof due mostly to the 3 mil kicker in his contract)

moving Giles just doesn't seem like a good move.

ArizonaPadreFan said...

In high school I was lucky enough to work out with Brian a few times in the off season when he was with the Indians as he would spend part of his winter with his dad, an assistant coach on our team. He has the same personality now as he did then and is fun to be around.

The problem with the existing team is other than BG and AG, the hitters have shown they can not make adjustments in a game built on making adjustments. Heck, even KG admitted to the press that he can not see the low and away breaking pitches. I think the padres should strongly consider contact gap hitters as they alter the baseball chemistry of the club (and no, I am not talking of weak contact hitters that have not panned out at the MLB level), and I would love to see a few guys who could hit the other way with authority instead of grounding out to the left side.

When your biggest threat behind Gonzo is second year Kouzmanoff or a non-full time Scott-Mendoza-Hairston, the order can easily be picked apart my opposing pitchers. Granted Kouz is starting to light it up as has Hairston, but if we were to add one bat that would invoke fear in opposing pitchers, the synergy will make all of the other batters better. Think of how drastically the padres improved last year with the acquisition of Bradley. In letting Cameron AND Bradley walk, and replacing two bats with a misplaced Edmonds, I am not totally sure how the FO could come to the conclusion that the rest of the lineup would perform.

BG is a great asset on and off the field, the club house, and getting on base, but we need to get some people that can hit him in more often instead of leaving him stranded at first with no outs.

On that note, I wonder if the dbacks and pads would consider moving Drew for Greene. Both are having off years, have similar defensive capabilities, and both would benefit from a change in scenery.

Alex said...

Giles is a nice player and is certainly someone that does not have to be traded. His defense is quite underrated, he works counts, and can be an above average RF'r offensively. The fact that he can serve as a leader and example for younger players (and the community) is just sweet, sweet icing on the cake.

However, as you stated earlier 4 x 0 does not equal 0 and you need to give up quality to get quality. Giles could be a very nice trade piece for a team like ATL (should they be buyers) who needs corner OF help in a bad way.

For all the great qualities Giles has, he is quite possibly at his peak value right now and it could be a good time to sell if the price is right for the following reasons:

1) He is having the best year he's had since 2005 and it is possible in the second half Giles will regress to his 06-07 levels. It's hard to imagine Giles doing much better in the future than he has done from April-July this year.
2) He is 37 now and will be 38 in 09. I know players age better in the modern game, but when you get into that age bracket you are playing with fire. His skills could diminish very quickly and the injury risks keep raising. Giles already missed 41 games last year due to injury and by your post and his latest injury it is clear injuries are a factor in his 08 campaign (making it all the more impressive).
3) His GB% has risen in each of past 5 years. His isoP has remained fairly constant the past 3 years, but his power rates are hardly celebratory, and the fact that he keeps pounding more and more balls into the ground is a bit telling as to his ability to drive the ball (although his LD% is at a 3 year high, but I have my own issues with the legitimacy of LD% and its subjectivity)
4) Salary. It goes up if he's traded, and the Pads could make the deal sweeter to teams by covering his trade bonus and remaining 08 salary, but clearing 9 million dollars for the off-season. Even if the return for Giles was not an 09 ML ready OF, the salary saved is enough to fill his production with a veteran if need be

Ultimately the offers are what matters, but I think what it comes down to is how the organization sees Giles future performance from here on out (July 16, 08 - October 09), his contributions in the clubhouse, and weigh those factors with the potential return.

If the Pads could turn Giles and a piece into a good (not necessarily great) OF'r close to (or already in, like Brandon Jones) the majors it would be really hard to say no to I feel.

It is my belief that trading Giles and cash (I am aware that his salary increases if traded) to a team could be a move that benefits the Padres chances for 09 and beyond, so a trade of Giles doesn't necessarily mean the pads would punt 09 (where they should have a legitimate chance).

Alex said...

