SB Nation User Blog: thehavenot

The Prediction Thread

thehavenot — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 01:45:05 -0000

Dear Diary,

Giants' baseball hasn't been that fun, lately. I mean, I still really like baseball and I still really like the Giants, but I don't like Giants' baseball. Oh there's some aspects of Giants' baseball that I like. Lincecum, for some reason. Matt Cain and Jonathan Sanchez too. Wilson, Hinshaw, Romo and Matos. Bowker and Lewis (even with Bowker's horrible July). Those guys represent various shades of flash that briefly illuminate the darkness.

But overall, it hasn't been fun. We haven't had cable for a while and usually I would be going crazy if I missed this many games. I love watching baseball. But this season, I have been able to handle it. I think it has to do with the enormous suck of the Giants.

So, I just thought it'd be nice to escape into alternate realities that will likely never come to pass.

Predictions are fun. It is fun to go back and see the ridiculousness that is flung around. Good examples of this are the community projections of various Giants' players. So here, any and all predictions are fair game.

How many losses for the Giants in '08? '09? '37? Will Barry ever play again? When will Bumgarner be up? How many Cy Youngs for Lincecum?

They don't even have to be baseball related. Obama or McCain? Third party darkhorse? Who wins the gold in fencing? How many mutations for the Olympic rowing teams from Beijing waters?

Since I started this thread, I should give some predictions myself. So.

-Bowker will hit more than 20 homeruns this year (risky, this one, what with his recent struggles)

-Freddie Lewis will never hit more than 20 homeruns (not so risky, this one)

-Freddie Lewis will have one season with an OBP over .400

-Bumgarner up in 2010, which is the same year the Giants finally have a good manager (I'm not up to predicting who)

-The next good Giants team in 2010.

-Villalona up in 2012.

-Fairley never makes it to the majors :(

-The Red Sox win the world series again this year :(

-The Rays win the world series next year

-Giants get the 3rd pick in the draft next year.

-Sandoval becomes a regular next year and wins rookie of the year (my bold pick)

-Molina ends up falling off a cliff, production-wise, and gets a bad attitude to boot, putting him squarely in Sabean's dog-house. This leads to a dump-him move ala Livan, Benitez, Morris, Pierzynski, etc.

-Matt Cain wins more than 10 games next year.

-Sanchez gets roughed up the next couple of starts and the Giants finally shut him down for the year.

-Correia finishes the year making gradual strides and then has a good year next year.

-Henry Sosa has a healthy season next year.

-thehavenot makes way too many predictions and most people don't bother to try and scroll down to the reply buttons, so no one replies.

So those are mine. They are all mostly serious. I probably could come up with some more. But I should save some for later. Plus less reading of mine means more predicting by you! Let's see what your inner eight-ball says about the future!

The Fate of Humanity Hangs in the Balance!

thehavenot — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 21:28:34 -0000

The Fate of Humanity Hangs in the Balance!

Guido (Charleston, WV): Will the Dodgers be dumb enough to trade Kemp? Hu? LaRoche?
Joe Sheehan: I think this is a battle for the soul of the franchise. If Ned Colletti makes another Dioner Navarro deal with one of those guys, I think the Dodgers lose Logan White within the year, and it gets very dark and cold up from Sunset Blvd. If Colletti doesn't do that, perhaps White gets elevated into the GM's chair, and the Dodgers become the Red Sox West in three years.

So what will it be? Doom and gloom for the Dodgers (hopefully via a LaRoche trade to the Giants)? or Red Sox west? Come on Ned, don't let us down!

Trade speculation season must be starting

thehavenot — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 19:03:35 -0000

Dear Diary,

It appears that trade speculation season has officially opened. There's about a month and a half left until the deadline but it's always fun to talk about possible trades. I usually don't put my two cents into the ring (crossed metaphors FTW), mostly because I feel it's futile. 99% of all trade speculation ends up not coming to fruition and 90% is no where near the ballpark and 75% is simply rediculous. Not that that stops us.

However, I participate despite the fact that I don't contribute. I usually read the various rumors and then let my imagination run wild. It's fun; much funner than the off-season simply because of the fact that the speculation is condensed into about a month or so.

This is all just a long-winded lead-up to my first ever contribution to trade speculation.

Here it is. The Giants should make a trade with the Texas Rangers. The Rangers need pitching. Badly. The Giants need young position players who are either in the Majors or close to the Majors. Badly.

I have no idea if the Rangers consider themselves contenders or buyers or whatnot. But here's the beauty of the situation. It doesn't matter. We can give them a pitcher that can help them not only this year but also in years to come. And they can return the favor in the form of a hitter.

