SB Nation User Blog: Pants Man

OT: All in all, not a bad year

Pants Man — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 03:43:28 -0000

It's been seven months since I've posted here, but since I've apparently been nominated for vice president, I figure now is as good a time as any to jump back into the fray. I've been carefully crafting some clever Bocock jokes lately, but before we get to that, please indulge me a little story...

As a season ticket holder who usually attends about 30 games a year, I was happy last March when I was able to sell all of my tickets for a midweek August series against the Nationals. Those are the kind of tickets that you often end up having to eat. Of course, as August approached, the Nationals series started to look like one that might be pretty exciting. I found myself wishing that I still had some of those tickets, but it was just as well. My wife was seven and a half months pregnant and I had a lot of work to do to prepare for our first child.

On the afternoon of Friday, August 3rd, my wife called me at work and told me that she had impulsively hopped on a bus to Union Square during her lunch break and purchased two tickets for Monday's game from the half-priced theater tickets booth. God bless that woman. "They had Tuesday's game for sale as well," she told me, "but we have our labor and delivery class that night." Barry Bonds had gone a week without hitting a home run, the buzz had died down a bit, and remarkably, she was able to get two upper deck seats behind home plate for $10 apiece. When Barry hit #755 on Saturday, her purchase looked even more brilliant, and we were eagerly looking forward to Monday's game. My only concern was that my wife might have trouble making it to Row 15 (and back down to the bathrooms several times) after a day of work.

As it turned out, this didn't up being our biggest concern. As I was getting ready to leave my office on Monday evening, I had just posted one last comment about Kevin Frandsen when the phone rang. It was my wife. "I was taking a nap in my friend's car, and I think my water just broke," she said. I sped to her office by the ballpark, she gave her tickets to her friend (nothing says "sorry my water broke in your car" like Giants tickets), and we headed to Seton Medical Center. Twenty hours later, Clark was born, 5 1/2 weeks early but healthy and nearly six pounds. My wife named Clark after her godparents; I quickly agreed to the name for other reasons.

A few hours later, I ran home to pack an overnight bag, catching Barry's first two at-bats on television. When I got back to the hospital, my exhausted wife was watching the game with her parents. "He's locked in," I told her as he approached the plate. "If they pitch to him, Clark's birthday is going to be a very historic day." Sure enough, a few minutes later, Barry crushed one. My mother-in-law alertly snapped this photo:

No, wise guys, she wasn't weeping for the loss of baseball's innocence. It had been a grueling day physically and emotionally, and she hadn't slept in nearly 40 hours. The emotional events at the ballpark were just a little too much for her to handle at that moment. The previous night we had wondered if Clark's early arrival might cause us to miss #756. But as it turns out, his early arrival was the only reason we were able to see it on television. We would have still been at our labor and delivery class otherwise. (Apparently my wife was qualified to give birth despite her lack of formal training.)

Here is what the home run (well, actually, this was a replay a few minutes later) looked like from our perspective:

Given his historic birthday, we figured we should drag Clark out to the ballpark a little ahead of schedule in honor of Barry's last game as a Giant. Clark lasted five innings; almost as long as Barry did:

Clark is doing great now. He's happy, healthy, and ready for Opening Day. And he's expressing a healthy skepticism towards the concept of giant stuffed rats that should serve him well later in life:

He's sleeping through the night now, so I finally have the time and energy to return to McCovey Chronicles and check in on the team. So, what's been going on? Someone please give me a rundown on all the young hitters Sabean was able to bring in over the winter. And is it true that Randy Messenger was sent down?

Villalona Watch!

Pants Man — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 19:12:51 -0000

This from Kevin Goldstein in today's BP (subscription required), wrapping up his review of players who will make their professional debuts in short-season ball:

Saving the best for last, Villalona was the top talent in the Dominican last year, finally signing with the Giants for $2.1 million, or more than the team gave Tim Lincecum as the tenth overall selection in the draft. His hitting skills are remarkably advanced for a person born in 1990, and he has the size and raw power of a college slugger. The only concern is that since he's already six-foot-two and well over two hundred pounds, he'll grow off of third base, but we'll get a sense of just how far he's come since signing when he makes his pro debut in the Arizona League before his 17th birthday.