On a side note (and Mr. DePodesta probably can't answer this, but maybe some of you readers can weigh in), how do the Padres view Mark Prior's future? I liked the gamble in the off-season, but obviously any time you gamble with Prior, the medical staff is more important in evaluation than anyone.

With the success Kerry Wood has had this year in the pen (and most notably, staying off the DL) is there a belief that maybe the pen is a good place for Prior to try?

Christopher said...

Paul:
I understand the rationale, but don't like it. While I know Adrian has talked about watching Giles and emulating him, if Giles served as such a great educational example, the lineup would be much stronger right now. Greene has been able to watch Giles for four years now, and he has regressed not progressed at the plate.
While providing a presence of "intangibles" sounds beneficial, nothing in the way the players have played over the last few years shows any of those intangibles statistically changing the team. Which is the problem I see when a player's talent is based on "intangibles": it can be used at any given moment when the qualitative analysis fails.
Giles at 36 has seen more and more DL time. His acquisition was to provide stability and pop to the order. Due to injury and time, he has provided neither. His numbers have decreased, making him better at the top of the order. His speed has declined, resulting in an inability to cover ground. Combined with a declining arm, even the possible contribution of a wily defensive presence has diminished.
I love reading this blog and seeing your statistical analysis. But I become disheartened when I read about a 36 year old outfielder, with declining power numbers being retained, even beyond this year, because of intangibles.
Finally, it pains me to write all of that, because Giles is a great person and more than a decent player. I guess, with hindsight being what it is, I am still upset the team didn't give Bay or Nady a chance, but remain adamant about a corner outfielder with intangibles.

Paul DePodesta said...

christopher,

I completely agree with most of what you said. The only thing is that Brian won't be here simply because of his intangibles. That .394 obp goes a long way, too. He's basically been the same player for the past three seasons, and that player is a pretty valuable one.

Also, I hear you on the influence on the players who have already been on the team for a while. However, I am more focused on guys like Headley, Hundley, and others yet to come (Venable, Antonelli, Huffman, Blanks, etc). These players are the first ones to have been developed with this particular philosophy at the minor league level, so having an example at the Major League level is important.

field39 said...

I am all in favor of getting better sooner rather than later, tomorrow works for me. How? The last I heard, Daddy Warbucks hasn't taken over, and there won't be a free agent spending spree in the off season. That leaves trades and the farm system. If you have ruled out trading any of your big guns, that leaves the farm. Do you expect this team to go from a 100 game loser, to a 90 games winner, based on moving players up from AA and AAA?

No More Lies said...

The very thought of holding on to Brian Giles is the kind of last place thinking for a last place team. It would be very stupid if the Padres do not trade him. But then again, look at the Padres record....2nd worst in all of baseball.
Brian Giles makes 10 million dollars and has 30 rbi! Think about that for a minute. Giles ranks 64th in mlb outfielders in rbi. That is deplorable and should be unacceptable. The very idea that you should hold onto Giles because he is Mr. Wacky in the clubhouse and he draws 2 walks a game is just plain stupid and last place thinking. By the way, I bet fans just flock to Petco to watch Giles draw 2 walks a game and strikeout looking in his 3rd at bat. Holding on to Brian Giles would be a huge mistake..but it would explain alot of how the Padres got to where they are now. In closing, the Padres are a last place team (and very boring) with Brian Giles, why not trade him for a player that at least one day MIGHT be exciting. Unless of course you think walks are exciting.

Alex said...

deathlydemise,

Your splits argument caught my eye and I know similar splits exist for Adrian Gonzalez and Khalil Greene (and plenty of others). When you look further into the splits it just adds to the mystery that is PETCO.

Logically you would assume PETCO's impact on hitters is strictly on turning potential HR's into outs (which is big) but that doesn't seem to be the effect it has had on Giles (with the exception of 2007).

The reason for Giles disparity in home/road splits is mainly a function of his BABIP at home and on the road. Since BABIP isn't affected at all by HR's, you wouldn't figure the BABIP discrepancies from PETCO and AWAY splits would be that great. Yet for Giles, it seems to be huge.

year home/away
08: .282/.367
07: .277/.296
06: .276/.267
05: .290/.336
04: .298/.295

In 04 and 06 the BABIPs were pretty close and as a result those happened to be years that Giles home/away splits were pretty equal.

