PDA

View Full Version : Giants agree to terms with Miguel Tejada



VRP723
11-30-2010, 09:10 PM
Miguel Tejada said ESPNdeportes.com he agreed with San Francisco for 1 year $6.5 millions. Half million in bonus

http://twitter.com/Enrique_Rojas1/status/9773200351166464

Zmaster52
11-30-2010, 09:11 PM
Nice move, I'd prefer this over Uribe.

SFGiants4life
11-30-2010, 09:13 PM
meh, i guess....

VRP723
11-30-2010, 09:13 PM
Nice move, I'd prefer this over Uribe.

Me too, being as how Tejada is horrible and Uribe is a solid player

MooseWithFleas
11-30-2010, 09:18 PM
Back to that habit of old over the hill players. Best case scenario is that Tejada returns to a slightly above average offensive producer for the SS position with porous defense. That being said the market for SS is extremely poor (though Tejada isn't a SS anymore)

BaustinSali08
11-30-2010, 09:21 PM
Me too, being as how Tejada is horrible and Uribe is a solid player

Yes, but if Tejada is a bust it's just one year and not three.

j-bay
11-30-2010, 09:24 PM
he's back wearing black and orange

d79cheese
11-30-2010, 09:25 PM
Me too, being as how Tejada is horrible and Uribe is a solid player

there's not a huge difference between uribe and tejada at this point in their careers except one is getting paid 21 million over 3 years and the other is getting 6.5 for 1.

dodgersuck
11-30-2010, 09:28 PM
well.....this blows

MooseWithFleas
11-30-2010, 09:30 PM
On second thought, maybe they aren't through with solidifying their infield. Theoretically, they could be thinking of him as their starting option at third and exploring other options at SS, such as O-Cab (ew) or through trade with Bartlett, or maybe JJ Hardy gets non-tendered.

If Tejada is being signed to play short, then it's probably a bad move (albeit not egregious because of the weak SS market). If he is being used as a starter at 3rd, then it is going to be interesting to see what happens to Pablo. I'm assuming Fontenot get's non tendered, though who knows.

A key part of the Giants 2010 was the platooning, it worked magically (though not logically :)) when Bochy flip-flopped Fontenot/Pablo, Rowand/Torres, and Uribe/Renteria. Tejada could be part of a multi-position platoon at short and third.

Regardless of my out loud thinking, 6.5m is too much.



there's not a huge difference between uribe and tejada at this point in their careers except one is getting paid 21 million over 3 years and the other is getting 6.5 for 1.

The difference is that Tejada can't play a competent short anymore. Uribe is no wizard, but he has a strong arm and makes the plays he gets to. Nonetheless, I don't like Uribe's contract either, the guy is a .300 career OBP about to hit his decline phase. His range is fringy and if it goes down a bit, he will have to be moved to. For the upcoming season and forward, Uribe is a better value than Tejada. That doesn't mean Uribe is a good value though...

RayRay
11-30-2010, 09:30 PM
a world series title will make you forget your gm blows. guess that's what the offseason is for.... :rolleyes:

Wrench
11-30-2010, 09:34 PM
Nice move, I'd prefer this over Uribe.

Really? I don't see how, other than their OBP Juan Uribe is a better and younger player right now. Now if this was 5 years ago I'd say this was a great move.

Wrench
11-30-2010, 09:36 PM
Jon Heyman

tejada has agreed with #SFGiants. word is, sandoval will still play 3B. so again, bartlett trade appears unlikely. #feellikeyoyo

JRisdabest
11-30-2010, 09:37 PM
uuuuuuuribe>>>tejada

The_Mac22
11-30-2010, 09:43 PM
I'm actually ok with this deal.

The_Franchise13
11-30-2010, 09:46 PM
:puke:

Let's hope we magically have career years again only to have a mediocre offense. That's the plan! We will certainly take advantage of this pitching staff that way! I hate Sabean.

Sigh... at least it's not Jeter @ 3/45+.

VRP723
11-30-2010, 09:49 PM
On second thought, maybe they aren't through with solidifying their infield. Theoretically, they could be thinking of him as their starting option at third and exploring other options at SS, such as O-Cab (ew) or through trade with Bartlett, or maybe JJ Hardy gets non-tendered.

