I didn't post after Game 3, although I probably should have. That was a game where the Sharks outplayed the Avs from start to finish and got beat because Craig Anderson stood on his head all game, and the Sharks made a mistake in overtime.
The Sharks win 9 times out of 10 if they play like that. If they play the same tonight, they should win.
We'll see how it all goes.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Friday, April 16, 2010
Holy @#%^, the Sharks Win!
That's not a typo. The Sharks won it! They still have a chance in the series. The Sharks did play their game for the majority of the game. They were physical, they controlled the puck, and they punished the smaller but faster Avs team.
The win covers up a lot, but it doesn't change the fact that Nabokov is going to have to step up his game by about 100% for the Sharks to take the series. Anderson let in 6 goals, but faced 46 shots and, by my count, didn't give up any cheap ones. On the other hand, Nabokov let in 5 on 22 shots. Maybe, MAYBE, 3 of them were legitimate.
In any case, it's a win, and the Sharks have the momentum going back to Colorado. The Avs had to feel like the game was theirs to win; all the breaks went their way, and they were 30 seconds away from taking it. Anderson couldn't have played any better, and Nabakov couldn't have played any worse. But, the series goes back now tied, with nobody in control, but the momentum pointing the Sharks direction. I think that the series hinges on the first playoff game in Colorado. Whoever wins that game should take it.
Hopefully, I'll actually be able to watch the game.
On a side note, Versus just went from Hockey, to Whacked Out Sports. Yay Versus!
The win covers up a lot, but it doesn't change the fact that Nabokov is going to have to step up his game by about 100% for the Sharks to take the series. Anderson let in 6 goals, but faced 46 shots and, by my count, didn't give up any cheap ones. On the other hand, Nabokov let in 5 on 22 shots. Maybe, MAYBE, 3 of them were legitimate.
In any case, it's a win, and the Sharks have the momentum going back to Colorado. The Avs had to feel like the game was theirs to win; all the breaks went their way, and they were 30 seconds away from taking it. Anderson couldn't have played any better, and Nabakov couldn't have played any worse. But, the series goes back now tied, with nobody in control, but the momentum pointing the Sharks direction. I think that the series hinges on the first playoff game in Colorado. Whoever wins that game should take it.
Hopefully, I'll actually be able to watch the game.
On a side note, Versus just went from Hockey, to Whacked Out Sports. Yay Versus!
NHL Playoffs Abomination
So, I should start off by apologizing for essentially abandoning this blog after getting it started with the other authors. That is, if there is actually anyone reading this or checking on it. But, I digress.....
During the Olympics there was a lot of talk about the NHL gaining fans because of the quality of Olympic hockey play. That was a fantastic thought, but I said at the time that it wouldn't actually happen. Part of the problem was that hockey was buried on CNBC or MSNBC, which meant that people wouldn't have the opportunity to see it, even if the ratings and interest was up overall. The only Olympic hockey that actually made it onto NBC were the finals, which was great, but not good enough to actually launch some additional interest in the NHL. The country got interested in hockey for the time it took for the US to play Canada in the finals, and then promptly forgot about it and went back to talking about the hot Canadian curler.
But the larger problem that nobody was talking about was the fact that NBC was burying hockey for a reason. THEY KNEW WHAT PEOPLE WANTED TO SEE AND IT WASN'T HOCKEY! It's an easy argument to make that hockey was on the secondary networks and therefore there wasn't any viewership, but I guarantee you that NBC would have been responsive enough to the viewership to move the games onto the major networks if there had been the call for it. The reality is there just wasn't the overall interest in hockey.
But, for the sake of argument, lets say that I'm completely wrong, and that NBC screwed up in a major way, and that Hockey was underexposed during the Olympics and that people were genuinely interested. That moves me on to the actual reason for the post.
The NHL should be embarrassed that they can't manage to get national broadcasts for the playoffs. The NHL can blame it on whomever they want but the reality is that the NHL turned down ESPN's offer after the lockout and decided to go with Versus, which was something else at the time. The fact that I can't even remember what the hell the network was should say enough. But, now, I'm forced to find alternative means to try and watch the game because I live outside of broadcast area for the Sharks game. That's unacceptable! How does the NHL expect to gain fans when they can't manage to have national broadcasts for their product? Playoff hockey is fantastic -- the on ice product is amazing and, in my opinion, doesn't need to be messed with, but how does the league expect to remain viable if they don't have anyone broadcast their games?