In 05 there was a huge disparity in BABIP's, and that is the explanation for the splits. Even when you adjust for HR rate (I chose to use HR per BIP) the numbers are still skewed greatly because of the BABIP. We are seeing similar results to 05 in 2008, where Giles HR power is actually BETTER at PETCO, but his road splits are so drastic because the difference in the BABIP's are ridiculous.

07 was drastic strictly because of the difference in HR rates on home vs away, but this is the only year the HR rates drastically explained the disparity in production.


What does this all mean? I'm not sure exactly, but perhaps Giles splits are more random than anything. Obviously PETCO has an effect, but if the splits are BABIP driven, why would PETCO affect that stat??? Why would PETCO's spacious dimensions have a negative impact on balls in play??? Is it a confidence issue in the hitters? Do hitters face the sun more often in PETCO? Is there some weather factor? Are the mounds higher? Adrian Gonzalez also has huge BABIP home/away splits so Giles is not alone here. Padres teams have had better BABIP's on the road than home in every year but 05, although the results are a bit less drastic than some of Giles splits.

I don't know the answer to any of those questions, but the bottom line is that Giles splits disparity is more BABIP driven than anything (I would call 07 more of an aberration than anything given the other 3.6 seasons). Yet, there seems to be a clear connection in home/away BABIP's for the Padres since PETCO opened, so I'd like to know what about PETCO causes lower BABIP's. Any guesses/answers???

Nathan said...

trading Giles (if we were to trade him at all) seems like something that would be much more likely to happen in the offseason. Unless a team becomes completely desperate in their need for a veteran OFer in the next 2 weeks, it's more likely that there would be better value for him either in the offseason or during the season next year.

I'm not sure about that "and beyond" talk. I'm not very excited about making a habit of signing (re-signing, whatever) 39 year old free agents to multi-million dollar contracts. Giles is a good player who has had a very good career, but he's no Maddux or Piazza.

Paul DePodesta said...

no more lies,

RBI? Really? Really?

No More Lies said...

Uh yeah. Considering the Padres have scored 2 or fewer runs in 40 games this year....you had better look at RBI. 10 million dollars for 30 of them is not too good. That is what Brian Giles has managed to accumulate this year. Not too solid for the number 3 hitter in your line-up.

ThaCEO said...

RBI is a worthless statistic in my mind. What is not is OBI%(percentage of baserunners batted in)

Giles always seems to rank low in this category(or lower than one would expect)

of players w/ more than 100 ABs, Giles ranks 249th in this category, park effects or not, that is pathetic! and not the kind of guy I think you want batting 3rd.

As a leadoff hitter, I think Giles is fantastic. Although some may argue the Padres should trade his salary(get prospects!) and save the cash to sign a long term, middle of the order LF(like Pat Burrell), something the teams does not have, or I do not believe it has in the minors

Steve24 said...

I'd rather move Giles' salary (Mets or Braves) and use it along with the money cleared from Maddux (10 mil plus 3.5 mil from Barrett) coming off the books and then bring in Adam Dunn in the offseason.

He's a veteran (yet almost 10 years younger than Giles), has a very high career OBP and he's shown that he can most certainly hit the ball out of Petco. He's also a very good clubhouse guy (he's taken Jay Bruce under his wing).

You take a hit with his defense but the Pads need a legit CF anyway (Reggie Willits!!!! Deal them T.Clark for the stretch run, they could use him at DH and 1b and as a PH). He would hit fifth with Kouz fourth (maybe Headley down the road) and Adrian third. You get your new CF to lead off (or maybe resign Cameron if Mil doesn't pick up his option and you can't get Willits) and hit him 6th. Then sign and Orlando Hudson (his D with Kahlil up the middle would be one of the best in baseball and Adrian at 1b you've got great infield defense).