If Tejada is being signed to play short, then it's probably a bad move (albeit not egregious because of the weak SS market). If he is being used as a starter at 3rd, then it is going to be interesting to see what happens to Pablo. I'm assuming Fontenot get's non tendered, though who knows.

A key part of the Giants 2010 was the platooning, it worked magically (though not logically :)) when Bochy flip-flopped Fontenot/Pablo, Rowand/Torres, and Uribe/Renteria. Tejada could be part of a multi-position platoon at short and third.

Regardless of my out loud thinking, 6.5m is too much.




The difference is that Tejada can't play a competent short anymore. Uribe is no wizard, but he has a strong arm and makes the plays he gets to. Nonetheless, I don't like Uribe's contract either, the guy is a .300 career OBP about to hit his decline phase. His range is fringy and if it goes down a bit, he will have to be moved to. For the upcoming season and forward, Uribe is a better value than Tejada. That doesn't mean Uribe is a good value though...

This misnomer that Uribe has no range is dumb. He's been a great defensive second baseman any time he's played the position.

Giraffes Rule
11-30-2010, 10:01 PM
I like Tejada, for what it's worth. I don't know how much his production fell off last year, but with the Astros he hit pretty well, albeit with not a lot of power.

dodgersuck
11-30-2010, 10:05 PM
I would still rather have tejada for one year than uribe for 3

VRP723
11-30-2010, 10:10 PM
^^ Tejada this year is gonna be like Uribe will in year three of his contract, so I wouldn't.

MooseWithFleas
11-30-2010, 10:13 PM
This misnomer that Uribe has no range is dumb. He's been a great defensive second baseman any time he's played the position.

I was referring mostly to his and Tejada's ability at short for the Giants. I didn't think of it in the Dodgers context. Him moving over to 2nd, definitely prolongs his value as range is less of an issue at 2nd. His range still is below average though.

CAIN=FUTURE
11-30-2010, 10:15 PM
For some reason I have a really good feeling about this. The Giants have a way of getting the best out of washed up vets. Maybe its Bochy?

ESaady
11-30-2010, 10:17 PM
Im expecting 34 homers and 146 rbis.

VRP723
11-30-2010, 10:17 PM
I was referring mostly to his and Tejada's ability at short for the Giants. I didn't think of it in the Dodgers context. Him moving over to 2nd, definitely prolongs his value as range is less of an issue at 2nd. His range still is below average though.

No it's not, his RngR in his career, along with last season, is positive at 2B and SS, as well as his UZR. As opposed to Tejada, who's never had range at any position, and can't even play 3rd.

MooseWithFleas
11-30-2010, 10:25 PM
No it's not, his RngR in his career, along with last season, is positive at 2B and SS, as well as his UZR. As opposed to Tejada, who's never had range at any position, and can't even play 3rd.

Uribe's RngR at SS
2007: -0.1
2008: Not enough games at SS
2009: -2.3
2010: -0.4

The sample size at 2B is too small to put any faith in, as the last time he started more than 40 games at 2nd was in 2004.

downsos
11-30-2010, 10:29 PM
Stupid move. If you're going to sign a stopgap mediocre SS you should at least not overpay for it. This move screams desperation.

t327
11-30-2010, 10:32 PM
No more Edgar?

VRP723
11-30-2010, 10:32 PM
Uribe's RngR at SS
2007: -0.1
2008: Not enough games at SS
2009: -2.3
2010: -0.4

The sample size at 2B is too small to put any faith in, as the last time he started more than 40 games at 2nd was in 2004.

So last year he was around average, the year before he started 35 games there, so we'll throw those stats out the window, that's about as average as it gets, along with the fact that he never makes errors and has a positive UZR at all three positions. He's an above average defender, no way around it.

Twitchy
11-30-2010, 10:33 PM
It's a good thing those Giant pitchers strike out a lot of hitters because every single ball hit to the left side of the IF is a guaranteed hit.

MooseWithFleas
11-30-2010, 10:42 PM
So last year he was around average, the year before he started 35 games there, so we'll throw those stats out the window, that's about as average as it gets, along with the fact that he never makes errors and has a positive UZR at all three positions. He's an above average defender, no way around it.

