Tuesday, August 28, 2018

Thriller Gets the Giants to........ .500?

I love me a 1 - 0 game, especially when my favorite pitcher is on the mound.   But this was a weird one.

This game felt like the Giants were going to lose.  They allowed a lot of base-runners.  Clay Bucholz didn't seem to allow much to the Giants, each hit he allowed was shortly erased.   The Giants grounded into double plays to end both the 1st and 2nd innings.  Brandon Crawford grabbed a line drive, only to have the ball bounce out of his glove.  Madison Bumgarner was called out on a 3rd strike that was at least 9 inches outside, and no, he did not get that call when he was on the mound.  In fact, there seemed to be numerous bad ball / strike calls and those bad calls didn't favor the Giants.  I don't think I've ever seen a 3-base error, but Austin Slater made one that put Jon Jay on 3rd with one out.

Yet, they held on.  Madison Bumgarner threw 107 pitches to go 7 full.  He gave up 4 hits, but walked 4 and struck out 5.  He got some pop-ups and grounders when he needed them.  And a relay, Duggar to Crawford to Hundley, at least 9 1/2 feet in the air, that Hundley caught to tag out Nick Ahmed at the plate in the 8th.  Clay Bucholz left the game after 7, the game was scoreless at that point.  Sam Dyson gave up 2 hits in the 8th, but no runs (well, thanks to that tag at the plate).   Will Smith worked the 9th, and looked good doing it.  In the bottom of the 9th, Steve Duggar walked with Brad Ziegler on the mound, went to 2nd on a Nick Hundley single, and then jammed his left arm coming back to 2nd base as he thought better than to try for 3rd.  But he stayed in the game.  Alen Hanson was to hit for Will Smith, so the snakes swapped pitchers, bringing in Jake Diekman.  So Bochy swapped Hanson for Gorkys.  Gorkys saw one pitch, hit one pitch and Duggar scored before a throw from left got close.  Then, I assume, he immediately went to get his arm iced and examined.  The score was 1 - 0 Giants.

Steve Duggar scored the Giants only run.  He also has been responsible for 4 of the Giants 5 runs they scored in the last 2 days.  The Giants have now won 4 in a row and are a .500 club.  In their last 9 games, the Giants are 6 - 3 with a 1.84 era.  Colorado picks up a game, as do the blue goo.  Derek Rodriguez pitches tomorrow.

21 comments:

M.C. O'Connor said...

Where was this team a month ago? Anyway, a great win!

M.C. O'Connor said...

Also--I reposted to Facebook. I'll try to remember to do that. Lots of our readers access RMC via FB. After you post you have to hit the little "f" button at the bottom.

Zo said...

Lets Look at Numbers!

The Giants are 6 games back this morning at 67 - 67, they have 28 games to play. The Rockies and snakes are tied and lead the division at 72 - 60 (.545), those clubs have 30 games to play. The smog suckers are 1 game back at 71 - 61 (.538) also with 30 games to play. The Giants will win the season series against the dbacks which will finish today, the Giants have already won 11 of the 19 games and lost 7. The Giants have 6 games remaining against the Roxies and the Pudres, the Giants are 8 - 5 against the Puds and, as per usual, 5 - 8 against the Rox and oh, fuck me, they have to go to Coors Field again next week. There are only 3 games left against LA, they are the last games of the season, and the Giants are currently 9 - 7 against them.

As of this morning, the "wild card race" is led by St. Louis and Milwaukee (two teams the Giants still need to play this year, along with the Mets and Atlanta). So a team from the NL West might not be eligible for the post-season unless they won the division. If the Giants win today, they may or may not move up a game, depending on what Colorado does. Let us say that the other teams play at the pace they have played except for games against the Giants, that means that Colorado would win 13 games against non-Giant teams for a record of 85 - 71, not including their final 6 games against the Giants. Given the same assumptions, LA might win 15 games to finish at 86 - 73, not including the final 3 vs the Giants. And Arizona, should the Giants prevail today, finish at 88 - 84.*

Were the Giants to sweep the NL West, they would have a record of 83 wins, not including the other non-NL West teams. They would need 5 victories in the remaining 15 games to finish at 88 wins, a .500 win percentage would win the division with a not very stellar total of 90 or 91 games. That's if they sweep the remaining 16 games in the West.

Not likely, I know. Especially since the team would probably be better off just forfeiting the games in Colorado and stretching and practicing bunting and fielding, or something. But after watching last night's game, I guess a little dreaming isn't going to hurt.

* Here's my thinking behind this analysis. You can't really project a team's continued success by their record, because when you play those teams face-to-face, you either win or lose, you don't win .545 of a game. But, the team's record is an OK proxy for lack of a better one against other teams. A really in-depth analysis would take into account each team's record against the other NL West teams, but that gets really hard before about 2 weeks before the end of the season. So I took each teams win % and rounded to the nearest number, then factored in the optimal scenario for the Giants against their NL West opponents. In fact, the Giants could play much better ball from here on out than .500, like they have done recently, and wind up not on top of the division because they keep knocking out leaders and then have other teams go into the lead, without the Giants moving up a game, just like they could today. All of which shows how very hard it is for the Giants to wind up in the post-season, and how it is actually more difficult than just winning a random 21 games (a .750 clip, at this point). Yet, I remember the Phillies famous 1964 collapse at the end of the season when the Cardinals caught them (I grew up in St. Louis). Go Derek. Here's hoping for a miracle.........

Zo said...

Err, Arizona would finish at 88 - 74.

M.C. O'Connor said...