I think the first thing that they need to do is get out from under the contract they signed with Versus. When I've actually been able to watch, the national broadcasts from the network are awful, the announcers are terrible, and it's clear that they don't know how to maximize the tension and passion that are the NHL playoffs. The next thing that they need to do is realize that in order to get the best of their product on national television, they may have to sign a short term contract that isn't incredibly advantageous to the NHL. That's fine, do it so that more people actually get to watch the games.
Speaking of watching the games, I'm watching the end of the Detroit, Phoenix game on Versus. There's 50 seconds left and Detroit is up by 3. Yet, for some reason, Versus hasn't pulled away from the game yet, when there's 15 minutes left in a one goal Shark game. This is unbelievable. This network has to be run by idiots, or Detroit fans. Has there ever been a game that had 3 goals scored in 20 seconds?
Final horn, and they go to break while the game is still being played in San Jose. Versus has to be one of the worst run networks on the planet. I'm pretty sure Versus is where all the failed GM's and everybody who's ever been involved in running the Warriors go to when they are fired from every job that'll have them . Pretty soon, Versus will be hiring Matt Millen to get the best on air talent. It's only a matter of time before Charles Rodgers becomes an announcer for Versus hockey.
Now they are in studio, and the game is being played in San Jose, but they are summing up the Detriot game. Fantastic choice, what we all want to see are poorly run replays from a game we just watched, rather than the 1 seed playing from behind.
Also, on a separate note, Nabakov is awful in the playoffs. Is there anyone who inspires less confidence than him in the playoffs? I'm convinced that he's going to give it away the game and I have to believe that the Sharks players think the exact same thing. Do they have any confidence in him at this point? Do they think that for a second they're going to win because of him when it counts? Or do you think that they know that if they're to win, it's going to be despite of Nabakov. Nabakov has given up 5 goals on 18 shots. 18 shots! He's been terrible. I'd feel more comfortable with Greiss in the net and I bet the Sharks would too. As an admittedly novice hockey fan, it's clear that success in the playoffs depends on the play of the goalies. Nabakov cannot step up and make plays when it's necessary. He's a choke artist. He was awful when it mattered in the Olympics, and he's awful in the playoffs.
If they win tonight, it's possible they make it out of the first round. But do you really believe Nabakov will play well in Colorado with the series on the line?
During the Olympics there was a lot of talk about the NHL gaining fans because of the quality of Olympic hockey play. That was a fantastic thought, but I said at the time that it wouldn't actually happen. Part of the problem was that hockey was buried on CNBC or MSNBC, which meant that people wouldn't have the opportunity to see it, even if the ratings and interest was up overall. The only Olympic hockey that actually made it onto NBC were the finals, which was great, but not good enough to actually launch some additional interest in the NHL. The country got interested in hockey for the time it took for the US to play Canada in the finals, and then promptly forgot about it and went back to talking about the hot Canadian curler.
But the larger problem that nobody was talking about was the fact that NBC was burying hockey for a reason. THEY KNEW WHAT PEOPLE WANTED TO SEE AND IT WASN'T HOCKEY! It's an easy argument to make that hockey was on the secondary networks and therefore there wasn't any viewership, but I guarantee you that NBC would have been responsive enough to the viewership to move the games onto the major networks if there had been the call for it. The reality is there just wasn't the overall interest in hockey.
But, for the sake of argument, lets say that I'm completely wrong, and that NBC screwed up in a major way, and that Hockey was underexposed during the Olympics and that people were genuinely interested. That moves me on to the actual reason for the post.
The NHL should be embarrassed that they can't manage to get national broadcasts for the playoffs. The NHL can blame it on whomever they want but the reality is that the NHL turned down ESPN's offer after the lockout and decided to go with Versus, which was something else at the time. The fact that I can't even remember what the hell the network was should say enough. But, now, I'm forced to find alternative means to try and watch the game because I live outside of broadcast area for the Sharks game. That's unacceptable! How does the NHL expect to gain fans when they can't manage to have national broadcasts for their product? Playoff hockey is fantastic -- the on ice product is amazing and, in my opinion, doesn't need to be messed with, but how does the league expect to remain viable if they don't have anyone broadcast their games?
