Two bits of intrigue remain in the Giants season, which essentially died in this, the month of June. The club totes a 6-18 record this month into Tuesday night’s game vs. Colorado. The two bits:
- Who gets dealt?
- Will they lose 100 games?
Gotta say, those are some remarkable questions to be asking. When Paulie Mac and I sat in Scottsdale Stadium in late February, we thought the two questions would be:
- Will Madison Bumgarner finally win the Cy Young this year?
- Can Mark Melancon close out Game 7 of the World Series?
But things change. The Warriors are winning NBA championships. Reality TV stars are being elected to the White House. ‘The Gong Show’ has returned to the airwaves.
Nothing is certain in this world, as I was just saying to my good pals on the Atlanta Falcons late in the third quarter of the Super Bowl.
We bring up the “Who gets dealt?” topic because Jon Paul Morosi, an MLB.com scribe with experience and credibility, posted a column today saying industry sources believe the only three untouchables on the Giants roster, come trade time, are Buster Posey, Madison Bumgarner and Brandon Crawford.
Because I majored in deductive reasoning, that means names like Johnny Cueto, Jeff Samardzija, Mark Melancon and Brandon Belt would be discussed.
And I have no problem with any of it.
The “small sample size” of a bad April or May has turned into almost a full blown year of awfulness for the Giants as currently constructed. Since the 30-42 second half of 2016, the 28-51 start to this year means that in the last 151 games, the Giants are 58-93. That means a 4-7 stretch in the next 11 games — wholly doable — would equal a 100-loss season from last year’s All-Star Break to now.
We’ve gone over the rarity of the 100-loss season on the air. It’s happened once in Giants history. Giants history goes back to 1883. I like to trot out the fact that Ulysses S. Grant saw a Giants game at the Polo Grounds. True story. So we’re talking about a history that involves CIVIL WAR GENERALS and there has been only one 100-loss season. (I know, they only started playing 162 in 1961, but work with me here. In fact, in 1901,1902 and 1943 they had lower win percentages than in 1985.)
In other words, something’s broken. If you believe it starts with bats and a lack of power, I won’t argue. If you believe it starts with inconsistent starting pitching, I won’t argue with you. If you believe it starts with a totally unreliable bullpen, I won’t argue with you. I especially won’t argue with you on the bullpen thesis. It’s perhaps the stinkiest fish of all.
Bad outfield defense … bad bench … poorly-constructed rosters under the aegis of Bobby Evans … it’s all awful.
So, like other crisis points in Giants history, drastic measures must be taken. In 1985, the Giants fired their manager and general manager, and hired Roger Craig and Al Rosen. In 1992, when the team lost 90 games and nearly was sold to Tampa, new owners swooped in and signed Barry Bonds.
I don’t see new owners swooping in. And I don’t see Bonds on the free agent market.
As for Bochy and Evans? Evans would be the more likely target for a dismissal, but Larry Baer’s ownership group is patented for patience and long haul. Like the Pittsburgh Steelers, they abhor turnover and cherish stability, even with a horrific stretch of ball.
That leads us to the trade market. If Evans is to turn this thing around, he’ll have to nail the market when it comes to Cueto, who has already said he is opting out at the end of this year; he’d have to convince a closer-hungry team like the Washington Nationals to take on $53 million of Melancon’s deal; he’d have to sell a team on Samardzija’s remaining three-year deal; and he’d have to be prepared to slide a first baseman in who can match Belt’s OPS and defense.
This, right here, is where Bobby Evans earns the big bucks. He has to make dramatic moves, and he has to make them well.
Murph: ‘If Evans is to turn this thing around, he’ll have to nail the market’
By
/