Must try to be patient and lower immediate expectations... must try to be patient and lower immediate expectations... must try to... ah, screw it! It's on!

Poll

At what age will Angel Villalona win his first National League MVP award?

17

36 votes

18

38 votes

74 votes | Poll has closed

How much money do we plan to save?

Pants Man — Sat, 09 Jun 2007 06:45:37 -0000

The general consensus here (and elsewhere) seems to be that the Giants went cheap with their fifth and sixth selections: Williams at #43 and Culberson at #51. The way the narrative goes, there's not much money left in the budget since they're going to be paying 4 of the first 32 picks of the draft. So, they drafted players they wouldn't have considered until much later under normal circumstances, figuring that they will happiily accept much less money than their draft slot warrants.

Everything about this narrative seemed reasonable to me, until I looked up the signing bonuses for the top 100 picks in 2005 and 2006 in Baseball America. I only found a few examples of teams clearly saving over $100,000 with a signing.

The Cubs saved about $150K in the first round last year, while the White Sox saved about $150K in the second round last year.

$1.6M, Kiker, TEX
$1.475M, Colvin, CHC
$1.7M, Snider, TOR
500K, Fontaine, ATL
330K, Long, CWS
480K, Jay, STL

The D-backs saved a few bucks on Dallas Buck at #86 (maybe $180K), but injury concerns that became clearer after the draft may have pushed his salary down. And that's all I could find for 2006.

2005? Wade Townsend to Tampa Bay at #8 was a 500-700K bargain. There were some odd issues with Townsend, but I think the D-Rays knew what they were doing. This is clearly the biggest price break of the last two years. The Marlins saved about $200K at #22, the D-backs saved about $150K at #49, and the Astros saved about $140K at #89.

By my estimation, that's one pick in two years who saved their team more than $200K, and he was picked in the top ten. Is there any reason to believe that the Giants are going to save any more money than this with these two picks? That they are somehow taking signability to a whole new level? If not, the likely choices are a) the Giants really wanted these players and were worried they wouldn't be available in the fifth round, or b) there were over a hundred players on their board that they preferred over Williams and Culberson, but they overlooked all of them in an effort to save $200-300K total. I honestly don't know which of these scenarios is accurate or how valuable these players will turn out to be; I was just surprised to learn that we're talking about chump change in an organization's budget here.

(Also, I realize that the Giants could have drafted players that were considered difficult signs with these picks, and either paid well over slot or lowballed them to the point where they wouldn't sign. However, when people say the Giants went "cheap" with those two picks, I am assuming that they mean they were planning to pay under slot, not simply that they were avoiding players who would require more than slot. Of course, nothing would save more money than drafting an unsignable player, but that clearly wasn't the case here.)

Anyway, I'm just throwing this out there for Brute, Doc, and Steve and the rest of you out there who understand amateur baseball a lot more than I do? Am I missing something, or is there not much money to be saved by going "cheap" once you get past the first ten picks or so?

Two free tickets to tonight's game

Pants Man — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 22:51:30 -0000

Exhibition tickets: the hidden tax on season tickets. You can't give 'em away.

Or can you?

I've got two free tickets in VR314 Row 3... if you're interested I can leave them at Will Call in your name this evening.

Open Misdirected Anger Thread

Pants Man — Wed, 28 Mar 2007 00:40:43 -0000

Back in August, Grant left on his honeymoon and we all went Lord Of The Files on him. The site briefly descended into an orgy of profanity, personal attacks, and bannings. I don't recall the details, but at one point I believe Josh From Hollywood tore a newbie's head clean off of his neck and posted it on a stake. It got ugly.