Lineup would look something like this -

1. R.Willits CF (high obp)
2. C.Headley LF (high obp)
3. Adrian 1b (high obp)
4. K.Kouz 3b (Kouz is Kouz)
5. A.Dunn RF (high obp)
6. O.Hudson 2b (great D)
7. K.Greene (low obp, great D)
8. J.Bard/Hundley

I'd like a stronger defensive C but I don't see any standout guys being available on the market (Pudge is a FA but he's just about done. He might be nice for the young pitchers to throw to in a platoon with Bard however).

The problem that I still see is moving Giles isn't as easy at it would seem, which again is why Giles won't be dealt.

You Know Me! said...

PAUL,

how long is it going to take this front office to realize that the fences need to be moved in? attendance will continue to plummet because fans win or lose want to see offense. not 1-2 games. im sick of balls dieing at the warning track where in any other park in baseball it would be a home run. This ball park sucks! period!

Steve24 said...

no more lies,

Hard to judge him on the rbi's there. I mean he has led off in 128 of his ab's this year. Can't fault him for the fact he's not in a run producing spot in the lineup all the time.

And with regards to the RBI thing... I read a long time ago about the Rico Brogna theory. I don't recall who came up with it but it basically made the argument that if you bat a player in the 4 hole, even a mediocre player like Rico Brogna, they can drive in 100 runs (which happened in '98 & '99 despite an ops of .765 and .790 respectively).

In case you don't want to do the math, Giles OPS this year is .827 meaning that if he hit forth, he'd probably be a good bet to drive in 100+ runs, just as Rico Brogna did.

Now looking deeper into the numbers, Giles has had a much, much higher obp than Brogna did in those years. Naturally the team recognized this and put him in a run scoring position in the lineup to take advantage of his strength.

The fact that he hasn't scored 100 runs the past few years says more about his teams play rather than his.

Steve24 said...

Paul,

I want to talk about the value of players by what position they play.

I think this would make an awesome post from a front office guy.

Conventional wisdom suggests that a player who plays ever day is more valuable than a guy who pitches say once ever five days and that relievers are less valuable than starting pitchers (and therefore position players as well).

But that doesn't always seem to be the case in the real world when you see trades made or discussed by front offices.

I understand most of the time these deals are about need. But being that this is a "fantasy" world these days and a lot of fans think in terms of a "fantasy sports" perspective, how do front office guys evaluate these deals?

An example from a few years ago - J.Barfield for Kouzmanoff. Obviously from the Padres point of view, Kouz is desirable since in the minors he was a high obp guy. But didn't Hairston play the harder position to find talent?

I'm also interested in your take on the Josh Hamilton for Edison Volquez deal as to who won? Good deal for both teams in terms of need? Or did one win because it's harder to find one type of player versus the other?

So, is there a general rule of thumb on how players are valued?

Seems to me guys like Billy Beane value pitchers over hitters usually.

And pitchers seem to be the difference makers in the post season (As an Indians fan I know this from the 90's and from last year when the Tribe got better pitching than the Yankees and won, then lost to Boston when the pitching tide turned).

So is it pitchers over hitters or vice versa?

Quality 2b or SS over 1b types?

Based on need only?

Combination of factors obviously, but some of your perspective and philosophies would be very interesting to hear.

Ryan said...

Paul,

Of course, RBI! You should move him for Jose Vidro. He's two years younger than Giles, and in 91 fewer PA's, Vidro has 38 RBI to Giles 30.

As part of the new winning team philosophy, I trust you can stomach Vidro's .215/.261/.310.

just-this-guy said...

The second reason, and the more important one, is very simply that Brian is the type of player we want our young position players to emulate.


Do we really need more players taking naked batting practice?

James said...

Giles should go if anyonew would take him. He isnt the same in the post Roids era

Brad K said...

There are a lot of things that I don't understand in this world, such as staying old for a team that is not contending this year, but could help another team this year. Furthermore, the market for OFs seems to be inclusive of Holliday, Bay, and Nady all of whom are very pricey, so why not capitalize on that market now, instead of maintaining the current roster?

