Giants to Rely on In-House Options for Infield Depth

Good. I'm sick of this. Yes, Mike Fontenot has a terrible arm for a shortstop. Yes, Emmanuel Burriss has little durability, a weak bat, and his defense at shortstop is mediocre at best. And Mark DeRosa, of course, doesn't profile well at shortstop, not to mention the impact his wrist injury probably had on his power.

But who cares? I think I can live with a backup shortstop with a weak arm. People love to bring up age: and guess what? Miguel Tejada is going to be turning 37 next year. Does that mean that, suddenly, after playing 150+ games in 11 of the past 12 seasons, he will incur a plethora of injuries that will limit him to 60 games this year? There's no evidence to support that. He's been consistently durable throughout his career.

And in the event that Tejada becomes injured to the point where the Giants might actually need a backup shortstop to start more than 12 games, the Giants can go out and execute a trade for a shortstop, or pick one of these free agent shortstops up (it's possible that many of them won't receive contracts). In reality though, these backup shortstop options (Orlando Cabrera?! Bobby Crosby?!) are really not going to be much better than Mike Fontenot.

Please do me a favor, and stop throwing names out there like Bobby Crosby, who has managed to compile -1.3 WAR in 167 games over the past two seasons. He's just Burriss with less speed, and a little more pop in his bat.

Notes: Hall of Fame, Renteria, Tejada, Frandsen, Martinez, Simon

• As you've probably heard already, Roberto Alomar and Bert Blyleven were announced today as inductees for the Hall of Fame. No complaints here -- both of them deserve the nod. 
• The Giants have resumed talks with Edgar Renteria, and have said that all they need at this point is a backup infielder. I'm not particularly excited about the prospect of having him return, but as long as they don't give him more than one year at $2MM, I'm fine. I don't think any Giants backup shortstop deserves more than that, because frankly, Miguel Tejada could very well play in 150 games this year -- as he's done in 11 of the past 12 seasons. If the Giants will only need Renteria for 10-20 games or so, that's certainly not worth more than $2MM. 
• Former Giants Kevin Frandsen and Joe Martinez have found new teams. Frandsen was signed by the Padres, and Martinez was traded to the Indians recently in exchange for a PTBNL or cash considerations.
• Miguel Tejada is lending a helping hand to Alfredo Simon. Simon, a right-handed reliever for the Baltimore Orioles, is a suspect in a death investigation, and Tejada has said that he will pay for the legal costs in order to help out his friend.
• For those of you that enjoyed last week's Ten Questions with Mike Petriello, you'll be happy to know that the series will continue with a Rockies blogger next week. 
• Giants will play Opening Day on 3/31 in LA...from @JohnSheaHey:

MLB will announce tomorrow the Giants won't open at home 3/31, as ESPN proposed. But they will open 3/31 (Thursday) at LA instead of 4/1.

A Distant Third Place?

In a recent ESPN post looking at the 2011 season, Rob Neyer wrote the following:

Which team will be the most surprising in 2011?

There's going to be a great deal of change in the National League West.

I don't expect the Diamondbacks' rebuilding efforts to pay off immediately and the Padres are obviously going to miss Adrian Gonzalez terribly, but it's hard to figure where everyone else ends up.

Still, the Giants might surprise a lot of people by dropping from world champions to third place, and perhaps even a not particularly competitive third place. In 2010, almost everything that could have gone well for them did go well, with a number of Giants enjoying surprisingly good seasons. If there's reason for optimism, it's tied almost solely to the assumption that Buster Posey and Madison Bumgarner will continue to thrive in their first full seasons. Will that be enough to balance the presumed regressions of Aubrey Huff, Andres Torres and Jonathan Sanchez, along with the departure of Juan Uribe (who's been replaced by Miguel Tejada)?

We'll know in eight or nine months.