Irwin was the first to step up and call for civility (or, failing that, improved punctuation). A few days later Grant himself violated his pre-nup by posting from his honeymoon. There were many useful sentiments in these two diaries, but four words from Grant's diary ("don't be a weenie") tell you all you need to know.

Unfortunately, personal attacks appear to be on the rise again, and the signal-to-noise ratio of the site is suffering because of it. One recent diary alone featured implications that posters' arguments were either a "bullshit position" or a "huge pile of dog doo doo." They were "idiotic" and the "worst kind of prejudice" and displayed the same logic as the KKK. Posters were cordially invited to "shut the f up" and "have a couple of Coronas and some hemlock." One poster idly fantasized about pointing a gun in another poster's direction. Various posters were referred to as either a "wet fart", a puppy-strangler sympathizer, a poo-flinging monkey, or a "tardbox." (Actually, a poster wasn't referred to as a "tardbox"... Doug Gottlieb was. This is entirely fine with me. Plus, I do enjoy the word "tardbox.") One poster was described as "clinically insane" and "off his meds." (Oops, I did that. Sorry, E.) I think most of us will agree that it was all a little much.

These are anxious days for a Giants fan. The team's creaky old lineup is a few hamstring pulls away from disaster, and it's been twenty years since Stephen King wrote anything as terrifying as the current incarnation of the Giants bullpen. Ideally we would point our angst not at each other but at the bullpen itself. Or at the Dodgers. Or Doug Gottlieb. But I realize that this might not be enough, so I'm willing to take one for the team in the name of sanity and civility.

Feel free to use this thread to unload any pent up personal attacks on me. Call me a hemlock-slinging tardbox, or a poo-strangling puppy fart. I promise not to take it personally, and hopefully we'll all be better off for it.

In order to help get the ball rolling, I'll even provide a discussion question:

"What's the matter with Pants Man?"

Contracts for S.F. Free Agents

Pants Man — Tue, 09 Jan 2007 00:52:49 -0000

I was well aware that Bonds's contract wasn't completed yet, but was surprised to learn today that none of the Giants free agents contracts have been completed yet. That's right... the Giants have signed zero free agents so far this winter. The culprit seems to be new language that Bobby Evans has thrown into all contracts this season. Agents no likey.

The Barry Bloom article on the subject is at the Giants website:
http://sanfrancisco.giants.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20070108&content_id=1775232&a mp;vkey=news_sf&fext=.jsp&c_id=sf

Bonds deal to include deferred money

Pants Man — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 01:58:59 -0000

I expected this to be the case, but I'm disappointed nonetheless. Sabean's major triumph of the offseason (not signing any deals worth over $20M in this winter of madness) is diluted by the fact that all of his multi-year deals are backloaded to some extent, and we're going to pay Barry even more than the $20M he's already due to receive over 2008-2001. I am neither a fan of Sabean's shaking, nor a fan of his baking.

The good news, there will be more flexibility to add players in 2007... preferably ones that don't come with crippling backloaded contracts.

From AP:

Barry Bonds is willing to wait for a significant portion of his paycheck until after he's done playing for the San Francisco Giants.

"That was very important to us to arrive at a deal. It was almost the only way we could arrive at a deal," Giants general manager Brian Sabean said Monday without officially announcing Bonds' new contract.

"There was definite give and take. If we hadn't been able to shake and bake the financial part of this we wouldn't have been able to go forward."

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/12/11/sports/s170615S81.DTL

40-Man roster is full

Pants Man — Fri, 08 Dec 2006 22:21:17 -0000

The Giants' website lists 38 players as being currently on the 40-man roster... the addition (or reappearance) of Bonds and Kline will bring that number to 40. If a Zito or a Klesko or a Riske is going to be added, someone is going to have to be voted off the island. (I don't think you can use the 60-day DL in the offseason... can you?)

The good news, if you could call it that: we have a fair amount of dead weight on our roster.

There are aging players with career-threatening injuries (Matheny, Worrell).

There are veterans we could trade (Benitez, Sweeney).