I think the first thing that they need to do is get out from under the contract they signed with Versus. When I've actually been able to watch, the national broadcasts from the network are awful, the announcers are terrible, and it's clear that they don't know how to maximize the tension and passion that are the NHL playoffs. The next thing that they need to do is realize that in order to get the best of their product on national television, they may have to sign a short term contract that isn't incredibly advantageous to the NHL. That's fine, do it so that more people actually get to watch the games.
Speaking of watching the games, I'm watching the end of the Detroit, Phoenix game on Versus. There's 50 seconds left and Detroit is up by 3. Yet, for some reason, Versus hasn't pulled away from the game yet, when there's 15 minutes left in a one goal Shark game. This is unbelievable. This network has to be run by idiots, or Detroit fans. Has there ever been a game that had 3 goals scored in 20 seconds?
Final horn, and they go to break while the game is still being played in San Jose. Versus has to be one of the worst run networks on the planet. I'm pretty sure Versus is where all the failed GM's and everybody who's ever been involved in running the Warriors go to when they are fired from every job that'll have them . Pretty soon, Versus will be hiring Matt Millen to get the best on air talent. It's only a matter of time before Charles Rodgers becomes an announcer for Versus hockey.
Now they are in studio, and the game is being played in San Jose, but they are summing up the Detriot game. Fantastic choice, what we all want to see are poorly run replays from a game we just watched, rather than the 1 seed playing from behind.
Also, on a separate note, Nabakov is awful in the playoffs. Is there anyone who inspires less confidence than him in the playoffs? I'm convinced that he's going to give it away the game and I have to believe that the Sharks players think the exact same thing. Do they have any confidence in him at this point? Do they think that for a second they're going to win because of him when it counts? Or do you think that they know that if they're to win, it's going to be despite of Nabakov. Nabakov has given up 5 goals on 18 shots. 18 shots! He's been terrible. I'd feel more comfortable with Greiss in the net and I bet the Sharks would too. As an admittedly novice hockey fan, it's clear that success in the playoffs depends on the play of the goalies. Nabakov cannot step up and make plays when it's necessary. He's a choke artist. He was awful when it mattered in the Olympics, and he's awful in the playoffs.
If they win tonight, it's possible they make it out of the first round. But do you really believe Nabakov will play well in Colorado with the series on the line?
Sunday, January 31, 2010
The Olympics Are Upon Us
Well, readers... if you're still here... it's been an utter eon since I put 'pen to paper' and updated this blog. I'd make excuses and try to pretend I was busy, but the truth is I just haven't been motivated. Until now, really.
The Olympics are almost upon us and quite honestly I'm very excited. Almost as excited as a four-year-old on Christmas morning. The World Juniors this year fed my Olympic hunger and, while I know it isn't realistic I'd love to see a repeat at the big show. Yeah, yeah. We all need dreams to get us through life. Welcome to mine.
I'd love to say I've compiled a whole mid-season breakdown. That I've been doing research and that has caused the delay. That I'm going to wax poetic about what's happened thus far in the '09/'10 season. The truth is I've done none of those things and have no real intention of even mentioning the first half. For the most part at least.
I will say that this season finds us in much the same place we were last season (as far as San Jose is concerned anyhow) - 1st overall in the NHL and looking shaky at times. I'm going to leave it at that for fear of spending 1,000 words fueled by emotion, letdown and disappointment trying to explain how the standings don't mean anything. The only thing that matters is the post... blah, blah, blah. We've done this all before. Let's move on.
The Olympics are in Vancouver, Canada this year and the big talk isn't who will win the Gold. The big talk is who will lose to Canada. Egotistical much? Maybe just a bit. Though it's a well deserved bit of ego. Canada is the epicenter of hockey for all intents and purposes. You can disagree, you can try to say Minnesota or Europe or outer space are more important to hockey, but you'd be wrong. Canada - the birthplace and still the center of all that is holey... erm... hockey.
