November 17, 2008
Could the S.F. Giants win the division in 2009?
They could be relevant again in 2009.
Yes, the Giants lost 90 games last year, but they were only 12 games back of the division winning Los Angeles Dodgers. Compare that to the 75-86 Oakland Athletics, which finished 24.5 games back. With a couple tweaks here and there, the Giants could win the division in 2009, and it's not as far fetched an idea as you may think it.
The Giants have two young, dominant pitchers heading up their staff in 2008 Cy Young Award winner Tim Lincecum and his sidekick, Matt Cain. Two other young players in Jonathan Sanchez and Noah Lowry also offer promise, but Barry Zito remains the laughingstock of baseball. If Zito can ever get it together, this is one deep rotation. If not, they can still compete with the best of them.
2008 was a transition year for the offense as they went from waiting around for Barry Bonds to get to the plate to having to manufacture runs. Catcher Bengie Molina led the team in home runs with 16 and only two other year-long starters reached double digits (barely): Aaron Rowand and Randy Winn.
They weren't a team of burners either, with Winn pacing the team with 25 steals, followed by Fred Lewis' 21. Eugenio Velez and Manny Burriss each checked in with double digits.
It's a solid offense that's lacking two playmakers, and it's those playmakers the Giants are chasing during the offseason. They're hot on the tail of shortstop Rafael Furcal, and Furcal has also expressed mutual interest. The team is desperate to be relevant again and put the Zito disaster behind them, so they're willing to spend. Adding Furcal would give the team a five-tool shortstop capable of batting in the top third of the order.
Even adding just Furcal would give the team hope of competing and finishing .500. The Giants are looking for that big bopper, however, one that can get them 30 homers a year. They're likely to go the trade route for that hitter (but don't count out an under the radar signing of Adam Dunn) and could talk to Milwaukee about Prince Fielder and Philadelphia about Ryan Howard. (Howard was about to be shipped to the Dodgers for James Loney and Clayton Kershaw at the deadline until the Dodgers pulled out to insert themselves in the Manny talks.)
Acquiring either Fielder or Howard, however, would result in losing Matt Cain, so Giants GM Brian Sabean is likely to set his sights a little lower. He could make a play for the Pirates' Adam LaRoche or the White Sox's Paul Konerko, both of whom have been on the block for a while.
If the Giants make those two moves and round out their relief corps with a couple arms, don't be surprised to see the Giants playing in October.

-
Best of MVN
The Queensberry Rules
Year-End Pound-For-Pound Top 20 List
Whereas before you could make an argument for Juan Manuel Marquez or Joe Calzaghe to deserve the top pound-for-pound spot, Manny Pacquiao's destruction of Oscar De La Hoya in a weight class well above where he started the year should end that debate. He's the best. Case closed.More of the "Best of MVN"
Discussion
9 Comments on "Could the S.F. Giants win the division in 2009?"
#1
Posted by Evan, November 17, 2008 7:07 PM
Giants signed LHP reliever Jeremy Affeldt today for 2 years and 8 M. Fantastic signing by them.
#2
Posted by RollingWave, November 17, 2008 11:05 PM
Unlikely, though with the NL west it's more likely than other teams. still though, this is a team with extremely limited future upsides at the moment, their good players are already so good that it's nearly impossible to sustain (Lincecum) while their not so good players... well. hasn't really shown signs that they are more than what they are.
Unless they land both Furcal and Mark Teixiera, they're chances of comtending is low at best.
If I were Sabean, I'd flip Molina / Winn / Durham / Lewis (maybe Sanchez) .. NOW, those are the 4 players that are both expendable and at least hold mild value. (for example. Molina to the Red Sox) if they can spin these 4 guys into 2-3 future regulars. they might have a decent shot in 2010 and beyond.
the Giants need at least one season with the intention to truely suck (08 wasn't it) before they have a true shot at being a contender again.
#4
Posted by Grizzlie Antagonist, November 18, 2008 5:11 PM
Not to be a stickler, but the Giants were very relevant in 2003 when they won 100 games and their division by 15 1/2 games.
At the time,they seemed as likely to win the World Series as any of the other playoff contenders.
#5
Posted by Evan in reply to comment from Grizzlie Antagonist, November 18, 2008 10:31 PM
True. I was going off playoff results, but you're right.
#6
Posted by obsessivegiantscompulsive, November 25, 2008 7:29 PM
I agree with the premise of this article.
Except that I think that it is possible just with the addition of another legit hitter, either Furcal or Renteria (I lean towards Renteria right now if the rumored 2 year, $18M deal is close to the truth for getting Renteria; I don't want to risk 4 years of a bum Furcal, and the Giants are probably fresh in the memory of that happening with Durham).
They were around .500 for much of the season, and thus just need some consistency. With Sandoval around for the whole season plus another new hitter, that should be enough to enable the team to win more games. Add to that improvement in Sanchez and Zito, who had signs of plus performance in 2008, and improvement in the bullpen with Affeldt, Romo, and Hinshaw, I think the Giants could be competitive in a division where .500 is competitive, as the NL West was in 2008 and look to be in 2009 with most of the teams struggling.
#7
Posted by JC, November 26, 2008 1:53 PM
I think Zito will come part of the way back next year. His strikeout rate, while not was it was in Oakland, is still plenty good enough to win (6.0/9IP), and he pitched several good games last year in between the disasters. He looks like a pitcher going through a mid-career transition, and I think he will come out on the good side of it because of his work ethic.
#8
Posted by ndjnd45, December 2, 2008 2:02 AM
My last coment in this blog for time ( today 20/ 34),




















Leave a comment