There are AAAA hitters who seem to be getting squeezed from the active roster (Niekro, Ellison).

There are live-armed AAA pitchers who we may be able to sneak through waivers given their significant injuries (Valdez, Threets).

There are players who are spinning their wheels and giving off an "organizational guy" vibe (Ortmeier, Knoedler, Munter).

There are the "is this guy possibly going to be ready to contribute at the big league level before he runs out of options?" guys (Ishikawa, Acosta).

And then there's Maude.

We may only need to waive one or two of these guys, but I think we should be prepared to waive more should we get the chance to grab some interesting names that other teams are forced to waive this winter.

I have included only the most likely candidates for DFA in this poll for simplicity's sake, and because it's difficult to rationally consider the other options when you're given the choice of dumping Benitez.

Poll

If the Giants sign another free agent, who should they drop from the 40-man roster?

Ortmeier

10 votes

Acosta

14 votes

Threets

7 votes

Ellison

33 votes

Knoedler

23 votes

Munter

14 votes

101 votes | Poll has closed

Gwen Knapp: deeply flawed, widely misguided

Pants Man — Mon, 04 Dec 2006 10:35:23 -0000

I really don't get too worked up about voting for postseason awards or the Hall Of Fame. I appreciate a good subjective barstool debate topic as much as the next guy, but as much as I love the game, I can't get too excited about a sportswriter's ballot. Some people think, "Justin Morneau was only the third best player on his own team! This is an outrage!" I think, "Hmmm... Justin Morneau was only the third best player on his own team. What's for dinner?"

Given my lack of enthusiasm for this particular form of democracy, and my crippling steroid fatigue, I don't know why I decided to read Gwen Knapp's column about her Hall of Fame ballot this evening. But I did. And, boy, is it a doozy.

Early in the column, Knapp discusses the Mark McGwire controversy in a fair and rational manner that gives me faith in the ability of sportswriters to look at a player objectively when marking a Hall of Fame ballot:

McGwire's debut on the ballot brings a host of torturous questions. Did his refusal to talk about the past on Capitol Hill constitute an admission of steroid use? Is it somehow nobler to throw a spitter than it is to juice? Should McGwire be rejected for doing something that so many others did, including pitchers who tried to contain him? How many other users will slip into Cooperstown simply because Congress left them alone?

These are difficult questions that require a great deal of thought, and answering them won't be easy. Oh, wait...

In this corner, the decision is easy. I can't honor a man for a past that he refused to discuss under oath.

Okay, some of you may find this maddening, but I just find it hysterical. Particularly the idea that this was an "easy" decision, as if a bizarre and arbitrary statement such as "I can't honor a man for a past that he refused to discuss under oath" is a time-honored method of player evaluation that has served sportswriters for generations. Ah, yes, I remember the last words Leonard Koppett ever said to me: "You've got to look at the whole package, Gwen. How did he perform in the field? How did he perform under pressure? Most importantly... how did he perform under oath?"

I'm still waiting for the column where Knapp blasts her colleagues Williams and Fainaru-Wada: "Many of my fellow journalists have praised these men for their thorough investigative work regarding the BALCO scandal, but I can't honor men for a past that they refused to discuss under oath..."

Steroids will keep Gwen Knapp from voting for a man who hit 583 home runs, including 70 in one season. I disagree, but it's her opinion, and it appears to be the majority opinion. This doesn't bother me, as long as she is consistent and doesn't do something insane like vote for an admitted steroid user who hit only 239 home runs in an uneven career that was followed by cocaine and alcohol abuse, prison, and a fatal drug-induced heart attack.

The late Ken Caminiti appears on the ballot for the first time this year, along with the record-breaking Bash Brothers, Mark McGwire and Jose Canseco. Only one of the three made real history.