So, what happens in the Olympics? Who does lose to Canada? I'm asking you, readers. I want to know what you think will happen. Get our your crystal ball, put your medal winners in order and post 'em up. We'll discuss it all in the comments section (see, I told you I had nothing clever and substantial to write - thus I let you do most of my job).
With that I welcome you to 2010, half-heartedly promising to update more. "Put your head down and skate."
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
2009-2010 Sharks' Schedule Announced
Today, July 15, 2009 the official '09/'10 Sharks' schedule was announced. Follow the link below to read the article in it's entirety.
There will be no All Star game this year. Instead, the Olympics will suspend the season for just about a month.
It also appears the the big three (Joe, Patty and Nabby) will have one more shot together. As much as I wanted blood after the mess of the playoffs part of me is just a touch relieved.
October can't come soon enough.
Official link to schedule.
COMPLETE 2009-10 SCHEDULE
OCTOBER
Thu 1 @ Colorado 6:30 p.m.
Sat 3 @ Anaheim 7:00 p.m.
Tue 6 @ Los Angeles 7:30 p.m.
THU 8 COLUMBUS 7:30 p.m.
SAT 10 MINNESOTA 7:30 p.m.
MON 12 PHOENIX 7:30 p.m.
Thu 15 @ Washington 4:00 p.m.
Sat 17 @ N.Y. Islanders 4:00 p.m.
Mon 19 @ N.Y. Rangers 4:00 p.m.
Thu 22 @ Tampa Bay 4:30 p.m.
Sat 24 @ Atlanta 4:00 p.m.
Sun 25 @ Philadelphia 4:00 p.m.
WED 28 LOS ANGELES 7:30 p.m.
FRI 30 COLORADO 7:30 p.m.
NOVEMBER
Sun 1 @ Carolina 10:30 a.m.
Wed 4 @ Columbus 4:00 p.m.
Thu 5 @ Detroit 4:30 p.m.
SAT 7 PITTSBURGH 7:30 p.m.
TUE 10 NASHVILLE 7:30 p.m.
THU 12 DALLAS 7:30 p.m.
Sat 14 @ St. Louis 5:00 p.m.
Sun 15 @ Chicago 4:00 p.m.
Tue 17 @ Nashville 5:00 p.m.
FRI 20 PHILADELPHIA 7:30 p.m.
Sat 21 @ Anaheim 7:00 p.m.
WED 25 CHICAGO 7:30 p.m.
Fri 27 @ Edmonton 6:00 p.m.
Sun 29 @ Vancouver 7:00 p.m.
DECEMBER
TUE 1 OTTAWA 7:30 p.m.
THU 3 ST.LOUIS 7:30 p.m.
SAT 5 CALGARY 7:00 p.m.
WED 9 LOS ANGELES 7:30 p.m.
FRI 11 DALLAS 7:30 p.m.
Sat 12 @ Phoenix 5:00 p.m.
THU 17 ANAHEIM 7:30 p.m.
Mon 21 @ Dallas 5:30 p.m.
Tue 22 @ Chicago 5:00 p.m.
SAT 26 ANAHEIM 7:30 p.m.
MON 28 PHOENIX 7:30 p.m.
WED 30 WASHINGTON 7:30 p.m.
Thu 31 @Phoenix 4:00 p.m.
JANUARY
SAT 2 EDMONTON 7:00 p.m.
MON 4 LOS ANGELES 7:30 p.m.
WED 6 ST. LOUIS 7:30 p.m.
SAT 9 DETROIT 7:30 p.m.
Mon 11 @ Los Angeles 7:30 p.m.
Tue 12 @ Phoenix 6:00 p.m.
THU 14 BOSTON 7:30 p.m.
SAT 16 EDMONTON 1:00 p.m.
MON 18 CALGARY 7:30 p.m.
Tue 19 @ Los Angeles 7:30 p.m.
THU 21 ANAHEIM 7:30 p.m.
SAT 23 BUFFALO 7:30 p.m.
THU 28 CHICAGO 7:30 p.m.
SAT 30 MINNESOTA 7:30 p.m.
FEBRUARY
TUE 2 DETROIT 7:30 p.m.