So I propose a trade centered around Matt Cain and Chris Davis. It's looking like Chris Davis will be up in the majors this year. He's done nothing but hit at every level. He's probably a first baseman now, but, hey, we need one of those. Matt Cain, of course, is extremely valuable. Probably more valuable than Davis (though, I am not very good at determining the trade value of players). So the Giants could probably ask for something else too. But Davis would be the centerpiece.

So, how'd I do? I've never done this before. Does that make sense? Are you scoffing at the notion just because you love Matt Cain? Well, I love Matt Cain too. But we need us some impact bats for cheap and Cain/Lincecum/maybe Sanchez is really the only way to get that in the next couple of years. And one thing we have is pitching.

An Apology to Natto RE: Durham

thehavenot — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 02:06:44 -0000

Dear Natto,

I have, as has many here at the MCC, been using Ray Durham as the butt of some of our many jokes and quips. It's the nature of the MCC. Someone sucks, even for a short period, and we turn on him. We constantly remind everyone else that we hate the player in question when they get into the dog house.

So when a player sucks for an entire season, such as Ray, he's got no chance. Even when he is doing well, we can not stop the abuse. It has been ingrained into us.

I usually resist such things when they are unwarranted (such as for Tyler Walker and Vinnie Chulk). But Ray was bad for so long that I couldn't help myself.

Well, now I must man up and face the music. Ray Durham does not suck any more. I don't know how it happened but Ray Durham is hitting again. He's got nearly a .300 batting average and nearly a .400 OBP in June.

I am quite happy to say sorry for ragging on your boy. However it happened, it's definitely a good thing. If they trade him. If they decide to keep him because of his production I will be annoyed.

I consider crow to be a delicacy in this case. I have indeed sucked it. But I am no longer a Durham-hater.

Some Random Zito (crap)

thehavenot — Sat, 17 May 2008 23:06:14 -0000

Dear Diary,

I have many different thoughts bouncing around my head. None of them warrant a diary (yes, diary. You heard me SB Nation!) by themselves (with the possible exception of the first one). So this diary is me having diarrhea of the brain.

-This year, the Giants have been very aggressive in regards to promoting prospects. The thing is, it's been selective. Nate, for instance, is still in AAA because of his option. Meanwhile, Bowker and Burriss are up in the show when they could still use some time in the minors. Then there's Sadler and Hinshaw. Bocock was up and when he went back down, it was to AAA. Denker was quickly promoted to AAA and Sandoval will likely skip AA. The thing is, there seems to be a legitimate and sound reason for every move, excepting Bocock. Yes, you can criticize management for creating the situation which has necessitated this (particularly Bocock and Burriss), but the treatment of the prospects has been fairly encouraging. It points to a true focus on development from within.

-Speaking of prospects, I love John Bowker. He looks good. I wish he would take some more walks. His strikeout to walk ratio is horrible. But he looks like a hitter up there. He's even battled through a slump. He's up in my pantheon of favorite prospects with Denker, Schierholtz, Sandoval and Bond.

-Apparently Jason Giambi wears a gold thong as a slump breaker. But that's not all. He apparently has shared it with Johnny Damon and Derek Jeter. Gah

-Why is nobody in the mainstream media talking about our boy Lincecum? Is it just because the Giants are officially the last team in major league baseball. Post-Bonds, horrible awesome, bad record. They are very forgettable. Aside from us, nobody cares about the Giants at all. In most quarters, the Giants are a joke. But why would that mean everybody in the mainstream media ignore such a phenomenal talent just because of the team he is on?

-F.P. Santangelo is an idiot and I wish he would stop being part of KNBR broadcasts.

-Is it just me or is 70 million over 6 years very reasonable for Hanley Ramirez?

-New Jonathan again last night. Stick around buddy.

-Petey's announcement makes me think about how much I hate the commissioner of baseball. Gary Radnich was talking about how Bud was thinking about community service for the owners of the Giants and some others. That guy....words fail me. He continues to deflect blame everywhere except for himself. It also seems obvious that the Giants are a target not just because of Barry Bonds but also because they built their own ballpark. Bud hated this. The owner's representative wanted publicly funded ballparks everywhere and with the privately funded phone park, there was precedent for another means for new ballparks.

-Is it arrogant of me to think that some random thoughts of mine deserve their own diary? Or does the fact that I think no one will care cancel that out?