In my personal opinion, it is absolutely essential for a professional sports writer to back up his or her claims with significant statistical evidence. I am all for expressing radical opinions, but when I read ludicrous conclusions based on cherry-picked numbers, or in this case, no numbers at all, it simply ticks me off.

It is reasonable to believe that the Giants will miss the playoffs next year. A third place finish is also within the realm of possibility. But saying that they won't be competitive? Give me a break.

As Neyer points out, the Diamondbacks and the Padres are unlikely to be contenders in the NL West. While it seems that both teams could compete in the near future, we'll save that argument for another day. Eliminating those two leaves the Dodgers and the Rockies, who finished with 83 and 80 wins respectively. With this in mind, it's hard to imagine both teams leaving the Giants in the dust as predicted. Neyer cites various flaws with San Francisco's roster, but clearly, the same circumstances apply to both Los Angeles and Colorado as well.

First is the argument of "uncertainty" concerning rookies Buster Posey and Madison Bumgarner. While each has their own small blemishes, I can not find any clear signs pointing towards future struggles. Posey's below-average walk rate (6.8%) and Bumgarner's mediocre K/9 (6.97) are hardly worth mentioning. To me, a pair of sophomore slumps for these young stars seems possible, but not probable. On the contrary, as a Dodger fan, I would be worried about Matt Kemp's struggles hitting the fastball, as well as Jonathan Broxton's second half implosion. Similarly, Rockies fans should be concerned about Carlos Gonzalez's unsustainable .384 BABIP and Jhoulys Chacin's high walk tendencies.

Next, we get to the regression dispute. Is it really fair to say that Aubrey Huff will bring the Giants down when rival lineups feature aging veterans Todd Helton and Casey Blake? And while Andres Torres' breakout season seems like an anomaly, the attack on Jonathan Sanchez seems illogical. Luck is a factor throughout the game of baseball, and thus, every team has at least one pitcher that outperforms their peripherals, some more than others. Jon Garland (3.47 ERA, 4.35 xFIP) and Ubaldo Jimenez (2.88 ERA, 3.73 xFIP) are excellent examples of this.

Lastly is the trifle issue of the Giants changing shortstops. While Juan Uribe flashes more power and defensive prowess, Miguel Tejada brings durability and contact abilities to the table. The gap between these two is marginal compared to that of Manny Ramirez and an average left fielder. And while the Rockies did not lose any key players this offseason, they did part with solid contributors Miguel Olivo and Clint Barmes, who combined for 3.6 WAR in 2010.

I believe many will agree with me when I say that writers must look at the bigger picture if they wish to write a relevant article. It is obvious that the success of the Giants will be highly dependent on that of the Dodgers and the Rockies. When Rob Neyer chose to only examine the inadequacies of the Giants through unspecific generalizations, he failed to do the same for their main competition, thus destroying the foundations of his argument. 

Notes

• Buster Posey will be featured on the cover of a special double-issue of ESPN The Magazine. Buster Olney has written a great article about Posey...check it out here. 
• In other magazine cover news, Tim Lincecum was featured on the cover of Sports Illustrated's year-end issue. 
• Triples Alley has a nice post about how the Giants induce the fewest groundballs in the majors (242 GB below average per year) and thus, infield defense isn't as important for the Giants as it would be for a team like the Cardinals. It's comforting to know this, as the left side of the Giants' infield, Miguel Tejada and Pablo Sandoval, has mediocre defensive range. 
• Kruk and Kuip are close to signing six-year extensions as the Giants' broadcasting duo.
• Roberto Alomar and Bert Blyleven were named today as the recommended 2011 Hall of Fame class by the Baseball Bloggers Alliance.
  
  

2011 Giants Hitting Projections

So far, Fangraphs has posted the Bill James projections and the Fans projections. I thought it'd be fun to project the slash lines and home run numbers of the Giants' (presumable) starting eight (along with our personal commentary on our projections). I'd love to hear input from readers...post your own projections in the comments, or simply gives us your take on our projections...

We're Giants fans, so our projections are probably biased, but whatever.

