Glad to know Sabean is reading my posts on Batter's Box. What other explanation can there be? With a healthy Aurilia back in the mix, the Giants' lineup is looking pretty good 1-5.

A move that I was wondering why the Giants hadn't made all off-season, it makes so much sense for them. It gives them some depth and flexibility in their OF and now they can play Durham at 2B instead of Nefei Perez. For Cruz, its not a bad deal either considering how bad the market has been for FAs. It beats playing for the O's.

Watch tomorrow's Toronto Star for a Richard Griffin column slamming JP for not getting anything for Jose in a trade. Inevitable as sunrise.

The Giants may yet play Cruz in right field and have Grissom in centerfield; which I would disagree with if there was anyone any better than Grissom available offensively for the Giants. They have a truck load of money spent this off-season but other than Perez and Grissom, I think it's well spent.

My guess is that Jose's agent was holding out for two years, somewhere, then once they decided to accept one year, went back to the best situation. There is a mutual option, but he'll have to perform at his 2001 level to make the Giants cough up $4 MM for 2004.

Cruz for nothing vs. Cruz-for-Ainsworth? Sabean does look good on this one. Cruz at $5 MM vs. Cat at $2.2 MM? No contest, even if you don't consider offence more important than defence. Which means J.P. also did the right thing. The Brad Fullmer situation (returning to your old team at a fraction of what you expected to be making) has the potential of creating some resentment on the player's part, so a change of scenery is probably best. Ask Mike Bordick. No matter how Griffin spins it, this is really a good outcome all around; now all Jose has to do is hit Johnson and Schilling.

Since I explored a possible trade several times in past posts before the new market made itself clear, I should pipe up and say that Sabean has indeed made what I consider to be a shrewd move. Cruz's lack of patience might still be exploitable by intelligent pitchers (see Johnson, Randy and Schilling, Curt), but if he is batting behind Bonds he'll hit his share of HRs too.

Paying out to avoid giving Neifi Perez ABs can only be considered a much-needed correction of a blunder.

Even if Cruz regresses to Reggie Sanders level, he's still more valuable given his youth and ability to play CF. Filipe Alou's history with Grissom aside, I have a feeling Cruz will be the team's CF by the end of the season. Who knows? Maybe a Grissom/Bernard platoon in CF will work out.

Like Jason said, I think the real benefit of this mean Durham can stay in the IF. That's one good IF, especially if Snow can rise above mediocrity at the plate.

Sabean does come out of this looking like a genius, not having to sacrifice Foppert, Ainsworth, or Ortiz to get Cruz.

I think the Ortiz for Moss deal looks pretty bad now. While the lineup appears the most balanced in the NL West, the rotation needs a more than a dash of good luck to stay afloat. Schmidt, Rueter, and Moss as the top three will be lucky to crack 600 IP, and that's asking an awful lot of Foppert and Ainsworth. It seems very unlikely they'll both be Mark Prior or even Josh Beckett good right out of the gate, and that means they'll have to drag Livan Hernandez out on bail every fifth day. Shudder.

I'd still take them to win the West, however.

After Durham-Aurilia-Fonzie-Barry, pitchers are going to be glad to see Cruz-Benny-J.T.-(insert anemic CF bat)-pitcher. Jose's younger than Reggie Sanders, a bit faster, but not a huge upgrade. It would be poetic justice if Reggie, who can still hit lefties well, signed for a million or so as the Jays' fourth OF. He's still jobless, along with Kenny Lofton, Chuck Finley and other "name" players.

Ignored in all of this fanfare, did anyone notice Esteban Loaiza had to settle for a minor-league deal from the White Sox, with only a remote chance to win a job in spring training? How much did Dr. Evil and Stew pay him again?

I am happy for Jose Cruz that he has landed on a team with a shot at the post-season. Better this fate than a dreary summer in Maryland.

It will be interesting to see which of two forces will be stronger in influencing his patience at the plate (which has only been below average in his best offensive season): Bonds' personal example of only swinging at strikes or Alou's walks-are-for-sissies philosophy.

Brian I'm not an idiot Sabean continues to keep his detractors guessing, doesn't he? I still have him in the idiot camp, personally, what with the signings of Grissom and Perez and the inability to replace a 700 OPS first basemen. This Cruz signing was a gimme and as for Alfonzo and Durham, did those take brains so much as cash?