My Toe: a metaphor for Rich Aurilia

thehavenot — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 06:29:57 -0000

Dear Diary,

As I'm sure no one noticed, I was not around here for a week. The reason is this. I got into a minor motorcycle accident. Well, it was minor for my bike and for the car. It was not so minor for my left big toe. My left foot smacked into the bumper of a car and as soon as it did I knew something was broken. I thought it was my whole foot but it turns out that it was just my big toe. Here's the problem, and the reason I stayed nearly a week in the hospital, the big toe has four blood vessels in it and I severed three of them in the crash. I also got this huge laceration on my foot. So now my toe is a couple shades of dark purple and there's a big open gash in my foot. And, of course, totally useless. It's hindering, actually.

Now my toe wasn't always useless. In fact, my toe used to be quite useful. It was very helpful in my walking and stuff. Unfortunately, it will never return to its former useful self. Therefore, even though I am very invested in my left big toe, I feel that it is better if it is removed. Or, at least, this is how the doctors feel. I tend to agree.

I actually have a picture of my toe in all of its useless glory. Some might not appreciate it, so this couldn't be a visual metaphor. However, imagine my perfectly good, useful toe in complete health. This is Rich Aurilia circa 1999-200.....let's say 06. Then imagine my toe purpled, a little crooked and a big open gash under the toes on the right side. This would be Rich Aurilia 07-08.

Now, of course, the right choice is to cut off the toe. It will never be the same. Yes, I have a decent investment in it but it is useless now. Of course, if Brian Sabean was my doctor we would get what my foot looks like right now. That is, still untouched, still broken, still with an open gash but wrapped with bandages to make it look presentable. Heck, when my sock was first removed from my foot my toe was sort of hiding behind the other toes and the doctor had to move back to where a big toe belongs. If Sabes was my doctor he would have immediately proclaimed my big toe as a super-utility toe and left it where it was.

My toe will eventually be amputated (unless a miracle occurs). However, Rich Aurilia will still use up at bats. Just like my foot in its current state forces me to hobble around on crutches, so does Aurilia similarly hobble the Giants organization.

The question is, when will the amputation be? Not soon enough, certainly.

All our eggs in a handbasket to hell

thehavenot — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 22:58:43 -0000

Dear Diary,

I was thinking about Brian Sabean's tenure with the Giants and was trying to think of a short and compact way of summing it up.

Well, voila. Brian Sabean: He put all of his eggs in a handbasket to hell. (By the way, that's the name of a song I'm writing [not about Brian Sabean but about us as a species])

Sabes's tenure consists of two parts. The first is he put all of his eggs in one basket. The Giants were obviously focusing all of their attention on the time they had with Barry Bonds. Thus the farm system and the draft went by the wayside.

The second part is, the basket was the handbasket part in the saying "going to hell in a handbasket." Brian Sabean didn't do a particularly good job of putting all of his eggs in a basket. They never went all out to actually maximize the time they had with a dominant Barry Bonds. The decision to not go after Vlad Guerrero being exhibit A. It's worth noting that the Giants had the single most dominant player in the game (by a mile) and only went to one world series. It's also worth noting that in 2003 and 2004, the Giants not only had the single most dominant offensive force in the game but also had one of the top five pitchers in the game. It's criminal that the Giants weren't able to win multiple world series.

Anyways, I know it's not particularly relevant to anything at the moment. But anything to not focus on the upcoming season....

Sabean, is you crazy?

thehavenot — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:25:16 -0000

Dear Diary,

I went out on a limb a while back and predicted a positive off-season. While I'm still on it, I've been hearing ominous cracks recently.

It's mostly due to the schizophrenic nature of everything I've been hearing from the Giants front office. Sabean says he's not interested in Rolen or Glaus but then we hear he might trade Lowry or Sanchez for Hideki Matsui. He turns down Delmon Young for Lincecum and then starts to seriously consider Alex Rios. What is happening here?

I think I know. It's the same thing that has happened the last decade or so. Giants ownership is happening. I heard a report on KNBR yesterday that Giants ownership wants to try and "compete" next season. I believe that, despite all of our hopes, the owners are meddling in the rebuilding process.

I still think Sabean is trying to rebuild. But he's got bosses.

I'm not abandoning my former prediction. But it is certainly looking a lot more tenuous now. At least I was right about them not completely committing to a rebuild.

Going out on a Limb (or the optimistic diary)

thehavenot — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 18:28:07 -0000

Dear Diary,

I really should be coming up with a rubric for the assignment I'm handing out today, but I've always been a procrastinator so I am typing this diary out, which is also a work of procrastination, instead.