I do understand that Brian Giles' ISO has remained relatively stable for himself (Alex talks about this quite well) and his OBP has remained exceptional, but as most get to Giles age, they do slow down. So, the ability to go from 1st to 3rd is lessened and that also should be considered. And what about his defense efficiency which while subjective, clearly shows that he is an inferior RF. With LF being blocked by Headley or potentially Kouz, he really is a luxury defensively that should be considered significantly in such an expansive park as Petco. And it is this luxury that makes Giles expendable for this year and next, in my opinion for the Padres.

Just out of curiosity, is a statistic like Baseball Prospectus' MORP used at all to evaluate his worth over the next 220 games versus offers that I assume have come to the Padres combined with the influx of talent next year? It has also been brought to light that Giles' numbers look much better on the road than at home. I would think that this should be exploited in a trade to another team rather than say that his production is only dampened in Petco as not only is he not a rental, but a more valuable player to build on for 2009 for another team, especially in LF.

I think all can agree that Brian Giles approach to the game of baseball and in particular his hitting is one to emulate; however, if his approach is so valuable to the young hitters that have not reached the majors yet, then why hasn't this approach been effectively instilled in the minors for 'key' players? Or is the new MLB paradigm one of which it is critical and necessary to have such a veteran on the 25 man roster because of the youth movement?

Thanks for being so open and thanks for taking the time to respond to some of us... and sorry about people talking about RBIs as the primary component for not liking Giles... but as ignorant as his comment was, the truth is that the current Padres offense isn't generating runs with their offense as they are the 2nd worst in the NL and they are biggest negative in WPA... so, he does have a rough point.

Tribe Fan said...

This kind of honesty and openness is incredible from a front office. I appreciate it.

Please see if you can get your pal Mark Shapiro to do a similar blog for those of us on the west coast of Tribe Nation.

Thanks again for doing this blog...it really is cool.

Aaron B said...

Mr. DePodesta, I've only been an occasional reader, but I've enjoyed your work thus far.
Anyway, I was wondering if you could provide some insight on a nagging thought I've had. I'm using an example from a rival team, but only because that's the team for which I cheer and because it's the most recent example that I could think of.
Last winter, the Giants offered Pedro Feliz arbitration, yet offered him only 2 years (I believe) when Feliz made it clear that he wanted to have some security (3+ years). I was wondering if teams do this often: offer one of their players arbitration, but then offer them in blatantly less than the player seeks duringcontract negotiations. If you can't comment on this, that's fine.
Thanks again for this venue.

Nathan said...

no more lies,

is the team not exciting because Brian Giles gets on base 4/10 times (does it really matter how someone gets on base? Isn't what really matters what happens to him once he gets on base?), or is the team not exciting because too many players on the team can't even get on base 3/10 times? Would you be happy if we were a last place team that was fun to watch? Don't you think if there were runners in scoring position when Brian Giles came to the plate, he'd have more RBI, and you'd have to resort back to the fact that he doesn't hit home runs anymore as a way to say he's unacceptable? Wouldn't it be better to say that Brian Giles and Adrian Gonzalez are the two brightest spots in a terrible first half, and that his ability to rebound from significant injury at his age to play so well bodes well to his ability to play at a high level for at least a couple more years?

I'm not saying we should or shouldn't trade Giles (I actually think we probably should), but a large part of the reason we can consider trading him is that his value is really high right now due to the fact that he's played so well so far this season, and he's one of the only players we have that if we do trade him we should be able to get significant value for him. But hey, we're a last place team with last place thinking, so we'll probably trade for players who can only draw walks and strike out a lot, right?

hector said...

To me this more like the Padres are playing hard to get (and I like the strategy)...

Giles has a lot of positives. But why not trade him a year too early than a year too late? He is starting to get injured more and his value could be at its peak.

I would like to see what type of numbers Hairston can put up the rest of the season.