Buster Posey:

• Bill James - .308/.370/.506; 21 HRs
• Fans - .304/.374/.483; 20 HRs
• Julian Levine - .310/.380/.500; 25 HRs...I don't expect much to change with Posey, with the exception of an improved walk rate.
• Zachary Chiang - .290/.360/.490; 20 HRs...More patience, less power. Might tire down the stretch.

Aubrey Huff:

• Bill James - .269/.348/.453; 19 HRs
• Fans - .282/.358/.456; 21 HRs
• Julian Levine - .280/.350/.460; 18 HRs...I expect a natural decline in Huff's numbers from his stellar 2009 campaign, but I think he'll remain solid. He won't be a major home run threat, especially playing in AT&T Park, and his walk rate will probably decline from his peak '09 season, but he'll still be an impact bat in the heart of the lineup.
• Zachary Chiang - .275/.360/.460; 20 HRs...Basically a repeat of last year, minus a scorching July.

Freddy Sanchez:

• Bill James - .285/.330/.401; 8 HRs
• Fans - .290/.336/.385; 6 HRs
• Julian Levine - .290/.340/.400; 7 HRs...I don't really expect Sanchez's numbers to change much at all from his '09 numbers. Rather, I expect his consistency to improve. He had a hot August that raised his numbers a bit, after he had had a prolonged slump; I expect fewer up's and down's in 2010.
• Zachary Chiang - .295/.340/.400; 10 HRs..Hoping he can improve on a career best walk rate.

Pablo Sandoval:

• Bill James - .308/.363/.492; 18 HRs
• Fans - .295/.345/.476; 19 HRs
• Julian Levine - .310/.375/.510; 20 HRs...Sandoval's a polarizing figure. Some say he'll play like he did in '10, which was rather mediocre and disappointing; others say he'll play like he did in '09 -- all-star caliber hitting. I lean towards the optimistic side. I think he'll hit for a high average with good power. AT&T Park will definitely take a few home runs away from him, so I expect a lot of doubles -- like 40-50.
• Zachary Chiang - .290/.330/.450; 20 HRs...Bounces back to somewhere between '09 and '10.

Miguel Tejada:

• Bill James -.279/.324/.415; 17 HRs
• Fans - .272/.311/.389; 13 HRs
• Julian Levine - .280/.320/.405; 12 HRs...low walk rate, doubles power, decent average.
• Zachary Chiang - .275/.320/.400; 15 HRs...Amazing comeback isn't that likely. Solid, if anything.

Pat Burrell:

• Bill James - .237/.351/.443; 20 HRs
• Fans - .255/.350/.440; 19 HRs
• Julian Levine - .250/.350/.440; 17 HRs...exceptional walk rate, good power.
• Zachary Chiang - .240/.320/.450; 20 HRs...Not much confidence after weak postseason performance.

Andres Torres:

• Bill James - .271/.340/.440; 14 HRs
• Fans - .270/.343/.420; 12 HRs
• Julian Levine - .270/.340/.460; 15 HRs..I'm a believer in Torres. In 740 PAs in 2009 and 2010, he posted an ISO of .223...I don't think my projected ISO of .190 is extremely optimistic.
• Zachary Chiang - .260/.330/.420; 10 HRs..A little bit low, but I think some pitchers will figure him out.

Cody Ross:

• Bill James - .265/.321/.444; 18 HRs
• Fans - .274/.335/.446; 19 HRs
• Julian Levine - .270/.330/.460; 20 HRs...Okay, I got a little crazy here. But I don't know. I feel like he has some legitimate power, and it will just come flowing out in 2010. Lots of doubles, and lots of home runs (yes, I just called 20 home runs "lots of home runs". Gee, I miss Barry Bonds...)  I think the fact that he has decent speed will help give a little boost to his power numbers, as he'll stretch several singles into doubles.
• Zachary Chiang - .275/.320/.430; 15 HRs...Will be hard for him to meet unrealistic expectations.

