I thought Matt Cain would be the one to step up and get the Giants a win - he just seems like the kind of guy to do just such a thing. But he threw a couple of meatballs and then the relief threw a couple more and the Giants blew yet another one.
Tonight it wasn't so much a "blown opportunity" as much as they never got an opportunity to blow. Jouhlys Chacin pitched for the Padres, and the Giants struggled to get a hit. Meanwhile, Madison Bumgarner also struggled. He threw 20 pitches in the first inning, hit the first batter, who scored, and then didn't look much more comfortable after that. He gave up another one in the 2nd, but, with much effort, held the game at 2 - 0 and gave the Giants 8 innings (114 pitches, 5 K, 6 hits and 2 BB).
Chacin gave up only 3 hits, and the Giants only got 2 more after he departed after 6 1/3. That was in the 9th against San Diego's closer, Ryan Buchter, when Brandon Crawford knocked in Buster Posey from 2nd for the Giants only run. Padres win, 2 - 1.
Who are these guys? They have a bunch of unfamiliar names, but they play like they have nothing to lose. It is discouraging to have to find positives in yet another loss, but Madison gave us 8 innings, which is useful, because they have to go twice more through the rotation before they get a day off. Defense was good. Remember last year? The Giants got off to a 5 - 2 start after their first 7 games, including 4 against LA. They proceeded to take first and then played like shit for much of the summer, stumbling into the playoffs. Maybe they will do the opposite, pick themselves up and storm through the summer, cruising to a first place NL West spot. Ah, well........anyway, Kershaw got beat by the Rockies.
13 comments:
You thought Matt Cain would be the one to step up and get the Giants a win.
You thought Matt Cain would be the one to step up and get the Giants a win.
Well,I have news for you. Your blog has been around for a while and Matt Cain is not the same Matt Cain that he was when it started.
"Raising Matt Cain"? His growth has stunted. But then the mainstream press that reported on that game seems to have been equally surprised, as if Cain had as good a chance of winning as anyone else, when he has not been any good at all since 2012.
Bochy and Giants management and Cain himself seem to be equally stunned and surprised.
What utter shock and amazement to discover that he wasn't any good on Friday!
Why would you or anyone else think that Cain would be the one to step up and get the Giants a win?
I have penciled in every Cain start as a loss. In my mind,the Giants started the season 0-32.
I don't ever pencil in losses. I mean, why be a fan?
Great effort by Bum last night to power past a poor beginning and give the team a shot. I guess when it's going bad, it's going bad. Not like they haven't seen Chacin.
The Giants are stuck in a dual causality time loop. Somehow they were thrown forward in time into June. That explains this horrific start to the season. Beam me up, Scotty!
Jon and I had a discussion yesterday afternoon about the relative importance of pitching and offense, with him coming down heavily on the side of pitching. He may be right, but last night proved that you can't win if you don't score runs. And I don't think it was incredible pitching by San Diego that shut us down. For the first time this year, our offense just didn't show up.
Yeah, that was disappointing. They should have hit enough to win last night. But in terms of winning, your brother is right, run prevention usually prevails over the long haul. A team with superior pitching and fielding can win with a mediocre offense. Rarely does a superior run-scoring team win without at the very least above-average pitching.
I look at it, as Bochy had a new start and started his team off just the way he started his team off after the all star break in 2016. There is something said about a manager who can get his team off to good starts whether it be at the start of the season, after the all star break, or in the playoffs. This has not been an automatic for Bochy, sometimes he has found the magic at these important time junctures, but going back sometimes he has not. Not sure if it is in the preparing, or in the motivation, but when you seem to keep playing just a little worse than your opponent, whether it be in a high scoring or in a low scoring game, something is just a bit amiss.
@ Mark Siegel: My statement about Matt Cain should be translated as, "I hoped Matt Cain would step up and get a win." It's not that I am unaware of what Matt Cain has accomplished (or failed to accomplish) in the last couple of years. In fact, he reminds me somewhat of Timmy in that, he seems like he could pitch pretty well, except for a pitch every now and then, and those come often enough that he is ineffective. But remember that Tim Lincecum threw a no hitter in 2013 when he wasn't very good and another one in 2015, when he really wasn't very good. Maybe Matt Cain is shot after 2000+ innings, but I think Bochy & Co. have a decent idea of what he's capable of, and what the options are. So the next time he pitches I will hope, again, that he throws a good game and the Giants win. Then, the game after that I hope that Madison Bumgarner wins, then that JC wins, then Moore wins, then Shark wins. That's just the way I am, I like pitchers and I like wins. That's different than being stunned, surprised, shocked or amazed. Cain gave up 4 and that is not good enough. But the Giants could have won that game had they not given up 3 more in the 7th.
Oh well, you never know what will happen.
Good points. Obviously, Cain is an every fifth day problem, and the bullpen is an everyday problem.
But it's not as if the Giants f don't have other options for the 5th starter slot.
Sticking with Cain strikes me as a combination of cheap sentimentality and futile attempt to recover the "sunken cost" of his contract.
By "cheap sentimentality" Siegel means "expensive sentimentality." But I dare say that that's an unduly cynical way of seeing things. The Giants believe Cain deserves respect, and they will give him a long enough leash for him to feel that he's been given as much chance as he is reasonably due--that is, unless that course of action proves untenable. As to redeeming a sunk cost, most to the point is that the sunk cost makes it harder for the team to acquire a proven replacement for Cain within their budget, and none of the unproven replacements, such as Blach, are clear probable improvements. Blach's part of that pen, after all, that Siegel calls an "everyday problem." To the degree that he's better than Cain, besides, the more problematic the pen will be if Cain and he swap roles.
I'm excited the Giants have Blach, and possibly Beede, in the wings. And we've all been rooting for Matty for years regardless of his performance, and even within that fan bias there's enough there to think he could still be a fifth starter. Sure, he costs a lot, but that's done. He earned it--his big contract was as much for services rendered as for future value.
Big win today!
Post a Comment