I love Kulbacki, Hunter, Venable, etc. and the other kids that are coming up. Also, the team will benefit from the salary relief in 2009 to field a better team (and enough cap space to sign Lebron James in 2010 hahaha).

Besides, lets share in the love. Another team will surely need his Padre hug.

ssceec said...

Lifelong Pirates fan. Bucs did fine with the Giles trade, but he's still my favorite Pirate of the past 20 years.

That said, I wonder whether his model of patience and excellence at the plate is something that other players pick up on. Padres are lowest in NL in OBP, even though they aren't last in batting average. The park is a huge issue, but I'm not convinced Giles is a significant counterbalance for the rest of the team.

Seems like the limited possible return given Giles' contract structure and age, his continued value as a hitter, and the possibility that he's content to stay where he is, are key factors in keeping him in SD.

steve24 talked about the clubhouse factor as spin. I'm miles away from any awareness of clubhouse factors, but if they aren't used as spin, it seems they might as well be.

Jason said...

"RBI? Really? Really?"

Hilarious. Almost enough to make you think paul can pronounce "sabermetrics"!

no more lies, RBI are a horrible stat that are largely reflective of the number of baserunners that get on in front of a player, as well as that players' power and contact rates. I shouldn't say it is a horrible stat, because it has some uses. But it is definitely prone to having outliers that area product not of a player's talent, but of the talent of the guys in front of him (for better or for worse).

John Ottavio said...

no more lies

$10mill....really not that much, let's be honest. i mean, it may seem like a bit, but for a .300 hitter with great OBP it's definitely not too bad.


lets also remember, Carlos Silva is making $11mill per year

Steve24 said...

Paul,

Any comments on this blurb today in Buster Olney's blog today?

• The Padres hold a $9 million option on right fielder Brian Giles for 2009 and they could keep the right fielder, who is hitting .301 with a .397 on-base percentage -- or they could swap him to a contender, which could keep the former All-Star for a relatively modest one-year obligation of $11 million for next year (his salary will escalate to $11 million in 2009 if he gets traded). The Mets and Padres have had some contact about a possible deal.

http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=3503274&name=olney_buster

Josh said...

I think all can agree that Brian Giles approach to the game of baseball and in particular his hitting is one to emulate; however, if his approach is so valuable to the young hitters that have not reached the majors yet, then why hasn't this approach been effectively instilled in the minors for 'key' players?

You know, I think too many people forget that the majority of players that have come out of the minors recently were not picked during the Sandy era. You can walk in with a new philosophy and push it all you want, but if the players you inherit (at the bigs as well as in our old shallow farm)don't have the talent or mentality to be patiently aggressive; it's not going to happen. I'm pretty sure the organization is aware of this fact and that's one reason why you see a team that doesn't appear to fit the philosophy of what the brass preaches. You can only do so much with what you've inherited from the previous management. The answer is to go out and find the players with the skillset that will mesh with your philosophy. Now the patiently aggressive player is desirable everywhere, so they're just not out there on the free agent market in large numbers. You have to get them from the draft, and in baseball terms, these guys haven't had enough drafts yet to stock the system with their kind of players. It's happening though, close even. It just doesn't occur overnight like some seem to want.

Kyle - Driveline Mechanics said...

Paul,

How you put up with someone posting about your best hitter's RBI totals in your blog is beyond me, but good for you.

Since you probably don't want to bother with it:

-Moving in fences to create more offense does not bring in people. Winning does. In fact, moving in the fences might make them lose more considering the FB tendencies of Peavy, Maddux, and Young.
-RBI are worthless.
-Intangibles at the MLB level may mean nothing, but Brian Giles is one of the 25 best hitters of his generation. Period. Full stop. If he can impart his wisdom on young hitters coming up, it is worth it. Oh, by the way, his CURRENT .400 OBP is pretty good, too. Life = OBP, and OBP = Life. Remember that.
-$9 million for someone who is going to post an OBP-heavy 800-850 OPS is a bargain. Trading him kicks in pay accelerators, making him less exciting as bait, and he has an NTC and obviously loves San Diego.

Keep up the good work, Paul.