I've been meaning to write this one for a while. But the limb that I am going out on didn't look very stable so I chickened out. It is getting gradually more and more stable, so I am committing myself. Here I go.

I think this off-season and, by extension, the moves made during the season will be a net positive. There are several reasons for this. Let me this them.

Barry is gone. This is not a good thing. But it finally frees the Giants from the WIN NOW!!! at all costs (except for paying more than our pre-assigned budget) philosphy that led to things such as the Pierzynski trade and the Michael Tucker signing. Giants management knew that they had a closing window with Barry so their philosophy was to sacrifice the future to win now. It was just too bad that they were too cheap and too veteran happy to actually commit to winning then.
We are a bad team again. When was the last time Sabean did something daring? Why it was in between the 96 and 97 seasons. The Giants were coming off a horrible season in 96. This was before the Giants got into their "we must WIN NOW, just don't spend too much" approach. They were in a "we are bad, we must improve" approach. The latter approach seems very helpful right now. In fact, I think that is the approach we are in again.
I think (and I am speculating here, based off of the previous two reasons and based off comments from Sabean) that Giants management is committed to rebuilding. Unfortunately, I think it is likely that they are committed to rebuilding like they were committed to WINNING NOW. That is to say, not all the way, but just enough to make their strategy not completely effective.
The lack of anything happening quick is a good thing. (That Vizquel signing kind of threw a wrench into all of this and was one of the reasons why I delayed writing this diary. But I throw that one into the pile of evidence that management is not going to completely commit to rebuilding.) Still, Sabean is not panicking. He's not looking like a man who has to prove himself. Even though he actually does have to prove himself. That's a good thing. It means he will only make trades and/or free-agent signings (hopefully not very many of these, if at all) that will work to improve the club for the long-term.
Sabean does not believe completely in speed and defense. All those Cabrera rumors show that. The Andruw Jones rumors as well. Sabean understands that a team full of Winn's and Rajai Davis's and Fred Lewis's and Omar Vizquel's is not going to score any runs (and would score negative runs if that were allowed). That's why he's going after at least some power.

I believe that is all. I am thinking that I am missing a couple but I'll add them later if I remember them.

But those are enough to show why I think this off-season should be a positive one. Will all of Sabean's moves be guarenteed good ones? Probably not. The Vizquel signing is already not very good. But this is why I am going out on a limb instead of making a bold proclimation.

The main thing is that Sabean is viewing this as a rebuilding off-season and is planning for the future for a change. This an important change in mind-set. And it is why I am willing to see what he does.

I'm expecting positive things Brian. This is your last chance. (Hopefully)

Poll

Hey! I've never done a poll, let's do one now! Do you agree with me that this off season will be positive?

An Indian vs. The Indians

thehavenot — Sat, 06 Oct 2007 03:29:58 -0000

Dear Diary,

After watching Joba Chamberlain pitch against the Indians today, it reminded me of the controversial topic of the Indians as a team name. After all, here was a guy whose cultural identity was represented as the mascot of the team he was facing. This is a sore spot with many people who consider themselves Native American. Yet, there are a plethora of teams out there with some sort of Native American themed mascot/team name.

To me, I don't really think having a team named the Indians or the Braves or the Seminoles or the Chiefs is that big of a deal. Even though the Chief is an important religious symbol to many Native American tribes, it should be deemed acceptable so long as there are teams named the Angels or the Saints or the Padres. However, if we are going to keep team names such as the Indians or Braves or Seminoles then we should be more inclusive. How about changing the name of the Athletics to the African-Americans? What is an Athletic anyway? Instead of the Marlins, they can be the Florida Cubans. The New York Football Giants? It would be much better if they were the New York Puerto Ricans.

But we would have to drop the Redskins. That is clearly racist and needs to go.

Team names are one thing. And an argument can be made to keep them around (except the Redskins).

But I wonder what it is that Joba Chamberlain (or any Native American watching on t.v.) must feel when he sees the goofy-grinning red skinned guy on every single Cleveland Indian cap. This image is worse than the name of Washington's football team. There's no way Black-Face would be tolerated in any public setting, much less as the mascot of a professional sports team. So why do we tolerate such racist charicatures?

Oh, yeah, that's right. It's racist towards Native Americans. The forgotten minority. You know, we only took most of their land. And their lives. Wiped out their cultures.

Since there are so few of them left and they are in such bad shape, nobody sticks up for them. And they need it more than any other group of people in this country. But that's how it will probably stay so long as Indians are just people out of Westerns and history books and the mascots of sports teams.