I wouldn't mind seeing the Grissom and Perez signings magically undone and replaced by signings of Ortiz and Sanders. How about this lineup?

Durham 2b, Aurilia ss, Bonds lf, Alfonzo 3b, Ortiz 1b, Cruz cf, Sanders rf, Santiago c

But where would the fun be if Bonds didn't have to carry sinkholes in the lineup and Santiago didn't bat 4th or 5th?

A whole season in Chicago would be a dream from where I sit. I can just imagine the Phil Rogers and Jay Mariotti columns. Estaban Loaiza and Kenny Williams belong together. They for me, are near the top of the list of baseball people I love to see fail. Extremely hard people to like anything about. I hope their families care for them.

Kenny Williams comments and behaviour during "Sirotka Gate" was pathetic. A true gentleman.

For Shane, and anyone else still stewing over Sirotka, an oldie but a goody from The Spitter, a baseball site that doesn't take itself too seriously.

I don't think the case for Alou as the Alfonzo Soriano of managers is well established. Larry Walker and Alou Jr. were/are both high OBP guys. Grissom did well under Alou, too. And Cruz is going to surrounded by a lot of other positive influences: Durham, Alfonzo, Aurilia, and some other guy. That doesn't mean he'll magically start posting a .400 OBP, but it can't hurt too much either--if nothing else it'll mean that when he cracks those 25+ HRs, they won't all be 1 run shots.

About Sabean... I'm not about to sing the praises of Neifi Perez, but as a backup IF he's not bad. Sure, they could have gotten Jose Hernandez for the same amount of money, but he wouldn't have agreed to a bench role. Grissom has potential as a platoon player, assuming that's what the Giants have in mind. He did very well in that role with the Dodgers last year.

Assuming everybody's healthy, this is the best lineup Bonds has had around him in some time. (And if Snow can regain pre-2001 form--what the hell happened?--they may challenge the Phillies and Cards for best lineup in the NL.) I only hope that no longer having to constantly show-up Kent means Bonds doesn't lose his super-powers (or whatever wizard key that guy's using).

Seriously, I only question the ability of the rotation not to drain the bullpen by August-September.

It was a real eye-opener watching Bonds and the Giants make their run in the playoffs this year. It would be fun to see a Texas-San Francisco World Series only to see the two best of our time playing head to head over seven games...

I know.

I'm not an idiot.

A Texas-San Fransico World Series! HA! What are you an idiot!?

The most interesting thing for me will be to see who ends up hitting in front of Bonds and how much better they'll be because of it. Conversley, what kind of drop-off Kent might have not hitting in literally the greatest line-up spot of all-time. He's going to a much hitter-friendly park but if the Astros are expecting him to protect Berkman or Bagwell, just watch those numbers drop.

If Cruz somehow gets into the no.3 spot ahead of Bonds I say he hits 30 HRS easy. Im guessing Alfonzo or Aurilla will end up there though.

Completely off the cuff, but I'd say the first three spots in the order should be Durham-Alfonso-Bonds. Then Aurilia-Cruz-Santiago, followed by the last trio of Snow-Grissom/platoon-SP.

This lineup maximizes OBP ahead of Bonds and guarantees him the most ABs, which should be what any competent manager's chief goal in managing the Giants' offense. And I'm prepared to say that Alou is competent (when motivated).

Jordan

Nope, no sunrise that I can see (okay it's cloudy out) and Richard Griffin's column this morning misses the Cruz signing.

The S.F. Chronicle says Cruz deferred all but $1 million to get this deal done, and suggests he might bat third. Jason assumes he'd hit 30 HR in front of Barry, and perhaps he would, but the occasional taters would cost the Giants dearly. With the almost-as-intimidating Delgado in the on-deck circle, in 258 3-hole AB over the last three years, Jose had a .305 OBP, just 8 HR, and fanned 67 times. In theory, he sees more fastballs, but he still has to put the bat on them. I don't dislike Cruz, but he's hardly the answer to the Giant's lineup problems.