Looking at the projections, it seems the Giants have five guys with decent potential to hit 20 HRs...they don't have any sluggers, but they have nice power throughout the lineup. It's certainly enough offense to support that stellar rotation (which we'll project some time in the near future).

The Giants and Baserunning

I recently got the 2011 Bill James Handbook (which I highly recommend, by the way), and one of the sections in the book is about 2010 Major League Baserunning. I was not surprised at all to find that the Giants were the second-worst baserunning team in the majors -- behind only the Kansas City Royals.

For context -- an average major leaguer went from first to third on a single 28% of the time; a very good baserunner will go from first to third on a single about 38% of the time; and a very slow runner will do it about 18% of the time. 

The Giants went from first to third on a single 82 times in 297 chances for a rate of 27.6%...so they were one base below average. 

Now, an average major league player scored from second on a single 58% of the time; a very good baserunner will score from second on a single around 70% of the time; and a very slow runner will score from second around 41% of the time. 

The Giants scored from second on a single 100 times in 170 chances for a rate of 58.8%...so they were one base above average. 

Lastly, an average major leaguer will score from first on a double 44% of the time; 62% is very good, 27% is very poor. 

The Giants scored from first on a double 31 times in 84 chances for a rate of 36.9%...about six bases below average. 

A player is credited with a base taken when they advance on a passed ball, a wild pitch, a sac fly, a defensive indifference, or a balk. The Giants had 167 bases taken, which was about six bases below average. 

The Giants, meanwhile, were thrown out advancing 25 times -- tied for tenth-best in the majors, and were doubled off 17 times -- tied for the worst mark of any major league team. 

In average, a player grounds into a double play (in a double play opportunity) 11% of the time. The Giants grounded into a major-league worst 157 double plays. They had 1135 GIDP opportunities, so that rate comes to about 13.8%, or 32 double plays below average. 

Baserunning Gain comprises all of these statistics...it is "the total of all the types of extra baserunning advances minus the (triple) penalty for all the BR Outs compared with what would be expected based on the MLB averages"....BR Outs "include the sum of Outs Advancing, Doubled Offs, and when a runner is tagged out on the bases when another runner moves up on a Wild Pitch, Passed Ball, or scores on a Sacrifice Fly."

The Giants had 43 BR Outs and their BR Gain of -42 was the fifth-worst mark in the majors. 

Meanwhile, the Giants had an SB Gain of -9, the absolute worst in the majors. SB Gain is based on the fact that stolen base attempts must be successful greater than about two thirds of the time to have a positive result on the number of runs scored. It is therefore "the number of bases stolen minus two times the number of caught stealing (SB Gain = SB - 2CS)." The Giants stole 53 bases (26 of which were stolen by Andres Torres), and were caught stealing 31 times, so that equates to 53-62 which is equal to -9. 

The Giants had an overall net gain (SB Gain + BR Gain) of -51, trailing only the Kansas City Royals as the worst baserunning team. 

Some stand-out individual Giants net gains:

• Andres Torres +28
• Nate Schierholtz +13
• Pablo Sandoval -27
• Aubrey Huff +8
• Edgar Renteria, Cody Ross (with Marlins and Giants), and Buster Posey +1
• Bengie Molina (with Giants and Rangers) -13
• Jose Guillen (with Royals and Giants) -25

It seems as though the Giants have moved in the wrong direction in fixing their baserunning problem, as Miguel Tejada had a net gain of -5, a bit worse than Rent's mark of +1. Jason Bartlett, a shortstop that I had wanted the Giants to go after, had a net gain of +21, markedly better.

Again, if you like obscure yet important statistics like this, I highly recommend that you get the Bill James 2011 Handbook.

Links Ed. #4

Every week, I gather links to interesting baseball-related articles, photos, videos, graphs, etc. Enjoy...