I never said he wasn't. I said his range is fringy at short, and if it declines at all he won't be able to play there anymore because those plays he gets to will go down in number.

I originally said,


Uribe is no wizard, but he has a strong arm and makes the plays he gets to

which is agrees with your sentiment about him not making errors. But a 31 year old SS who is not the poster boy for being in shape screams of position change. Luckily, the Dodgers will be playing him at 2nd, where it is easier to last.

shizzle09
11-30-2010, 10:45 PM
Me too, being as how Tejada is horrible and Uribe is a solid player

Dodgers paid Uribe for what he did over the last two years. We got him for roughly 5 mil for the two years he was with us. Good luck getting the same production from him.

cambovenzi
11-30-2010, 10:49 PM
Dodgers paid Uribe for what he did over the last two years. We got him for roughly 5 mil for the two years he was with us. Good luck getting the same production from him.

I'd be more confident that uribe can put up similar numbers to what he has been than in tejada having a miracle turnaround @ 37 years old.
I dont think either signing was all that good tho.

VRP723
11-30-2010, 10:52 PM
There's no indication that Uribe is on a decline though :shrug:

Tejada on the other hand, clearly is.

giantspwn
11-30-2010, 10:59 PM
Me too, being as how Tejada is horrible and Uribe is a solid player

:laugh:

You've got to be Ned Colletti incognito.

The only argument you've consistently made is using UZR metric which can be a very inaccurate stat. Your actually calling Uribe a solid player while Tejada's horrible? LOL

Tejada was a +10 in 2008 then all of a sudden he was horrible in 2009. The stat is just too volatile.

Obviously, Uribe is a better defender but your completely forgetting about the offensive aspect. Tejada has a career .345 wOBA while Uribe has a .312 wOBA.

In the last ten seasons, Uribe has only posted a WAR above 3 twice, Tejada has done it nine times.

Now, I assume this is where you say, " but omg Juan's five years younger!!?"

Gimme a break, he's Dominican! Dude looks like he's 38. Regardless of arguing who's better, Uribe's signed to a ridiculous contract, Tejada isn't.

Good deal Sabes

The_Mac22
11-30-2010, 11:03 PM
They both look the same age. Which is like 38-39

giantspwn
11-30-2010, 11:03 PM
There's no indication that Uribe is on a decline though :shrug:

Tejada on the other hand, clearly is.

Your using 2010 as an indicator for decline.

I'm sorry. I'm not trying to be rude or anything but I'm not seeing any logic here.

If Tejada is declining, what was Uribe doing from 2005-2008, dude was garbage. Uribe had two decent years as a utility player for SF and now he's a "solid player"?

cambovenzi
11-30-2010, 11:08 PM
:laugh:

You've got to be Ned Colletti incognito.

The only argument you've consistently made is using UZR metric which can be a very inaccurate stat. Your actually calling Uribe a solid player while Tejada's horrible? LOL

Tejada was a +10 in 2008 then all of a sudden he was horrible in 2009. The stat is just too volatile.

Obviously, Uribe is a better defender but your completely forgetting about the offensive aspect. Tejada has a career .345 wOBA while Uribe has a .312 wOBA.

In the last ten seasons, Uribe has only posted a WAR above 3 twice, Tejada has done it nine times.

Now, I assume this is where you say, " but omg Juan's five years younger!!?"

Gimme a break, he's Dominican! Dude looks like he's 38. Regardless of arguing who's better, Uribe's signed to a ridiculous contract, Tejada isn't.

Good deal Sabes

So you'd rather use stats over the past 10 years that dont represent the player miggy is now instead of the past two?
Tejada is not the allstar player he once was.

On UZR, its best used over the course of multiple seasons.
tejada is a significantly below average fielder in most years.

More-Than-Most
11-30-2010, 11:13 PM
Neither signing was very good but the Giants went the safe route... I would much rather take a risk on Tejada for 1 season at 6 mill than have Uribe for 3. Basically The Giants have a low risk high reward situation here... If he blows they could always go a different route... The Dodgers are stuck with uribe.

giantspwn
11-30-2010, 11:15 PM
So you'd rather use stats over the past 10 years that dont represent the player miggy is now instead of the past two?
Tejada is not the allstar player he once was.