I'm almost certain Alfonzo will hit ahead of Bonds, and Sean's idea of Aurilia fourth isn't as bad as Cruz or Santiago in that spot, but they simply haven't replaced Kent's bat or given teams a reason to pitch to Barry. I think they'll be in a dogfight with the Snakes and Dodgers for a playoff berth, as JK will help the Astros rejoin the wild-card fray.

I totally agree with Sean in terms of the Giants' batting order. That seems the best way to maximize Bonds' value in the lineup.

I talked about the whole batting Cruz third ahead of Barry with Jason, and our disagreement seems to centre on how good a player one thinks Kent really is. Jason thinks Kent's a good player who became a superstar because of Barry. He also pointed out that Kent's numbers pre-S-F are very similar to Cruz's. It's an interesting observation. That said, I think Kent's legit, and the benefit of hitting in front of Bonds is minimal. Right now, like Coach says, Cruz hasn't shown he's up to the task.

As for replacing Kent's bat, I think it's become evident that no player on earth could give teams a reason to pitch to Barry. Durham and Alfonzo ahead of Bonds give him two legit on base guys. I don't think he's had that before. I guess I look at Durham and Alfonzo as being better than Kent and Bell, and to me that makes the Giants lineup better.

What might be interesting if Bonds is again approaching 150+ BB for Alou to try batting Bonds at the top of the order. This was much talked about last year, and I think it's an interesting theory, if only to throw opposing managers for a loop. It means that at least one at-bat per game they'll pitch to him.

My query about putting Cruz in the no.3 spot is also contingent on the likely-hood of Bonds being put in the no.4 spot by Alou. I agree he is best used in the no.3 spot, or higher, but if its an issue of ego, Bonds wanting the no.4 spot, or Alou sticking to conventional baseball logic, your best power hitter goes in the no.4 slot, then I wonder if Cruz is better hitting off in the no.3 spot.

As I pointed out to Jurgen Mass, Cruz's numbers are comparable if not better than Kent's pre-SF. I believe this is because he hit in front of Bonds and saw his share, probably more than anyone else in baseball, of fat pitches over the plate. I still think Kent is a good hitter, just not a great one.

I think the best hitter after Barry in the new SF lineup is Alfonzo and I don't think I'll get much disagreement on that. Alfonzo is a patient hitter who has a good OBP and hits for a decent average. Thats why I think if Barry is hitting no.4 that Alfonzo should hit behind him in the no.5 slot. Why? Barry is consistently walked because he has no protection behind him and pitchers are okay with putting him on 1st if they know they only have to face the likes of the free-swinging Santiago, or in the case of this coming season, Cruz. This also affects the number of runs Barry can score and doesnt make full use his ridicoulous OBP. What is the most logical thing to do with a guy who gets on base all the time? Drive him in, I say. If you put aside Bonds power numbers for a second what you have are the type of numbers, OBP/AVG/BB, you ideally want your lead-off man/top run scorer to put up. If pitchers are willing to give Bonds a record OBP by not pitching to him, then doesn't it make sense to make the most out of that? That's why I agree with hitting Barry 1 to 3, but if they are going to hit him 4 then I think Barry should have their best hitter behind him.

Alfonzo doesn't need the assistance of hitting in front of Bonds to be a good hitter, he'll be a good hitter regardless of where he hits. I cannot say the same for Cruz, who has all the athletic talent in the world, but isnt the most patient man at the plate. However, if you force a pitcher to pitch to Cruz in the strike zone you are going to get the most out of his power and athletic ability. (Next to Bonds he has more raw power than anybody with the Giants) I believe his so's will fall and his avg and HRs will rise.* And it also doesnt hurt to have your top 2 base stealers, Durham and Cruz, hitting ahead of Bonds applying more pressure on the pitcher to pitch to Bonds. And if Alfonzo is hitting no.5 that pressure is doubly increased.

So in summation, with this line-up 1-5:

Durham
Aurilla
Cruz
Bonds
Alfonzo

You'll maximize Cruz's ability while giving Bonds more opportunities to score and drive in runs. You will also give Alfonzo a bunch of guys to drive in.