Thu 4 @ St. Louis 5:00 p.m.
Sat 6 @ Nashville 5:00 p.m.
Mon 8 @ Toronto 4:00 p.m.
Wed 10 @ Columbus 4:00 p.m.
Thu 11 @ Detroit 4:30 p.m.
Sat 13 @ Buffalo 4:00 p.m.
MARCH
TUE 2 NEW JERSEY 7:30 p.m.
THU 4 MONTREAL 7:30 p.m.
SAT 6 COLUMBUS 7:30 p.m.
THU 11 NASHVILLE 7:30 p.m.
SAT 13 FLORIDA 7:30 p.m.
Sun 14 @ Anaheim 5:00 p.m.
Tue 16 @ Dallas 5:30 p.m.
Thu 18 @ Vancouver 7:00 p.m.
Fri 19 @ Calgary 6:00 p.m.
Sun 21 @ Edmonton 5:00 p.m.
Tue 23 @ Minnesota 5:00 p.m.
THU 25 DALLAS 7:30 p.m.
SAT 27 VANCOUVER 7:00 p.m.
SUN 28 COLORADO 5:00 p.m.
Wed 31 @ Dallas 5:30 p.m.
APRIL
Fri 2 @ Minnesota 5:00 p.m.
Sun 4 @ Colorado 5:00 p.m.
Tue 6 @ Calgary 6:30 p.m.
THU 8 VANCOUVER 7:30 p.m.
SAT 10 PHOENIX 7:30 p.m.
SAT 10 PHOENIX 7:30 p.m.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Julius Peppers in Red and Gold?
Ever since the 49ers traded their 2nd and 4th round draft picks in the 2009 draft to Carolina for a first round pick in the 2010 draft there have been rumors that Julius Peppers is San Francisco bound. I would like to be among the first to voice my strong opinion on what an excellent move this would be.
I don’t think that Carolina would let go of their franchise defensive end/OLB to just get back their first round pick next year. As much as I would love to see that, that would be a terrible exchange for Carolina, and let’s face it, I don’t think Scot McCloughan has the balls, or the aptitude, to make that offer, if he did, he would have just offered the 2nd and 4th round picks for Peppers and save himself and the Carolina front office some headaches. Carolina is looking for 2 first round picks, at least according to just about everything I have read on the matter since the end of the previous season. I don’t think Peppers is worth quite that much, he is a proven playmaker, and could be the difference on defense that we need. However that is quite a steep price to pay, even for someone as talented as Peppers, and I just don’t think he is that big of a difference maker. Parys Haralson looked very good at times last year, specifically times when the defense got off the field and got the rest they needed in the game, and Manny Lawson is in his second season coming off ACL surgery, I expect more out of him this year. I am also intrigued by our final pick of the draft this year, Ricky Jean-Francois. He was projected as a potential third round pick with gobs of talent, however some off-field issues kept him from going early on the second day of the draft. If he can get his head screwed on straight, as I wrote in my analysis of the draft, I think he has the potential to make a difference. Due to these factors, both of our first round picks next year are not worth giving up to get Peppers.
I do think there is a deal to be made though. The deal would have to include one of the first round picks, probably whichever is lower next year, and a player to go along with the pick. My proposal, if I were the GM of the 49ers, would be to send Manny Lawson and the lower pick to Carolina for Peppers, assuming he is ready to sign a long term deal to play in San Francisco. We would exchange one hybrid DE/OLB with tons of potential for another proven hybrid DE/OLB that can get the pressure on the QB that we have lacked so badly in the Erikson/Nolan era. Even if Peppers isn’t himself bringing the pressure, he attracts tons of attention from the offense which would allow Haralson a much clearer path to the QB, something I believe he would take advantage of. It would also allow Justin Smith to not be double or triple teamed every snap and potentially give the 49ers a fairly potent pass rush, something that has prevented us from realizing the aspirations we have had the previous two years. A pass rush takes pressure off of our DB’s because the opposing QB doesn’t have all day to decide what to do with the ball, he is forced to get rid of it quickly, much like our QB’s have had to do in the previous several seasons. We do have elite DB’s, we do have elite ILB’s, now it’s time to get an elite player who can get some pressure on the QB and take our defense from middle of the pack to the top 3rd in the NFL which also allows us to play the type of football that Coach Singletary wants to play, that is to win games 10-7 or 14-10. Let’s hope our front office pulls its head out of it collective rear end and make this deal that so badly needs to be made.