• "With a team like San Francisco, you don't say no." Miguel Tejada's press conference.
• Rest in peace Ron Santo. 
• Larry Granillo of Wezen-Ball.com has developed the Descriptive Hall of Fame Ballot.
• This one's hilarious -- CSI One-Liners: Baseball Style
• Another funny one -- what Derek Jeter's teammates have been texting him.

If you know/have an interesting baseball-or-Giants-related link, by all means tell us about it. 

Giants Have Interest in Renteria....Seriously?

According to John Shea, there's mutual interest between the San Francisco Giants and their World Series hero Edgar Renteria.

Let's see here...the Giants have Mike Fontenot on a one-year deal. He can play short and second. They have Freddy Sanchez as their starting second baseman. They have Pablo Sandoval starting at third, and Miguel Tejada starting at short (he can also play third). Then they have Mark DeRosa at the utility role. He can play both middle infield positions that Renteria would supposedly play (shortstop, where he's lived his entire career, and second base, a position to which he recently said he's willing to switch). Then, of course, there's the younger guys, who to be honest, probably aren't the best options: Emmanuel Burriss and Ryan Rohlinger.

So to review...at short we have Tejada, Fontenot, and DeRosa. Do the Giants really need a fourth shortstop? And if so, are Burriss and Rohlinger truly incapable of being viable fourth shortstop options?

Then we have Sanchez, Fontenot, and DeRosa at second. Do the Giants really need a fourth second baseman? And if so, are Burriss and Rohlinger truly incapable of being viable fourth second baseman options?

The Giants don't really need another middle infielder. On top of that, it's simply a waste of money to sign Renteria again. Renteria has constantly battled injuries, he's not that fast anymore, his defense is quite mediocre, he's old, he can't hit for power, he can't hit for a high average, and he'd likely cost more than Burriss and Rohlinger combined. Plus, Burriss gives the Giants speed off of the bench.

So...I truly believe that Renteria will NOT man a Giants uniform next season. And if he does...well, I can't even begin to understand what is wrong with the Giants management.

Non-Tenders: Velez and Ray; Fontenot Signed to a One-Year Deal

Eugenio Velez and Chris Ray have not been offered contracts. Mike Fontenot was signed to a one-year deal worth just over $1MM, and all the other arbitration-eligible Giants (Cody Ross, Andres Torres, Santiago Casilla, Ramon Ramirez, Javier Lopez, and Jonathan Sanchez) have been tendered contracts. It's all here.

Fontenot's deal will not have incentives, and I can't really see it hurting the Giants at all. He'll provide them with a veteran middle-infield bat, and the fact that he's left-handed obviously presents value -- keep in mind that Freddy Sanchez has had some trouble against right-handed pitching...Fontenot doesn't particularly shine in any categories -- not a top defender, doesn't have great speed, not much power, doesn't hit for a high average -- but as a backup middle infielder, he'll be fine.

With the Giants in 2010, he produced -0.3 WAR, played mediocre defense, and didn't hit for much power at all (.282/.329/.310). I've always been bothered by hitters whose SLG is higher than their OBP, and Fontenot was one of those guys with the Giants. It's not like his .329 OBP is dazzling either, so it doesn't really justify the fact that it's higher than his SLG. Anyway, I'm sure he's a better player than this. He's not an impact bat, but he'll play average defense, and he'll give the Giants a back-up left-handed middle-infield bat -- useful, if you consider that the Giants' starting middle infielders will be right-handed hitters Miguel Tejada and Freddy Sanchez.

Ray and Velez could potentially be signed to minor-league deals, but we'll see. Their time as San Francisco Giants is likely over.

A more positive take on Miguel Tejada

Because I'm capable of being positive...

Here's what I said about Miguel Tejada on November 24:

So to sum it up, Tejada's defense is pretty mediocre. His power has declined to a point where it's just below average for a shortstop. He rarely walks. He can't cover much range at short. He's pretty much only good for two things: making contact with the ball, and playing in a lot of games. Beyond that, he's just pretty mediocre.