On UZR, its best used over the course of multiple seasons.
tejada is a significantly below average fielder in most years.

Well even the last five seasons still represent my point. Defense aside, Tejada has still had the higher overall value.

What about when Uribe was horrible for four straight seasons? Is he not the player he was then? Has he gotten better with age?

sacgiants1213
11-30-2010, 11:19 PM
Wtf.

CityofTreez
11-30-2010, 11:23 PM
Brian Sabean Does Wonders

cambovenzi
11-30-2010, 11:25 PM
Well even the last five seasons still represent my point. Defense aside, Tejada has still had the higher overall value.

What about when Uribe was horrible for four straight seasons? Is he not the player he was then? Has he gotten better with age?

Tejada just isnt the same player he was 4 or 5 seasons ago.

Who knows on uribe. i wouldnt be opposed to discounting him a bit because of that. but the fact is he is playing better now than tejada.

Swishalicious
11-30-2010, 11:28 PM
Upside: You get Tejada from a couple of years ago... remember he led the NL in doubles!! Not too shabby

Downside: You get Tejada from last year...which was not impressive at all

Either way, its not the worst risk one can take. Tejada is still clutch in big spots. At least they didn't sign Jeter for a multi-year contract for over $15 million a year...

Giants-49ers-Ws
11-30-2010, 11:38 PM
**** this...i really wanted to get BARTLETT..we need to get YOUNGER and more athletic..bartlett would've provided speed on the basepath, could've hit leadoff and had range defensively..

he also would've been cheaper and is from the Bay Area...bad move sabean..bad move

dodgersuck
11-30-2010, 11:43 PM
**** this...i really wanted to get BARTLETT..we need to get YOUNGER and more athletic..bartlett would've provided speed on the basepath, could've hit leadoff and had range defensively..

he also would've been cheaper and is from the Bay Area...bad move sabean..bad move


Meanwhile, even after striking a deal with Tejada, the Giants, according to sources, are one of several clubs engaging the Rays in conversations regarding Bartlett.

http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/6270335/26165848

we still might get bartlett :eyebrow:

giantspwn
11-30-2010, 11:45 PM
**** this...i really wanted to get BARTLETT..we need to get YOUNGER and more athletic..bartlett would've provided speed on the basepath, could've hit leadoff and had range defensively..

he also would've been cheaper and is from the Bay Area...bad move sabean..bad move

I preferred Bartlett but he wouldn't have come cheaper.

He's going to make 5+ mil plus prospects to trade for him unless the Rays non tender him which is unlikely.

VRP723
11-30-2010, 11:57 PM
:laugh:

You've got to be Ned Colletti incognito.

The only argument you've consistently made is using UZR metric which can be a very inaccurate stat. Your actually calling Uribe a solid player while Tejada's horrible? LOL

Tejada was a +10 in 2008 then all of a sudden he was horrible in 2009. The stat is just too volatile.

Obviously, Uribe is a better defender but your completely forgetting about the offensive aspect. Tejada has a career .345 wOBA while Uribe has a .312 wOBA.

In the last ten seasons, Uribe has only posted a WAR above 3 twice, Tejada has done it nine times.

Now, I assume this is where you say, " but omg Juan's five years younger!!?"

Gimme a break, he's Dominican! Dude looks like he's 38. Regardless of arguing who's better, Uribe's signed to a ridiculous contract, Tejada isn't.

Good deal Sabes

Career stats for Tejada? Really? I think there's a reason your entire fan base hates this signing, you're really missing the boat here.

dodgersuck
11-30-2010, 11:59 PM
I don't hate it because I don't have to watch Uribe swing at pitches over his head for 3/21

Gigantes4Life
12-01-2010, 12:02 AM
NL West GMs have a lot of fail.

At least it's only one year. I'm hoping they move him to 3rd, Pablo to 1st and still try and get Bartlett or Hardy.

