Giants release fungible infielder, keep other fungible infielder

Published by on March 30, 2012 | 8 Responses

Sometimes baseball moves are made that make me shrug my shoulders and go “meh.” This, unfortunately, is probably one of those moves. It was reported today that the Giants have released Mike Fontenot, tiny man and member of the 2010 World Series squad. The Giants will save themselves approximately $750K by giving Fontenot his walking papers — Fontenot originally avoided arbitration earlier in the offseason by agreeing to a one year, $1.05M deal.

It is a little surprising that the Giants are (presumably) choosing Ryan Theriot over Fontenot. Despite their similar abilities, I don’t think I’ve read one good thing about Theriot this spring from any of the beat guys. They’ve all been pretty consistent in saying that Theriot has looked bad in the field, and at the plate. Fontenot surely isn’t a capable full-time defender at shortstop, but he’s almost certainly better than Theriot at this stage.

Another thing to consider is that the team could honestly be giving thought to using Brett Pill as a the backup third baseman, a role that Fontenot would have assumed had he made the team. Brett Pill playing third base, in any capacity, is interesting because Brett Pill isn’t a third baseman.

The biggest issue with the team jettisoning Fontenot and choosing Theriot isn’t that one player is exceedingly better than the other, but rather the team is willfully choosing Manny Burriss to be its everyday second baseman. Burriss’s baserunning and athleticism are intriguing, but he’s never hit a lick, and his projected .281 wOBA from ZiPS highlights his offensive futility. I’m not saying the Giants are crazy for banking on Burriss to be a productive major league player, but I don’t think it’s going to happen.

The team got a little less ragin’ today, never forget BFFs:

Article written by

8 comments
  Livefyre
Newest | Oldest
daveinexile
daveinexile

To me the saddest part is the steel cage match that should have been Pill vs Fontenot vs Huff vs Burriss. Huff doesn't have scratch on him. I doubt his dead cat bounce will be used as postion would need it most and I imagine his dead cat bounce being used to overly rest better bats.

marc
marc

Does seem like an odd move to me. I'm glad we're at the point of "meh" discussions (and this is one) but out of Theriot/Burris/Fontenot, Fontenot is the last one I'd cut. Don't see either of the other two being any better, though.. it's relative.

BB25
BB25

Finally! Fontenot is gone and it is a move I have been waiting for since we got him. NIce guy, wish him luck. Just never saw him as someone who deserved a roster spot.

marcellosfg
marcellosfg

This is surprisingly nonchalant for a move that, in all likelihood, makes the team worse (Burriss). It's not a huge difference, but this team doesn't have the margin of error to be giving away wins.

Chris Quick
Chris Quick

Losing Fontenot hurts team depth, but I think it's clear that the Giants are going with Burriss -- science be damned! -- and I can't really see a difference between Fontenot and Theriot. Maybe I'm missing something?

marcellosfg
marcellosfg

There's not a huge difference between Fontenot and Theriot, although I think Fontenot is the better defender and a more capable SS. But, I don't really care about the choice between those two because, as you say, there isn't really a difference. It's the keeping Burriss thing that is the problem for me.

Chris Quick
Chris Quick

>> It's the keeping Burriss thing that is the problem for me. No argument from me.

blank
blank

I’m with marcellosfg. When I first read that the Giants released Fontenot, I stared at the screen wondering why the universe had just done the opposite of what I would have done. By universe, I mean SF Giants’ FO, which on reflection makes me think I should rethink some things. In any case, my reasoning: Fontenot is about the same player as Theriot but can field SS better and even 3B in a pinch. Fontenot can do everything except clock a 40-yard dash better than Burriss. Given the Giants’ plan for SS and back-up plan for 3B (Do they have one of these? Gillespie? Gillespie isn’t horrible but won’t make the roster), Fontenot seemed to have more value than Theriot. Given the Giants play baseball and not track & field, Fontenot seemed to have more value than Burriss. I agree that the difference between Fontenot and Theriot is quite small, so if Burriss and Crawford are really the starting middle infield, then this is really a meh move. However, I would place the probability that at least one of these two completely fails in the Bigs as pretty high and the probability both of them failing as quite reasonable. I also place a non-trivial probability that at some time in the season Panda will either need a day off or suffer a minor day-to-day injury. In any such cases, I would rather have the player that could more seamlessly work in 2B/SS/3B. I think that is Fontenot.