First off I apologize for being off topic on the first post - I mean no disrespect to the author. 

However, I wanted to point out that apparently one of Japan's top shortstops, Hiroyuki Nakajima, is apparently on his way to MLB.  He is supposed to be a 300 hitter with a 400 OBP and 20 HR 20 SB track record - he might lose some of that power in transition but, considering how highly regarded he is supposed to be, the rest of the numbers might stick. 

I bring this up because if this guy is willing to move over to 3B he might be a very good solution to our 3B problem - a talented defensive player with a good OBP and some speed to balance out our lineup.  More importantly, although the posting system (he is still officially under contract) may mean that he costs us a little bit of money, the fact that he is not a type A free agent makes him a more likely solution (for a team that will value first round picks in next year's stacked draft) for the Jays who should have money to spend.  I believe he is only 28 so he would fit into the plans for 2011-2014 at least.  

Patrick Newman on Fangraphs has some very good things to say about him and also points to a video of him hitting an opposite field HR.

I would be more excited about this than most of the other 3B options like Beltre who would cost us a first round pick.  The idea of trading for Figgins sounds interesting but I wouldn't want to give up a top prospect (in a trade) for him either.  My plan B would still be keeping Bautista at 3B, finding a new more athletic CF, and putting Wells in RF

On Doc, the Freak and Nakajima -

No question their two or three match-ups will be PVRed by many - me included. Come a frosty Friday in February they'll be GREAT games to re-watch!

On Nakajima - I doubt the guy has "corner" power AND AA is really just not that into free agency as a way to get (expensive) guys. I think we've a better chance to get David Wright from the Mets in a trade rather than even try for this guy, Beltre or any other MAJOR free agent - until we need the one of two to push us over the top. As to getting David from the Mets - I think a lot of snowballs would have to resist Hell's heat before that became a reality. However, AA will make a trade this off-season for a big bat - I'm sure of it.

Back to regular programming - I like the Phillies and the Docster in 5.

No disrespect to Doc or the Freak, but the player featured in these playoffs that I'd be most eager to have on my team just might be Brian McCann.

McCann over Mauer or Posey?

I am going to go out on a limb and say that neither will have his good stuff due to the long layoff between starts.

If that does prove to be the case, then it is really too bad.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Giants fail to score a run in the first three games. It's going to be a perfect showcase for the "Pitcher's Year."

I am going to go out on a limb and say that neither will have his good stuff due to the long layoff between starts.

That's a shaky limb. I believe Doc had eight day's rest before his no-hitter.

It's going to be a perfect showcase for the "Pitcher's Year."

A year in which run-scoring plummetted all of 5%, from 4.61 to 4.38 runs per game per team.

Framing it as just 5% is one way of saying it, another is that it has been nearly 20 years since run scoring was this low.

A game of 'what could've been'. Halladay the ex-Jay and Lincecum who almost was a Jay based on reports at the time. If only JP had kept quiet he might still have a job and the Jays staff would've been the scariest in baseball (the media went nuts when the rumour was out for Lincecum for Rios was rumoured, took days before SF said 'no').

Regardless of the reality, the perception is that this was the "Pitcher's Year" (Registered Trademark of the national sports media).

And if the pitchers dominate the NLCS as they certainly have the potential to do, that perception will be reinforced.

My recollection is that the talk of the Lincecum deal came out of SF and not JP shooting off his mouth though I could be wrong on that.  However, in a more recent interview JP said that a deal was worked out for a pitcher who was really hot now(assumed to be Matt Cain at the time) and a player (assumed to be Rios) who was a favourite of an executive (assumed to be Godfrey) and that the executive nixed the deal.  That's a lot of assumptions!

Actually that report has the ring of truth to it.  Even if Ricciardi is not naming specific names, it sounds pretty clear that he's referring to Cain, Rios and Godfrey.  And if it's true that Godfrey nixed the deal because he thought Rios was a fan favorite, that's the second example of Godfrey screwing the team because of his sentimental perception of "fan favorites."  He saddled the Jays with the massive long-term contract for Vernon Wells, and he nixed a deal that could have brought Matt Cain to the Jays.   Nice work, Mr. Godfrey.

Regardless of the reality, the perception is that this was the "Pitcher's Year" (Registered Trademark of the national sports media).

I hear you. My sarcasm wasn't aimed at you but the "national sports media" in general. Halladay's perfect game and the multiple no-hitters this season have apparently given the media license to suggest that there has been a seismic shift in the balance of power between hitter and pitcher.

And if the pitchers dominate the NLCS as they certainly have the potential to do, that perception will be reinforced.

Very true. The Giants will be pitting their league average offense against three very hot pitchers. And they will be doing this while throwing their league-best pitching at the Phillies.

The Giants' pitching has been amazing.  First 3 starters in the series vs Atl gave up a total of 1 earned run combined in the 3 games.  Bumgarner, who had the best ERA of the 4 during the season, gave up 2 in game 4, making it a total of 3 earned runs allowed by the starters in 29 innings pitched - an ERA under 1.00.  Then you get the bullpen with Wilson, Casilla, Lopez, Romo and Ramirez who all had great numbers this year. 

I remember it being Lincecum but it easily could've been Cain. IIRC the talk here was that it was a great deal for Lincecum, good for Cain, impossible for both.

A big reminder of why a GM needs to be given full authority over who to sign and who to trade with upper level executives left to debate raw dollar amounts only. Part of why I'm glad to have Beeston here as he learned that with Gillick and was rewarded, then saw what happens when a GM focuses on the short term only with Ash (iirc he pretty much refused to trade for prospects after the David Cone/Marty Janzen fiasco).

A president/owner should only jump in when big dollars are involved (baseball big that is). Vernon Wells made sense for him to be in on, but only in terms of 'yes' or 'no' to the raw dollar amount (total and per year). The GM should've had say on years and if it was worth it or not vs other use of that money (ie: give me $10-20 mil for international free agents and I'll get more value type of thing). Roger Clemens with Beeston was a good example of how to do it (short term deal, big dollars) while Wells was how not to do it (JP pretty much said that the raw dollar amount was too much a couple of weeks earlier iirc).

Run-scoring is, of course, down substantially since 1999-2000.  2010 has simply been a continuation of a longer-term trend.

McCann over Mauer or Posey?

Posey over McCann...based on two-thirds of a season?  Absurd.