Hunter48MVP
12-01-2010, 12:06 AM
This deal seems great for the Gaints. I think Miguel Tejada is a bargain this year

giantspwn
12-01-2010, 12:10 AM
Career stats for Tejada? Really? I think there's a reason your entire fan base hates this signing, you're really missing the boat here.

Haha, that's what I thought. Way to avoid your previous statements.

Does my entire fan base consist of 5-6 posters on this board. Wow, great generalization there bud.

Besides this isn't about the Tejada signing, remember? It's about how Uribe is a "solid player" while Tejada is "horrible". You my friend didn't even come near the ****ing boat. Stop embarrassing yourself.

Boston-Born
12-01-2010, 12:13 AM
Haha, that's what I thought. Way to avoid your previous statements.

Does my entire fan base consist of 5-6 posters on this board. Wow, great generalization there bud.

Besides this isn't about the Tejada signing, remember? It's about how Uribe is a "solid player" while Tejada is "horrible". You my friend didn't even come near the ****ing boat. Stop embarrassing yourself.

:clap:

VRP723
12-01-2010, 12:15 AM
Haha, that's what I thought. Way to avoid your previous statements.

Does my entire fan base consist of 5-6 posters on this board. Wow, great generalization there bud.

Besides this isn't about the Tejada signing, remember? It's about how Uribe is a "solid player" while Tejada is "horrible". You my friend didn't even come near the ****ing boat. Stop embarrassing yourself.

Alright then, I'll just ask, what is Tejada better at than Uribe?

Hitting for power? No
Taking walks? No
Playing defense? No
What am I missing?

ChetSteadman
12-01-2010, 12:16 AM
Rumors are we're still front runners for Bartlett. Looks like Bartlett at SS, Tejada at 3B and Panda's comin off the bench til he can pull his swing out of the crapper

VRP723
12-01-2010, 12:18 AM
Rumors are we're still front runners for Bartlett. Looks like Bartlett at SS, Tejada at 3B and Panda's comin off the bench til he can pull his swing out of the crapper

I don't get the people counting Sandoval out, he wasn't that bad last year, and he should certainly improve. He's way better than Tejada and Bartlett anyway, that's for sure.

Swishalicious
12-01-2010, 12:19 AM
Alright then, I'll just ask, what is Tejada better at than Uribe?

Hitting for power? No
Taking walks? No
Playing defense? No
What am I missing?

Im actually on your side here, I think Uribe is a better fit for the Giants than Tejada.

The only advantage of the Tejada signing is:

1) Its a shorter deal [1 year]
2) Is clutch... but Uribe was too in the 2010 postseason

Swishalicious
12-01-2010, 12:22 AM
NL West GMs have a lot of fail.

At least it's only one year. I'm hoping they move him to 3rd, Pablo to 1st and still try and get Bartlett or Hardy.

So you are gonna have Aubrey Huff sit his $22 million on the bench? I don't think you have to move Sandoval. He had a bad year, but I don't think he is done by any means.

ChetSteadman
12-01-2010, 12:23 AM
I don't get the people counting Sandoval out, he wasn't that bad last year, and he should certainly improve. He's way better than Tejada and Bartlett anyway, that's for sure.

We'll see. I'm not ready to give up on him. He's only played two seasons, but that drop in stats after the first season was pretty drastic. I think its more that guys just learned how to pitch to him. He needs to learn some plate discipline though.

ChetSteadman
12-01-2010, 12:25 AM
The GIDP were what was killing me. I wish he'd hit more HRs too, but AT&T just ain't that kinda park (hell, the NL West in general isn't aside from COL), so Im not too concerned with power bats. We need guys who can hit for average and with guys on base. We need to manufacture runs. He DID strike out 2 less times though

VRP723
12-01-2010, 12:30 AM
Im actually on your side here, I think Uribe is a better fit for the Giants than Tejada.

The only advantage of the Tejada signing is:

1) Its a shorter deal [1 year]
2) Is clutch... but Uribe was too in the 2010 postseason

Yup, the shorter deal is the only advantage over the Uribe deal, but like I said, in year three Uribe will probably be what Tejada is right now.

dodgersuck
12-01-2010, 12:31 AM
Dude Uribe is not that good right now, He's solid but in 3 years its gonna be ugly

RTL
12-01-2010, 12:37 AM
So you are gonna have Aubrey Huff sit his $22 million on the bench? I don't think you have to move Sandoval. He had a bad year, but I don't think he is done by any means.