In 2002, six years after he was named the National League's MVP, Caminiti became the first prominent major-leaguer to admit that he had used steroids. He died two years later, at age 41, when a cocktail of drugs sent his already damaged heart into arrest. One of the last pictures of Caminiti showed him handcuffed and wearing an orange jumpsuit, preparing to check out of a Houston jail, where he spent 25 days for using cocaine and violating his probation in an earlier drug-possession case.

For me, none of that rules him out as a candidate.

I couldn't agree more, Gwen. I believe that steroids should not be a litmus test in an era of rampant drug usage. And anything that happened to Caminiti outside of baseball after his retirement is obviously irrelevant. I think you and I would agree that what matters is what he did as a player...

Nor do I care that he hit only .272 with 239 home runs in his career.

Hmmm. Of course not. Hall of Fame voting shouldn't be cluttered by insignificant little facts such as how a player performed on the baseball field.

Oh, and if you're scoring at home...

Caminiti admitting his steroid use: "real history"

Canseco admitting his steroid use: not "real history"

McGwire evading questions about steroids while testifying before Congress: not "real history"

Canseco achieving the first 40/40 season, hitting 462 home runs and winning two world titles, rookie of the year and an MVP award: not "real history"

McGwire's 70-home-run season... well, you get the picture.

I'll admit that I'm a little old school on this issue, as I still believe that there's a difference between "historical acts" and "acts that I find morally admirable." I learned this the hard way in junior high, when my "Why Stalin Was Not A Historical Figure" essay only got a C-.

Anyway, Gwen Knapp is going to vote for Ken Caminiti because of his honesty concerning his steroid use, which some believe was a turning point in how we view steroids. In a way, I guess you could say Caminiti changed the game...

But I'm not voting for Caminiti because he changed the game.

I'm trying to work with you here, Gwen. I really am. In a column full of reasons not to vote for Caminiti, you're going to have to give me at least one "I'm voting for Caminiti because..." sentence.

I'm voting for Caminiti because of who he was, a deeply flawed, widely beloved man.

I absolutely adore this sentence. The problem with McGwire is not the flaw in his personality that caused him to take steroids or the one that caused him to stonewall Congress. It's that these flaws didn't run deep enough. It's tough to find just the right combination on this year's ballot. Albert Belle? Deeply flawed, but not quite beloved enough. Now, Dale Murphy is beloved, but he just doesn't have any deep flaws that I know about. If only he were a pedophile or something.

So, the clearly underqualified Ken Caminiti will receive one Hall of Fame vote this year. (Well, two votes. It would appear that Knapp got this brilliant idea from Tom Verducci, whose reasoning is just as sound, I would guess, and is in no way influenced by the fact that he was the reporter who broke the story about Caminiti's steroid use in the first place.) It's not a big deal, and he probably won't be the worst candidate to receive votes this time around.

But what bothers me is that it's a vote that screams "THIS VOTE IS ABOUT ME! GWEN KNAPP! OVER HERE! LOOK AT ME!" This is nothing new, as evidenced by the fact that five percent of the voters didn't vote for Babe Ruth or Willie Mays when they were elected to the Hall of Fame. Any hack can humbly fill out a ballot based on rational analysis, but an arrogantly misguided ballot, now... that might generate some press coverage!

You write columns for a major metropolitan newspaper, Gwen, so you already have the kind of soapbox that every shrieking talk radio caller in this country dreams about. So use it as such. The column is about you, so keep giving us your unique perspective on the sports world. Give us a "Caminiti Good/McGwire Bad" column every week for a year if that's what burns inside of you.

Your Hall of Fame ballot, however, isn't about you. So try to take a step back and take it seriously.

40-man Shuffling

Pants Man — Sat, 14 Oct 2006 01:22:52 -0000

From mlb.com's transaction wire...

San Francisco Giants
Sent LHP Jesus Reina and IF Tomas De La Rosa outright to Triple-A Fresno.

Okay by me. I hope Reina clears waivers and we get to keep an eye on him for another year, but we should be able to find a better use for the roster spot. I wouldn't mind if Munter, Acosta, Knoedler, and Ortmeier were outrighted as well.