I don’t think that Carolina would let go of their franchise defensive end/OLB to just get back their first round pick next year. As much as I would love to see that, that would be a terrible exchange for Carolina, and let’s face it, I don’t think Scot McCloughan has the balls, or the aptitude, to make that offer, if he did, he would have just offered the 2nd and 4th round picks for Peppers and save himself and the Carolina front office some headaches. Carolina is looking for 2 first round picks, at least according to just about everything I have read on the matter since the end of the previous season. I don’t think Peppers is worth quite that much, he is a proven playmaker, and could be the difference on defense that we need. However that is quite a steep price to pay, even for someone as talented as Peppers, and I just don’t think he is that big of a difference maker. Parys Haralson looked very good at times last year, specifically times when the defense got off the field and got the rest they needed in the game, and Manny Lawson is in his second season coming off ACL surgery, I expect more out of him this year. I am also intrigued by our final pick of the draft this year, Ricky Jean-Francois. He was projected as a potential third round pick with gobs of talent, however some off-field issues kept him from going early on the second day of the draft. If he can get his head screwed on straight, as I wrote in my analysis of the draft, I think he has the potential to make a difference. Due to these factors, both of our first round picks next year are not worth giving up to get Peppers.
I do think there is a deal to be made though. The deal would have to include one of the first round picks, probably whichever is lower next year, and a player to go along with the pick. My proposal, if I were the GM of the 49ers, would be to send Manny Lawson and the lower pick to Carolina for Peppers, assuming he is ready to sign a long term deal to play in San Francisco. We would exchange one hybrid DE/OLB with tons of potential for another proven hybrid DE/OLB that can get the pressure on the QB that we have lacked so badly in the Erikson/Nolan era. Even if Peppers isn’t himself bringing the pressure, he attracts tons of attention from the offense which would allow Haralson a much clearer path to the QB, something I believe he would take advantage of. It would also allow Justin Smith to not be double or triple teamed every snap and potentially give the 49ers a fairly potent pass rush, something that has prevented us from realizing the aspirations we have had the previous two years. A pass rush takes pressure off of our DB’s because the opposing QB doesn’t have all day to decide what to do with the ball, he is forced to get rid of it quickly, much like our QB’s have had to do in the previous several seasons. We do have elite DB’s, we do have elite ILB’s, now it’s time to get an elite player who can get some pressure on the QB and take our defense from middle of the pack to the top 3rd in the NFL which also allows us to play the type of football that Coach Singletary wants to play, that is to win games 10-7 or 14-10. Let’s hope our front office pulls its head out of it collective rear end and make this deal that so badly needs to be made.
Thursday, May 7, 2009
The Giants Lineup
It’s no secret that the Giants, on most nights struggle to hit their way out of a wet paper bag. The Giants currently rank last in runs scored (90), homeruns (14), second to last in on base percentage (.310), last in slugging percentage (.367), and the list goes on and on. Simply put, the Giants just aren’t hitting right now and, to be honest, there doesn’t seem to be much hope that the Giants will improve themselves by any large margin during the season.
The previous post made a great argument that I have to disagree with slightly. It’s true, we should have gone after Dunn. Had we been able to get him for the same 2 year deal that the Nationals did, he would be an absolute bargain and immediately become the best hitter on the Giants by a large margin. He can play left, right, and first, so we could have moved him around and still gotten time for Lewis and Winn, both of whom can play any outfield position. Ishikawa would have been relegated to a late inning defensive replacement, and would have been able to get a couple hundred at bats over the course of the season to try to adjust to major league pitching. Plus, it would have allowed the Giants to send down Velez, who serves no purpose on the Giants roster.
