Wednesday, May 28, 2014

Freakishly Effective Tim

GAME SUMMARY:
For the second day in a row, the Giants shut out the hapless Cubbies, 5-0.  It was a midweek day game, so I pretty much missed the whole thing. Which really SUCKS because after scanning the wrap it was clear that this would have been a great game to see; it had all kinds of cool shit (if you are a Giants fan, that is.) But most of all it featured Tim Lincecum once again being surprisingly effective. He may not have known where it was going, but neither did they.  And, they sure as shit could not hit it.

TIM FACTS:
Start #11  ND  (4-3, 4.18)   5 innings  0 hits  0 runs  0 earned  4 walks  5 strikeouts  0 hr
Look at those zeroes! Aint they sweet? Sure, five innings, six base runners and almost a hundred pitches are kinda ugly. But look at those zeroes! Unhittable and ugly, at the same time! That's our Freak.  Is it a little surprising that Bochy pulled Tim when he did? Maybe, but classic, by-the-book baseball moves are boring. And there is nothing classic or by-the-book about our Timmeh. Anyway, talk of a blister makes the decision easier. Isn't it amazing how different our two Tims are? Well, one thing they have in common now is kicking Cub ass.  

HIGH and/or LOWLIGHTS:
Besides Lincecum, several other Giants deserve note. The bullpen continues to shine. The latest addition, George Kontos looks good to me. His command and velocity seem to be at a higher level than last year. I bet he stays around for a while.
Pablo kept his RBI streak alive at eight games. Impressive achievement. If he gets to nine he joins people like Ott and Mays, I think. Keep it up Panda!
Tip o the cap to Hector Sanchez! Looks like he will pair up with Tim from now on. Not sure if that is a reward. Although when Tim throws his next no hitter, Hector will get the photo op.
And finally, congrats to Hunter! Can you believe someone brought the scooter back?

5 comments:

M.C. O'Connor said...

If you throw two five-inning no-hitters, does it count as a whole no-hitter?

Ron said...

I know that valuing pitching 'Wins' is considered gauche on this blog, but I still think that it sucks to have pitched a 5-inning no-hitter but, because of not getting any run support, you don't get a 'W'.

I'd like to see our Starters get some 'W's', although finishing 100-62 is still much more important.

We could be the first Team with 100 wins to have 12 Pitchers with 8 Wins or more. I guess that there's some honor in that.

Zo said...

Krukow has commented that the 2013 Kontos used a slider and had little confidence in his fastball. The 2014 Kontos throws a cutter, a 2 seam and 4 seam fastball, a changeup has added velocity and still has the slider. He looks very good.

ogc obsessivegiantscompulsive said...

No: you have to pair it only with a four-inning no-hitter.

I like seeing the starters earn wins too, there is nothing wrong with the stat if you recognize the limitations involved with it. People just get to polarized by the stat, it is not either/or if you understand it properly.

Yeah, I heard something like that too about Kontos, that he's throwing a lot of different pitches now, that would explain his out of the world stats in AAA up to now. Good for him, he wants to be back in the majors for good and he now understands what he needs to do to stay after screwing up his 2013 season by celebrating too much after 2012. It is a great problem to have in the bullpen, and maybe he can be the replacement for Romo that we have needed since Wilson left the team (though Machi has done so well, maybe I should give him that mantle; great problem to have, too many good relievers).

Zo said...

Here is the thing with wins - if you pitchers get a bunch, your team gets a bunch of victories. No pitcher on your team gets a W unless your team wins, which cannot be said of a quality start. If your starters get a bunch of W's, it means they have stayed in the game long enough and have kept the other team's scoring to a minimum and have received some run support while they were the pitcher of record to warrant the stat. All of those are good things. Mr. OGC hits the nail on the head - it is a descriptive statistic that has limitations. A quality start is also that. It describes something different, and it also has limitations.