Talk me out of wanting Jason Giambi.
by Toxicadam on Dec 2, 2008 1:19 PM EST
Email
PrintI think he's as good as Garko defensively, hits for better power and draws more walks. On the surface, you would think all of his power came from that short porch in NY, but he was only marginally better at home. He will be 38 next year, but that means he would likely sign a shorter contract for a few more dollars. People have him pegged at 3 years .. but he might sign for 2. Our only competition (as of now) would be Oakland.
With Pronk still a mystery and LaPorta still 2 years away (imo), I think he would be a fine piece of insurance for our DH, if that remains a problem. A 2 year deal would fit in-line nicely with the rest of our contracts that are expiring in 2010. Allowing for greater flexibility into the future, in case the next two years don't bear fruit.
Of course, this would mean you would have to trade Shoppach (and possibly Garko), which isn't a bad thing necessarily.
2009 Lineup:
Grady
PTBNL/Droobs
Victor
Pronk
Choo
Giambi
Peralta
FrankyG
Droobs/Marte/PTBNL
49 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I wouldn’t start with a Giambi signing, but if either they upgrade their pitching and have some money left OR they can’t get a closer/starter/infielder and are stuck bottom-feeding, I’d have no real problem with signing Giambi to a 2-year deal (not big bucks, perhaps with incentives?)
By the way, I don’t think you’d HAVE to trade Shoppach under these circumstances, although it might be smart business to trade him while he’s valuable (instead of devaluing him by having him revert to a part-time player.).
Count me in on the “why not sign Giambi?” train. I also don’t think you have to trade Shoppach here, but rather simply send Garko down to AAA, and run a platoon at first with Giambi at 1B and Victor at C vs. RHP, and Victor at 1B and Shoppach at C vs. LHP.
I want Adam Dunn, but in some ways (contract length, etc.) I would rather have Giambi. I seems like it would be in our interest to take advantage of the market overload (or lack of demand) at certain positions (relievers, out-of shape first basemen) than to force ourselves to sign a middle infielder or thirdbaseman.
you’ll always play second fiddle to his job. he travels a lot so he’ll never be around. he has pretty greasy hair. he’s a little overweight. he does have a lot of money, but that’s never enough to meet your emotional needs.
by Brick. on Dec 2, 2008 2:34 PM EST reply actions 12 recs
rec
Anti-Ben Fran before it was cool.
by Gradyforpresident on Dec 2, 2008 2:41 PM EST up reply actions
Your reference to KH’s moustache reminds of the time that my older brother had to explain to me why nobody was sitting upper-deck section of Municipal Stadium with the home-made “Keith Hernandez Fan Club” banner hanging over the railing.
by PatBordersHelmet on Dec 2, 2008 11:30 PM EST up reply actions
Other than the chronically low attendance and the unpopularity of Keith in Cleveland, what explanation did he give you? Did he claim that Keith had stashed them in a not-yet politically incorrect teepee?
Helium Watch: Chuck Lofgren, OF
He simply explained that there were no members of any “Keith Hernandez Fan Club” because his signing was considered a bad move for a cash-strapped team. His back problems, obvious to everyone in that section, should have been obvious to the FO.
KH was sold as the guy who would fill the offensive void that Joe Carter left in the 1989 offseason trade. KH struggled to play 43 games for the Tribe in 1990 and retired after the season. Popular perception was that he knew (and the Mets knew) that he was toast after the 1989 season. His attempt to come back with the Indians was considered a waste of time and money. My perception at the time, mostly cobbled from the opinions of adults, was that he didn’t care about Cleveland and spent his DL time in NYC. He was a pampered big-market star playing for a rebuilding team with a need for a clubhouse leader. His short tenure was awkward.
I think that sign sticks out to me because it was one of the classier displays of fan discontent. Subtle but effective. I think it was a comment about management more than the player, but I don’t know. I also like that the responsible parties weren’t standing behind it trying to get on the jumbotron or sportscenter. I also like that the ushers allowed the sign (it was the size of three beedsheets ) to be hung in a closed section and left up for most of the game. I’ve seen some clever signs since, but never one as succinct or well-executed.
by PatBordersHelmet on Dec 4, 2008 9:29 AM EST up reply actions
It doesn’t get nearly as much nostalgiac talk as it deserves.
by Jay on Dec 5, 2008 2:11 AM EST up reply actions
The President-elect got into the beard act today, when a reporter asked Bill Richardson why he shaved:
I don’t know what happened. The western rugged look was really working for him. For some reason, maybe because it was scratchy when he kissed his wife, he was forced to get rid of it. I’m deeply disappointed in the loss of the beard. I think it was a mistake for him to get rid of it.