Huff would go to LF. Sandoval will have a lot of maturing at the plate to do this offseason. Nothing wrong with being prepared if he doesn't. Plus Sandoval moving to first would help over defense or at least at third.

VRP723
12-01-2010, 12:38 AM
He will definitely be bad in the third year, but probably not much worse than Tejada will be this year.

iggypop123
12-01-2010, 12:50 AM
so is he playing short? or does sandoval have third all to himself? if he is going to be the full time short stop damn this sucks. at least its a 1 yr deal more of a stop gap measure.

Lloyd Christmas
12-01-2010, 01:03 AM
Yup, the shorter deal is the only advantage over the Uribe deal, but like I said, in year three Uribe will probably be what Tejada is right now.

So in 3 years Uribe will be the starting SS of the defending world champs? Not if he's on the bootsy *** Dodgers.

BAY
12-01-2010, 01:12 AM
I'd MUCH rather have Tejada @ 1 year than Uribe at 3. Easily. I support this signing.

Lincecum4CY
12-01-2010, 01:21 AM
http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/6270335/26165848

we still might get bartlett :eyebrow:

side note- am i the only one that thinks the chick in your sig looks like jimmy rollins at the up close shot?

DodgerB24
12-01-2010, 01:30 AM
side note- am i the only one that thinks the chick in your sig looks like jimmy rollins at the up close shot?

No. :p

Lloyd Christmas
12-01-2010, 01:41 AM
side note- am i the only one that thinks the chick in your sig looks like jimmy rollins at the up close shot?

Who Lauryn Hill? Get outta here.

VRP723
12-01-2010, 01:50 AM
side note- am i the only one that thinks the chick in your sig looks like jimmy rollins at the up close shot?

:laugh:

Swishalicious
12-01-2010, 02:07 AM
Huff would go to LF. Sandoval will have a lot of maturing at the plate to do this offseason. Nothing wrong with being prepared if he doesn't. Plus Sandoval moving to first would help over defense or at least at third.

I guess you can do that... but Mark DeRosa and Rowand are on the bench? Idk, just seems like a waste of talent...it would be a pretty sweet bench though

d79cheese
12-01-2010, 02:11 AM
I guess you can do that... but Mark DeRosa and Rowand are on the bench? Idk, just seems like a waste of talent...it would be a pretty sweet bench though

Huff will end up in LF eventually when Belt comes up. . DeRosa will be a SUPER utility guy playing all around the IF and OF, and Rowand will collect 12 million on the bench

iggypop123
12-01-2010, 02:13 AM
new update says giants aint in on bartlet. well welcome to the gm meetings. rumors change every 10 minutes

zambo4president
12-01-2010, 02:18 AM
Tejada to the Giants. Huh there were alot better options for them. He could have a solid year but I wouldn't get your hopes up with this move.

Giants-49ers-Ws
12-01-2010, 03:01 AM
^ their not; should've got bartlett..

very bad move...but we can't get bartlett...if we were to replace uribe/burrell with tejada/bartlett we'd be losing so many hr's and rbi's..plus clutchness

resign burrell...were ****ed at leadoff hitter when torres goes down

Gaels1997
12-01-2010, 04:08 AM
The best part is Dodger fan is laughing at our Tejada singing. Yet they just grossly overpaid a guy who was paid a total of 4 millionin 2 years by the Giants after they signed him to a minor league deal 2 years ago because nobody wanted him, the comes back this year again because he couldn't get better and NOW he's worth 21 million..I guess it really does cost more to go down in LA...21 mill for a .240 hitter..he will run into the HRs but not 21 million worth

tadmanny
12-01-2010, 04:11 AM
^ their not; should've got bartlett..

very bad move...but we can't get bartlett...if we were to replace uribe/burrell with tejada/bartlett we'd be losing so many hr's and rbi's..plus clutchness

resign burrell...were ****ed at leadoff hitter when torres goes down

dude, why are you so into bartlett? bartletts avg. at best. He's had one or two decent years his whole career and he isn't that young either. I'd much rather have Tejadas bat than Bartletts. Bartlett is a scrub 8 hitter and Tejadas UZR has actually been better than Barlett....