*In response to Coach saying Delgado was nearly as intimidating as Bonds I'd greatly disagree with that. In addition to Delgado being far behind Bonds in every catagorey, he has nowhere near Bonds consistency. In addition Delgado hits in a very hitter friendly park while Barry hits in a very pitcher friendly park. There is no comparison. Also, before I'd be willing to say that Cruz doesn't hit well in the no.3 spot I'd want to see a breakdown of when and in front of whom those 258 bats happened. If they were 258 consecutive ABs in front of Delgado then I'd say that that might be a decent indicator.

To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised to see Grissom hitting near the top of the order. That's where Alou always used him with the Expos. Of course, Grissom also used to steal 70 bases back then so perhaps things are different now.

So who really knows what we'll see? Cruz and Grissom in the top 3? Anything is possible. Alou subscribes to traditional baseball wisdom of speed at the top and the best power at cleanup. Which is why Delgado will likely continue to hit fourth for the Jays, although third might make more sense with their current collection of hitters.

I would want a good OBP guy like Alfonzo hitting in front of Barry, and Cruz hitting behind him. Get the maximum possible chances of Barry coming up with guys on base.

I think Grissom is best served as a platoon player at this point.

Gwyn, Cruz isnt a bad OBP guy, he averages around .330 or so (Alfonzo is .367), and I think that number would come up signifigantly if he hits in front of Bonds.

As I stated in my previous post, ideally I would like to see Bonds anywhere from 1-3. But,if he has to go no.4, I think you get the maximum possible chances of Barry being able to drive in those runs with guys on base, and being able to score runs as well, if you have a good hitter behind him. In my mind Alfonzo is a better hitter than Cruz.

Feel free to compare Kent's pre-SF numbers with Cruz's. Minus Cruz's SBs you'll see a lot of similarities.

Jason, I didn't mean to suggest Delgado is a close comparison to Bonds, I was just trying to point out that Cruz, well protected by a dangerous slugger, is still a lousy 3-hitter. And he's not any better in the 5-hole.

It's hard to argue with your Kent vs. Cruz comparison at a similar age, but it wasn't just Barry that made JK better; he was a late bloomer who suddenly decided to swing for the fences, and it worked. It's not impossible for Jose to improve, but it's easier for a contact hitter to muscle up than for a free-swinger to learn discipline. If Delgado ahead of him and/or behind him didn't help Cruz, why would Bonds?

This is still a good signing for the Giants, and I'm really happy for Jose, I just don't think it's an improved team. The talent's roughly the same, and they are the defending champs, but there's no guarantee all the new parts will mesh. Most importantly, as much as I admire and respect the dignified Senor Alou, he's yesterday's manager. Third in the division with 89-90 wins wouldn't surprise me a bit.

"...it's easier for a contact hitter to muscle up than for a free-swinger to learn discipline."

Exactly my point. If Cruz hits in front of Bonds he won't need the same amount of discipline as hitting behind him because pitchers are going to throw to him.

"...but it wasn't just Barry that made JK better; he was a late bloomer who suddenly decided to swing for the fences, and it worked."

I don't think there is any way to prove outright your contention or mine, that Kent's(who ended up driving in 40 more runs than anytime in his career as soon as he got to SF)improvement comes directly from hitting in front of Bonds. I guess this season will tell the tale.

I have a good feeling about Cruz in that situation. I've always liked his potential and since he's basically a 30+ double, 30+ homer player when he's healthy, I think it would take a major meltdown not to drive in over 100 given a good spot in that order.

Coach:

You don't think Alfonzo & Durham are better than Kent & Bell? I don't have the win shares or whatever to back it up, but intuitively I'd rather have this lineup.

About Bonds' spot in the batting order (which, aside from assessing Kent's merits as a hitter, seems to be fueling a lot of this debate), does anybody have here have access to Bonds in the locker room (or have access to anybody who has access to anybody who has access to Bonds)?

I once wrote Peter Gammons, who seems to get all the insighful, non-jerk Barry Bonds quotes, about whether he could ask Bonds about his own preference. I never got a response. It seems crazy to me to bat Bonds fourth in any lineup (especially if it means Cruz bats third), and I'd like to get Barry's own thoughts on batting leadoff to avoid another 150+ walks.

If anyone anywhere can pull some strings and go straight to the source, that would be awesome. I'd be completely willing to defer to Bonds' judgement.