Reuters notes that among the new administration appointees, only Attorney General-designate Eric Holder has any facial hair.
by Jay on Dec 3, 2008 6:04 PM EST up reply actions
David Axelrod, senior advisor to the president-elect, sports a mean mustache.
by APV on Dec 3, 2008 7:12 PM EST up reply actions
I wouldn’t be adamantly opposed to an offseason that involved signing Hoffman for $6-7 mil per year, signing Giambi to $9 mil per year and calling then calling it quits. Maybe moving Shoppach for a middle infielder or at least prospects. Though if we were to go down this route I’d prefer someone who could play 1B/LF/DH.
I wonder if Shapiro might take advantage of the glut of DH/OF/1B Gammons reports about being available this offseason.
Unless Hafner is out for the year, the Indians kind of have that one covered. I’m not really concerned about the offense. Unless the Indians are adding a premier talent at 1B (Teixeira) that would also be an asset in future seasons, any dollars spent there rather than on the pitching staff are probably wasted. Plus, Atkins was just quoted as saying how LaPorta can jump into action at first base without blinking, if need be.
I do agree that if Shoppach is moved it should be to fill one of the voids (closer, starting pitcher, middle infielder/3B), but I’d be highly irritated if Shoppach was dealt for a closer when there are droves of them on the market. That means Shoppach is available for only a starting pitcher or middle infielder unless some stupidly attractive offer is made that would bring back star-quality player even at a filled position.
My thoughts, and I was just thinking aloud, were that it might be better for the Indians to take advantage of the soft spots in the market rather than overpay to fill a hole or sign a player that’s not particular upgrade at the position.
IE given the market, it might be more cost effective (cash versus value) to sign a OF/1B type as opposed to spending more money on subpar “upgrades” at INF.
We might even be able to address our INF situation via trade of Shoppach or other players/prospects.
It also might be helpful to sign a 1B/OF just in case one of our corner OF’s or Garko underperforms next year. It might even make Garko/Gutz/Fransisco expendable trading chips. (They would only be parts of a larger trade probably)
Once again, just thinking aloud.
by world dictator on Dec 3, 2008 8:47 PM EST up reply actions
as opposed to spending more money on subpar "upgrades" at INF…or spending talent on subpar “upgrades” at INF like Jason Bartlett…
Seperate arguments Brick, seperate arguments.
Besides, I’m still open to trading Shoppach for Beltre :-)
by world dictator on Dec 3, 2008 10:26 PM EST up reply actions
Just because they don’t want to trade us Beltre doesn’t mean I don’t want them to.
Duh.
by world dictator on Dec 4, 2008 12:50 AM EST up reply actions
A 2 year deal would fit in-line nicely with the rest of our contracts that are expiring in 2010.
With all those expiring contracts, maybe they can make a run at LeBron in 2010.
MLB2PDX!!! (someday...)
by The Cactus Leaguer on Dec 3, 2008 10:40 PM EST reply actions 3 recs
Do we really need another DH/1B type on the roster who can’t field?
Besides, we have plenty more on the way in the minors.
We might, if we traded Garko or Shoppach (if Mike Jacobs can be traded, so to can Garko??) I mean, we don’t need anyone, but we’d like to be good next year.
I think Brown will be taken in the Rule 5, not that this matters. He’s as good as gone no matter what happens.
Aubrey, entering his “prime” could be entering a window of clean health, but I wouldn’t count on him.
Wes Hodges isn’t a major leaguer if he isn’t a 3B. Gimenez is in a similar position.
I think Beau Mills will make it——in several years, two more at the earliest. Weglarz should stay in the OF for now, and his apparent schedule parallels Mills’.
Laporta might be an option next year. I’d rather he remain an outfielder as long as he can.
I don’t think Hafner will play another inning in the field again. I have no idea what he’ll do as a DH.
That leaves Garko and Vic and Shoppach. I’m ok with that crew rotating the duty, but I won’t protest if some other option presents itself favorably, in the form of Giambi or whoever.
Helium Watch: Chuck Lofgren, OF
He’s as good as gone no matter what happens.
What the heck does that mean? It’s entirely possible that Brown doesn’t get selected this week (or kept all season), has a stronger knee this season and performs well enough to get rostered next November.
I thought that not including him was a pretty clear statement that he’s the odd man out. Ok, I missed. I strongly expect him to be taken. I don’t know if he’ll stick or not.
Even if we get him back, it’s hard to see a path for him as an Indian. So much has to happen roster-wise, and he’d have to take a great leap forward in his development. Very slim chances there. I hope you’re right about the knee in any case. I read the interview too. He seems like a really good guy.
Helium Watch: Chuck Lofgren, OF
I don’t have a link, but I recall Kevin Goldstein saying that Hodges’ defense at third wasn’t as bad as some were making it out to be.
Yeah, but that’s just one guy. I think the consensus is not good.
by Jay on Dec 9, 2008 3:08 AM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Photo: Padres fan regrets letting mother capture moment with Trevor Hoffman
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