cambovenzi
12-01-2010, 04:11 AM
The best part is Dodger fan is laughing at our Tejada singing. Yet they just grossly overpaid a guy who was paid a total of 4 millionin 2 years by the Giants after they signed him to a minor league deal 2 years ago because nobody wanted him, the comes back this year again because he couldn't get better and NOW he's worth 21 million..I guess it really does cost more to go down in LA...21 mill for a .240 hitter..he will run into the HRs but not 21 million worth

Hes a better and younger player than tejada, and is getting paid about the same per year.
The only difference is the contract length, but again hes younger and better.

cambovenzi
12-01-2010, 04:23 AM
dude, why are you so into bartlett? bartletts avg. at best. He's had one or two decent years his whole career and he isn't that young either. I'd much rather have Tejadas bat than Bartletts. Bartlett is a scrub 8 hitter and Tejadas UZR has actually been better than Barlett....

Bartlett had a down year in 2010, but was one of the best SS's in 2009.

In his career his defense is also above average via UZR and total zone.(including 1 run above average in 2010 with TZ)

Hes alot younger and IMO a lot more likely to return to successful #'s.

The_Jamal
12-01-2010, 06:16 AM
Rumors are we're still front runners for Bartlett. Looks like Bartlett at SS, Tejada at 3B and Panda's comin off the bench til he can pull his swing out of the crapper

Nope Panda to 1B and Huff to LF is much more likely. We just can't give up on the Panda's potential after 1 season.

el_primo_nano
12-01-2010, 07:33 AM
This is a step down from Juan Uribe. Tejada has not been the same for three years now

raidersrock99
12-01-2010, 11:37 AM
dodger fans are so bitter lately about everything. just saying

Gibby23
12-01-2010, 12:25 PM
:laugh:

You've got to be Ned Colletti incognito.

The only argument you've consistently made is using UZR metric which can be a very inaccurate stat. Your actually calling Uribe a solid player while Tejada's horrible? LOL

Tejada was a +10 in 2008 then all of a sudden he was horrible in 2009. The stat is just too volatile.

Obviously, Uribe is a better defender but your completely forgetting about the offensive aspect. Tejada has a career .345 wOBA while Uribe has a .312 wOBA.

In the last ten seasons, Uribe has only posted a WAR above 3 twice, Tejada has done it nine times.

Now, I assume this is where you say, " but omg Juan's five years younger!!?"

Gimme a break, he's Dominican! Dude looks like he's 38. Regardless of arguing who's better, Uribe's signed to a ridiculous contract, Tejada isn't.

Good deal Sabes

Isn't Tejada like 43?

CAIN=FUTURE
12-01-2010, 12:35 PM
The Giants might be leaving an open spot for Brandon Belt. Do they think he can come up right away and produce like Posey did?

Slumberking
12-02-2010, 02:34 AM
If Uribe had signed that rumored 3 year 20 million offer that the Giants offered to match the Dodgers, i would have been pissed. Decent player, but a memorable off season really got him payed more than he deserved in my opinion.

I think 6.5 was too much for Tejada, but i have a really good feeling about him this season, and as everyone else has said, we can DFA his *** if it doesnt work out and that is something the Dodgers cannot do.

While its clearly not ideal, im happy the Giants took this route over the Uribe 3/20 route. The homers are nice, but it will be nice to not have to see the 20 clueless swings per home run like we have the last couple years.

Super.
12-02-2010, 03:15 PM
I personally hope tejada has a good year. Ive always kinda liked him

hype707
12-02-2010, 03:21 PM
Tejada one year > Boooo Ribe 3 years.

DodgerBlue24
12-02-2010, 11:48 PM
This thread has turned into nothing but a flame war between the DODGERS/giants....

To the giants go take Tejada.... We are taking Uribe and thats it... We"ll see who has the better season next year...

Close this **** thread....

CAIN=FUTURE
12-03-2010, 02:55 AM
I really really really dislike the dodgers.