Tejada, however, might be a good option with a little bit of luck. If the Giants sign him to one of those bargain contracts -- the maximum risk should be 1yr/$3MM -- and Tejada has a resurgence, much like that which they saw out of Huff or Burrell, he could just be worth it. He's probably good for anywhere between 1-3 WAR. For $3MM, that's worth it.

Do I want Tejada? Not really. I'd rather have Juan Uribe, Jason Bartlett, Marco Scutaro, J.J. Hardy, Orlando Cabrera. But if they can manage to get him on one of those bargain contracts, he could just surprise people. He should not be a player that the Giants are considering at this point, but as a last-minute cheap option? I say go for it.

The one thing I must say is that Tejada is due for a resurgence. He had an uncharacteristically poor .269/.312/.381 slash line in 2010, and will likely bounce back. He won't be incredible. But he might just bounce back to the point where he's actually a legitimately good option for starting shortstop. With a little bit of luck, he could be a decent shortstop.

Oh yeah, and I change my mind. I would not prefer Orlando Cabrera over Miguel Tejada.

Giants Sign Miguel Tejada for $6.5MM

The Giants just agreed to sign Miguel Tejada to a 1yr/$6.5MM contract. I am not even joking...

Yesterday, I defended Tejada as an option in an argument with a friend. I'll admit it. I cited three reasons as to why:

• Durable (he's averaged 158 games each season since 1999). Yes, he's going into his age-37 season. But I figured that wouldn't matter, given his durability in the past. 
• Due for a resurgence (his 2010 season seems to me like an outlier, and he could likely hit more like the player he was in 2009) 
• Cheap. I figured he'd be a last-minute option, and the Giants could get him for $3MM. After all, he was signed to a one-year $6MM deal in 2010, and performed worse than he ever has. I figured he'd receive quite a pay decrease. Man, was I wrong. 

Brian Sabean panicked. He saw the Cardinals acquire Ryan Theriot. He knew that he couldn't get Stephen Drew nor Jose Reyes. He knew Derek Jeter was not a legitimate possibility. Most importantly, he saw the Dodgers acquire NLCS hero Juan Uribe. J.J. Hardy was probably not easily accessible, nor was Jason Bartlett I suppose (there are speculations that the Rays wanted Sergio Romo...). So Sabes acted fast. Too fast. And he gave Miguel Tejada twice as much money as he deserves. 

I don't dislike Tejada as the Giants' starting shortstop, and maybe I'm crazy because of it. After all, he produced 1.4 WAR in 59 games with the Padres. Obviously, that's a partial product of small sample size. But he's not terrible. He could easily produce 2 WAR for the Giants, which would render him, in some eyes, an average shortstop.

But this is not how the Giants succeed. They succeed by getting those bargain contracts, like the $6MM that they had to shed out for the combination of Aubrey Huff and Juan Uribe in 2010. And it got them to the World Series. 

This is a stupid deal, not because Tejada is bad -- although it would be nice if the Giants got a player that wasn't nearing 40 years of age -- it's that they gave him $6.5MM. I think, in terms of WAR, he could very possibly meet that value (or even exceed it). He produced 1.3 WAR last year, his worst season ever, and that's valued at near $6.5MM. So I don't doubt that he can live up to the contract.

But again, that's not how the Giants succeed. They need players to be worth more than their contract. For $3MM, I would love to have Tejada. Of course, I would appreciate if the Giants had a decent back-up plan, for the possibility that Tejada gets injured or just plain sucks, but I would have been fine with a one-year $3MM deal. Even in spite of his declining power, his poor walk rates, his terrible defensive range, and his age.

This contract can be filed under Brian Sabean's terrible contracts, along with the Aaron Rowand contract, the Dave Roberts contract, and the Barry Zito contract. It won't harm the Giants too much, but it was an obvious mistake. 