Where I disagree is with the signing of Hudson. He would have made the Giants better in the short term, but would have hurt the development of the team in the long term. Burriss is struggling at the plate right now but has shown the ability to hit major league pitching over a large enough sample size to suggest he can do it again. He plays great defense at second and is only 24. He’s past the point where he can develop any further in the minors and needs to see the field consistently to see whether or not he’s going to become a good hitter at the major league level. The point is that, because of when he would have been signed, Hudson would have blocked a major league ready player at a time when the Giants are trying to get significantly younger and at a time when their playoff chances are really dependant on getting a big, middle of the order bat, rather than a player like Hudson.
So, the Giants have neither Dunn nor Hudson, and are left with Ishikawa at first and Burriss at second. The more I watch Ishikawa hit, the less optimistic I am about his ability to turn it around. What I thought was patience seems now to be indecisiveness because he can’t seem to pull the trigger when he gets a good pitch to hit. Multiple times now, I’ve seen him take good fastballs on a 0-1 or 2-0 count because it either wasn’t the pitch he was looking for or he wasn’t able to make the decision to swing soon enough. I don’t know if he can turn this kind of thing around, but he’s probably running out of time to do it in.
But even if Ishikawa can turn it all around, where’s his future on the Giants? The San Jose Giants, probably the most loaded team in the minors, has our future infield on it. Buster Posey will be the starting catcher next year, and Connor Gillaspie will be the starting third baseman either next year or the year after. Kung Fu Panda Sandoval is going to move to first, and that still leaves the Giants trying to find Villalona a spot. One of those players is going to end up in the outfield, and it’s a tossup as to which one.
I hope that I’m wrong. I hope that Ishikawa gets his head right (because I don’t think it’s his swing) and becomes a very productive first baseman with a great glove and he makes it hard for the Giants to make decisions with their young players. He’s certainly got the potential to do so, but potential can only keep you on the field for so long. You have to turn it into production.
The previous post made a great argument that I have to disagree with slightly. It’s true, we should have gone after Dunn. Had we been able to get him for the same 2 year deal that the Nationals did, he would be an absolute bargain and immediately become the best hitter on the Giants by a large margin. He can play left, right, and first, so we could have moved him around and still gotten time for Lewis and Winn, both of whom can play any outfield position. Ishikawa would have been relegated to a late inning defensive replacement, and would have been able to get a couple hundred at bats over the course of the season to try to adjust to major league pitching. Plus, it would have allowed the Giants to send down Velez, who serves no purpose on the Giants roster.
Where I disagree is with the signing of Hudson. He would have made the Giants better in the short term, but would have hurt the development of the team in the long term. Burriss is struggling at the plate right now but has shown the ability to hit major league pitching over a large enough sample size to suggest he can do it again. He plays great defense at second and is only 24. He’s past the point where he can develop any further in the minors and needs to see the field consistently to see whether or not he’s going to become a good hitter at the major league level. The point is that, because of when he would have been signed, Hudson would have blocked a major league ready player at a time when the Giants are trying to get significantly younger and at a time when their playoff chances are really dependant on getting a big, middle of the order bat, rather than a player like Hudson.
So, the Giants have neither Dunn nor Hudson, and are left with Ishikawa at first and Burriss at second. The more I watch Ishikawa hit, the less optimistic I am about his ability to turn it around. What I thought was patience seems now to be indecisiveness because he can’t seem to pull the trigger when he gets a good pitch to hit. Multiple times now, I’ve seen him take good fastballs on a 0-1 or 2-0 count because it either wasn’t the pitch he was looking for or he wasn’t able to make the decision to swing soon enough. I don’t know if he can turn this kind of thing around, but he’s probably running out of time to do it in.
But even if Ishikawa can turn it all around, where’s his future on the Giants? The San Jose Giants, probably the most loaded team in the minors, has our future infield on it. Buster Posey will be the starting catcher next year, and Connor Gillaspie will be the starting third baseman either next year or the year after. Kung Fu Panda Sandoval is going to move to first, and that still leaves the Giants trying to find Villalona a spot. One of those players is going to end up in the outfield, and it’s a tossup as to which one.
I hope that I’m wrong. I hope that Ishikawa gets his head right (because I don’t think it’s his swing) and becomes a very productive first baseman with a great glove and he makes it hard for the Giants to make decisions with their young players. He’s certainly got the potential to do so, but potential can only keep you on the field for so long. You have to turn it into production.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)