I have to admit that the article in the Merc, if true, scares me. He’s giving it more consideration than I thought and that means I gave him more credit than he deserves. Rios for Lincecum isn’t as bad as some others have said (Lincecum, for all the hype, just isn’t likely to live up to his potential, Rios is an established commodity, the Giants do have surplus pitching, etc.–I would disagree with the move but we have to consider that there are at least valid arguments to be made for it) but it’s still a pretty dumb move.

You can say that Sabean went after yet another guy who didn’t get on base. You can say that he ignored AJ’s reputation for being a dick. And you can make a case that it wasn’t a good idea to take a chance on AJ arbitration-wise because he never indicated San Francisco as a town he’d like play in. But anyone who acts like it was obvious that AJ wouldn’t sign, that he was as much of a douche as he actually turned out to be, or that Nathan was going to become so dominant, is full of shit. Sabean made a deal that turned out horribly for the Giants, but it was not obvious at the time that it would; you can’t blame him for how badly it turned out because at the time the move seemed to much more justifiable (even if you disagreed with it at the time).

As for the argument that this is an example of Sabean’s having no long-term plan, I don’t buy it. Benito was 35+. AJ was 27, and Sabean’s intention was to install him as the long-term catcher for the Giants. How is that not long-term?

i beg to disagree

i recall distinctly hearing at least one commentator stating that the nathan for aj trade would be good only if aj got signed to a long term deal…when he chose arbitration, many started voicing their worry over the deal

the only place that i saw only positives was on the mlb giants board

and the fact remains, sabean showed no foresight to what this trade would mean had aj not panned out….and that was caused by our beloved gm having absolutely no long term plans for the team

for years, i believed that he had planned for the eventual day that bonds would no longer be with the team….i was wrong….starting in 2000, sabean planned year to year….and that is not the sign of a good gm

The reason I felt you were being knee-jerk in your post is the fact that, based on rumors and speculation, you went on a rant against Sabean, who hasn’t given much indication that he’d actually do a Rios for Lincecum swap. He said the deal was “intriguing” as far as I know; that’s hardly a statement to spill so much virtual ink over. For all we know, what he referred to as intriguing could have been a much better deal discussed between Sabean and Ricciardi that the reporter wasn’t privy to, or it could have been Sabean simply musing on the idea that, in Lincecum, he does indeed have a chip that could net him a young, potentially powerful bat, without actually considering Rios to be of the caliber that he thinks he could net using Lincecum.

You’re too busy looking in the past to give proper consideration to the present. And you’re too busy re-writing the past as well; there isn’t a single person in baseball who thought the AJ for Nathan deal would end up even remotely as bad as it did for the Giants, and if you are going to call prescience on that, I call bullshit on you. Nathan had an excellent year but was still a question mark given his injury history and the fact that fluky seasons by relievers are common. Not to mention, there was not a little bit of psychic stigma attached to Nathan given that he had just given up the lead in Game 2 of the NLDS in 2003, playing a big role in their series loss that year. The deal turned out to be a clusterfuck, and there were plenty of good reasons at the time to disagree with it, but to say that it was even close to predictable that anything like what happened would happen is just a delusion.

When Lincecum gets traded for Rios, I’ll be right there with you going ape-shit. But I’m certainly not going to bother to get worked up over speculation in a Toronto paper and a throwaway quote from Sabean.

most gave him the benefit of the doubt on the nathan for aj trade….but it all depended on aj sigining for the long term….when that didnt occur, all bets were off

the fact that our great gm was so clueless as to aj not only hating the trade, but hating the players he was placed with, till this day angers me…it shows no insight

the fact that he allowed alou to determine that nathan no longer had worth in this org also angers me

the fact that sabean could not see even one year down the road, how a trade of that magnitude would effect every one of his decisions also angers me

the fact that he would even consider putting timmy on the table for a 27 year old who has never hit over 30 dingers and will never be a superstar, just shows me that neither he nor peter m have even the faintest of clues what to do with this team

be prepared people….the giants are gonna be a second division team for the remainder of sabean’s tenure

Your SF Giants 2008 marketing slogan.

And they’d be thrilled to be the Rays right now.

John’s right. Sabean’s moves have destroyed this team for years to come.

My biggest problem though is that Sabean said they’re looking to acquire players who are already established. I understand that for trading someone like Lincecum, where you need to get somebody like that. But I don’t think this team can afford to continue to get “established” but mediocre players. They need to try to acquire some young minor leaguers, guys who have lots of upside but have yet to play in the Majors or who have very limited experience. Its moves like that, that if they pan out can be huge for a fledgling franchise. Like San Diego’s acquisition of Adrian Gonzalez. Or Pittsburgh acquiring Jason Bay in the Brian Giles trade. Those are the kind of moves the Giants MUST make if they have any chance of improving over the next few years. Especially considering that its highly likely that their young talent in the lower minors will never develop, when you factor in the team’s inability to develop a single decent positional prospect over the past 20 years.

So guys like Joey Votto, Ian Stewart, Jay Bruce (doubt the Reds would trade him, hence mentioning Votto), Evan Longoria, Jed Lowrie, Andy Marte, Josh Barfield, Carlos Gonzalez etc are people the Giants SHOULD be looking at. Screw all of these washed up has beens like Rolen and Matsui.

Supposedly the most interest for Lowry has been within the NL West. Ok, say the Dodgers are interested, tell them you want Matt Kemp for Lowry. Or Andy LaRoche. Or go to the Rockies and say fine I want Ian Stewart and Eric Young Jr. But no Magowan, Baer and Sabean (because management demands it) want to fill seats and put together a good marketing campaign instead of a winning ballclub.