I can now feel content in going back to criticizing Sabean. Everybody fell in love with him when the Giants won the World Series, although I felt that he was receiving too much credit. Hopefully, people will be able to recognize that not all of his moves are brilliant, like the acquisitions of Cody Ross and Pat Burrell. Hopefully, people will realize that Tejada is receiving more money than he deserves and more money than the Giants needed to pay him. 

If Tejada returns to his 2009 form, I will still hate this contract. To reiterate, it's more money than the Giants needed to pay him.

UPDATE: As Andrew Baggarly notes, "Tejada also has led his league in ground-ball double plays in five of the last seven seasons. Recall that the Giants broke a 70-year-old franchise record for GIDPs in 2010, with Pablo Sandoval pacing the NL." Yikes...

A sad, sad day in San Francisco

The Los Angeles Dodgers have just signed Juan Uribe to a 3yr/$21MM contract. 

And with that, the San Francisco Giants legacy of Uribe has come to an end. It was a fun ride, which culminated in a World Series victory, but it's over.

But now all we're left with is memories...like this. And this. And this.

Uribe has joined the dark side. This really sucks.

Now the Giants have the remaining shortstop options:

• Orlando Cabrera
• Cesar Izturis
• Miguel Tejada
• J.J. Hardy
• Edgar Renteria
• Jason Bartlett
• Marco Scutaro
• Jed Lowrie (not going to happen...)
• Stephen Drew (not going to happen...)
• Jose Reyes (not going to happen...)
• Derek Jeter (not going to happen...)

At least the Dodgers signed him to a three-year deal. I doubt that he will provide much value in 2013. They paid him too much; gave him too many years. But it was the price they had to pay to deprive the Giants of their beloved Uribe. And it sucks.

More Pablo Sandoval...

In a recent article, Mychael Urban said the following:

Pablo Sandoval simply can’t be counted on at this point, so it’s not absurd to see the Giants going with a left-side tag team of Uribe and Tejada, with a little Mark DeRosa and Manny Burriss on the side.

Seriously? I know Pablo Sandoval had a disappointing season, but I find the notion to be ridiculous: that Miguel Tejada, Mark DeRosa, or Emmanuel Burriss are better options than Sandoval playing alongside Juan Uribe. Let's do a little comparison...for the sake of making this unbiased, I will use anonymity...I refuse to even include Burriss in this, because it should be obvious that Sandoval is a better option than him. Burriss has played mediocre defense in his career at short, and has a career slash line of .264/.329/.302; yes, I'm not making this up. Burriss has a career SLG of .302...oh yeah, and he's injury-prone. Let's move on here...

Listed are the following players' 2010 slash lines along with their current ages...

Player A: .194/.279/.258, injured for most of 2010, current age: 35
Player B: .268/.323/.409, current age: 24
Player C: .269/.312/.381, current age: 36

Hmm...so it appears that player B put up similar numbers to player C in 2010, with one exception. Player C is 12 years older. It should be pretty obvious who these players are, but in case you are unaware, A is DeRosa, B is Sandoval, and C is Tejada.

DeRosa is an injury risk, and was terrible when he played in 2010. Even assuming a full recovery, his upside is minimal -- he'll probably max out at 15 home runs, and that's at best. Meanwhile, his third base defense is mediocre, with a career UZR/150 of -5.7, as is his shortstop defense (career UZR/150 of -1.5). So, yes, it's absurd to think that DeRosa is a better option than Sandoval. Oh yeah, and to reiterate, he's 35 years old.

Now Tejada has only played third base in one season, 2010, and he produced -6.9 UZR. Just awful. In all fairness, though, small sample size. At shortstop, however, he has played thousands of games, and his career UZR/150 of -3.4 is mediocre. His offense, meanwhile, was slightly worse than Sandoval's, due to a nauseating 4.4% walk rate, and slightly less power than Sandoval. Oh yeah, and he's 36. Plus, he'd cost extra money because he's a free agent, whereas the Giants already have Sandoval and DeRosa for 2011.