It seems funny that we're arguing about this. Isn't the official sabermetric line that batting order doesn't really matter?

Aaron Gleeman thinks it'll go Durham, Alfonzo, Bonds, Cruz, Aurilia. Bet no one here thought of that one! But then again, we've all seen Cruz up close and personal. I don't think Aaron has.

Oh, and Aaron's done my homework for me, and suggests that this lineup is worth the same number of equivalent runs as last year's (OK, he projects Durham and Alfonzo will be worth 5 runs less than last year's duo, but it's still close.)

However, I'd be prepared to concede that Aaron's predicted lineup is quite plausible and that Alou will try it during the season. Myself, I would swap Aurilia and Cruz as I stated above, but either way I believe that San Fran--the usual caveats about injuries and Bonds putting on Clark Kent's glasses apply--should have one of the top three offenses in the National League. Because I am so bullish about the Giants' young pitching trio of Foppert/Williams/Ainsworth shoring up their rotation, I am picking the Giants to win the NL West.

The Giants may win the West, but it won't be because of the three pitchers you mention. Nearly every rookie/young pitcher takes his lumps; for every Roy Oswalt, there are a dozen Roy Halladays (before he blossomed) and Bud Smith's and et al, et al, et al. It will be unlikely for ONE of the Giants young guns to have a good year, yet alone all three; more likely, all three will get thrashed around a bit, and Sabean will end up trading one for a Proven Veteran.

Having seen Ainsworth actually pitch, I'm not sure what all the hype is about; he's got the least upside of the three, and I really don't see him being much more than a #4 starter in the bigs.

I shouldn't be so gloomy. Maybe I have too many Pulsipher/Isringhausen/Wilson memories ...

I agree with some of your skepticism, Gitz; what I should have said is that I think that the Giants' trio of young pitchers will manage to perform at league-average levels, collectively. That should be enough, IMO.

John Sickels says one of the Giants' three phenoms will be a star, one will be traded and one will get hurt. He admits he has no idea which is which; one of the most refreshing and candid prospect evaluations I've seen. (Right now I'll guess Ainsworth gets dealt, "Doc" Williams breaks down and Foppert makes it, but who knows?) I'm not sure why Boof Bonser doesn't get lumped in with them more often; he's huge, throws gas, has that great name, and is only about a year behind the others.

Jurgen, just saying that all the SF changes don't add up to a noticeably superior roster. Sure, Fonzie and Durham combined are better than Kent and Bell, but if you consider Grissom-Lofton and Moss-Ortiz, overall it's not like the upgrades in Philly or Toronto. There may still be enough talent, it's really the new skipper more than anything else that makes me reluctant to concede a pennant just yet. And as always, my brain's impaired by my heart -- go Cards!

Joe Sheehan likes the additions to the Giants, and thinks they're a better team.

So there.

In all seriousness, I honestly think whether the Giants repeat hinges on how well their pitchers can hold up (will Schmidt be able to throw 200+ innings; will the bullpen implode if he can't?), and whether Bonds continues on his superhuman tear. If he regresses to, say, mere Shawn Green levels of greatness, I see them battling with the D-Backs and Dodgers until the end. If the spell wears off completely and he turns back into a pumpkin, they don't have a chance.

Barry Bonds and a bunch of little leaguers aren't far off from the greatest outfield in baseball.

Hmm... for those of us who think Cruz will essentially be a younger Reggie Sanders, you've got to scroll down a LONG way to find him.

Let's just say it's not a good thing when your VORP is lower than J.T. Snow's.

Granted, Cruz looks a lot better in 2001.

And giving further weight to my Torri Hunter is overpaid argument and this P.R. move will bite the low-payroll Twins in the ass, Cruz's 2001 score is better than Hunter's 2002. And Cruz isn't making $8 M a year.

Which Cruz will show up for the Giants?

Good old VORP. When we used to compare Willie, Mickey and the Duke, we looked at batting average and RBI and we were lucky to have that.

Interesting that still-begging-for-a-job Alex Ochoa had the same value as the 2002 model Cruz, and the next OF on the list is Howie Clark, signed by the Jays to a minor-league deal and invited to Dunedin to compete with Werth and Aven for the last seat on the bench.