Keep in mind, also, that Sandoval is due for a resurgence. I recommend that you look into this for further reading.

If Sandoval gains another 20 pounds this offseason, and comes back looking like Mo Vaughn in 2003, then yes, send him to the minors. But at this point, taking into account that he's due for at least a slight resurgence, that he has less of an injury history than DeRosa/Burriss, that he's younger than DeRosa/Tejada, and that he's never played atrocious defense, at least by UZR standards (career UZR/150 of -0.5 at third base), he's a better option to play alongside Uribe than DeRosa/Burriss/Tejada.

People are too quick to lose faith in players. Remember in August, when people thought Tim Lincecum's career was quickly coming to an end? Exercise patience, people. Sandoval's 2010 production was that of an average third baseman. He needs to lose weight, but that doesn't mean he's not worthy of the starting job at third.

Miguel Tejada: Giants 2011 Shortstop Option?

The Giants are reportedly one of the teams currently interested in Miguel Tejada. So...what say we delve into the prospect of signing the 37-year-old...

At first, one might think that Tejada provides at least a decent amount of power...after all, the guy has reached the 30-homer plateau four times throughout his career. This, however, is no longer the case. Even for a shortstop, his power is average at best. His 2010 ISO of .112 indicates that he has the same amount of power as Marco Scutaro and Cliff Pennington. In all fairness, though, it was a career-low, and likely an outlier. His Bill James projections see him having an ISO of .136 in 2011, power closer to that of Jhonny Peralta. Nevertheless, it's nothing special, even for a shortstop. Average at best. He's good for 10-15 home runs, though, and can hit his share of doubles.

The one great thing Tejada does have is that he makes contact a lot. His K rate of 10.5% in 2010 was extremely low (although that's often the case with shortstops). If you want a guy who constantly puts the ball in play, Tejada will do that. He doesn't have the speed to beat out a lot of infield hits, however, and doesn't hit the ball with the same force that he used to.

The major problem that I have with Tejada: he doesn't walk. Over the past three years, he's posted walk rates of 3.6%, 2.8%, and 4.4%. This could greatly exacerbate the Giants' overall problems with low walk rates. Walk rates this low are atrocious, especially considering he doesn't have any big numbers to outweigh it.

As for Tejada's defense, he's pretty mediocre. He has a career UZR/150 of -3.4 at shortstop. In 216 games at short over the past two seasons, he's posted a UZR of -12.3 with -14.2 RngR. He just can't cover much range out there. He never has, and going into his age-37 season, one can't expect him to.

There is one standout when examining Tejada. He is extremely durable. He played in 162 games in each season from 2001-2006. Over the past three seasons, he's played in 472 games. If he's good for one thing, it's being out there in the field every single day.

So to sum it up, Tejada's defense is pretty mediocre. His power has declined to a point where it's just below average for a shortstop. He rarely walks. He can't cover much range at short. He's pretty much only good for two things: making contact with the ball, and playing in a lot of games. Beyond that, he's just pretty mediocre.

Tejada, however, might be a good option with a little bit of luck. If the Giants sign him to one of those bargain contracts -- the maximum risk should be 1yr/$3MM -- and Tejada has a resurgence, much like that which they saw out of Huff or Burrell, he could just be worth it. He's probably good for anywhere between 1-3 WAR. For $3MM, that's worth it.

Do I want Tejada? Not really. I'd rather have Juan Uribe, Jason Bartlett, Marco Scutaro, J.J. Hardy, Orlando Cabrera. But if they can manage to get him on one of those bargain contracts, he could just surprise people. He should not be a player that the Giants are considering at this point, but as a last-minute cheap option? I say go for it.

The one thing I must say is that Tejada is due for a resurgence. He had an uncharacteristically poor .269/.312/.381 slash line in 2010, and will likely bounce back. He won't be incredible. But he might just bounce back to the point where he's actually a legitimately good option for starting shortstop. With a little bit of luck, he could be a decent shortstop.