The Dodgers have won 4 in a row, just like the Giants. So "hot streaks" work both ways. And I think the Giants .500 record actually reflects the team's "true" level. In other words I think they are more likely to continue playing roughly .500 ball than not, and LA/COL/AZ are likely to continue playing roughly .540 ball than not, regardless of the particular matchups. Colorado strikes me as the one team ready to collapse if only because they continue to allow more runs than they score, unlike AZ and LA. The Giants have a problem scoring runs, and have allowed more runs than they've scored all season long (the month of June so far is the only exception). I don't think that bodes well for a late surge.

It would be nice to be wrong!

M.C. O'Connor said...

538 projects the Giants to finish 81-81 and give them a 2% chance to make the playoffs. That matches my gut instinct.

Barbara said...

Your instinct is right. No playoffs this year. But I am starting to get hopeful for next year. We have quite a few exciting youngsters. A new team is emerging.

M.C. O'Connor said...

I think so, to. Dereck Rodriguez, Andrew Suarez, Reyes Moronta, Chris Stratton, Steven Duggar, and Austin Slater have all been called upon and I expect them all to contribute next year. Guys like Tony Watson and Will Smith aren't youngsters but new to the team and they've been great. How about an exciting unknown like Alen Hanson? A new mix is definitely emerging.

M.C. O'Connor said...

Sheesh. Duggar to the 10-day DL, shoulder injury might end his season. Gregor Blanco recalled.

Damn, just when the rookie was starting to show what he could do he gets hurt. That's the curse of 2018.

Zo said...

And, they follow that game up with one of the most lackluster performances (or, more accurately, non-performances) of the year. If there's momentum to be had, the Giants want none of it.

nomisnala said...

If you get hot on this team you get injured. Despite all the pitching injuries, the pitching has been relatively okay, but the hitting needs a spark. Immediately. With all the injuries this team has had, and they are only 7 games out suggests that with a few less injuries they would have been right up at the top of the division, despite an OBP from Longoria less than 300. Does any other team, have a top RBI guy that has less than 60 RBI?

nomisnala said...

cutch is reportedly gone. Hope to see a detailed analysis on the return prospects the giants received for him. I really enjoyed watching McCutchen play. He is at least 3 years younger than Markakis, so the talk of him being over the hill, seemed premature.

M.C. O'Connor said...

MLBTR breaks down the Cutch info. Two prospects are coming to SF but only one name so far and it is All-Name Team worthy. Abiatal Avelino, 23 yrs old from the DR. He's been in pro ball since he was 17, mostly an infielder.

Zo said...

I'm sorry to see Cutch go. Not because he was going to help the Giants more than he already has (as leader in just about every offensive category, including games played) but because I liked the guy - he had a style. I also very much fear that the big push to get younger will result in younger. But not necessarily better. I hope the brain trust has better sense. The media seems already sold on youth as the answer and looks to Ronald Acuna and Juan Soto as the "proof." We'll see.

Ron said...

Here's my dopey plan for the Giants:

- Next year, do everything possible to draft Oregon State's already awesome switch-hitting C/1B Adley Rutschman. Supposedly, he's going to play his Junior Year, then enter the draft.

- Having cornered the market on great young Catchers, by some time in 2020, contemplate having both Joey Bart & Rutschman on the MLB Roster.

- For at least the next decade, have each of them play approx. half of each Season at C, & half of each Season at 1B, so that neither of them prematurely wears out their knees & hips.

- Win multiple World Series titles.

M.C. O'Connor said...

I think the Giants will try to bring Cutch back, maybe a 2-yr deal or somesuch. He's popular and still a good player. We'll see if his stint with the Yanks (and post-season) improves his FA case and makes him unaffordable (assuming the Giants want to avoid the luxury tax again).

The injuries to the old guys (Cueto, Samardzija, Melancon) forced the Giants to promote young pitchers and they've performed. Moronta, D-Rod, Suarez; these guys have brought to the team what was needed--fresh talent. The core, other than Bumgarner, are all now over 30: Craw, Belt, Posey, and now Longoria. No problem from my point of view with "going younger." Young players have that most coveted thing in all of baseball, namely "upside" and add in the next most coveted thing, namely "cost-controlled" and you get the picture.

If the Giants are to improve next year, a year without Johnny Cueto, they'll have to stay healthy and hope their young talent (like Duggar, Slater, etc.) emerges. That's assuming they don't sign a superstar like Bryce Harper which I not only consider unlikely I also think the $100+M or whatever would be better spent on multiple players and positions (not that I don't think highly of Harper, who is a better risk in my mind than Stanton was).

M.C. O'Connor said...

Juan de Paula is the second player in the Cutch deal:

RH pitcher, just shy of 21, from the DR, still in A ball.

Ron said...

What Zo was trying to enunciate is that 'go young & cheap' is the new approach. Our Roster is littered w/ 'old & expensive'. Harper fits the 'young' part, but, definitely, not the 'cheap' part. To mean, that means we need to do a better job of scouring the International Market (which we seem to suck at lately) + go for can't-miss College upperclassmen (e.g. Bart, Rutschman), who don't need years & years of Minor League preparation.

Zo said...

That is exactly what I am not trying to enunciate. I fear that the "younger is better" approach is a fallacy, that younger does not equal better. I know that the Giants have to move towards younger, and also that the Giants have contracts that are not easily moved for aging players. I get the cost-controlled part, too. Our roster is littered with guys who are in their early thirties. Would that I were that age again (knowing what little I know now, of course). If they were 38 or 40 I would agree. I don't agree that 30 or 31 is old. It would be nice to pick up a 20 year-old impact player like Acuna, but those guys just don't come around every day and the fact that there are some does not mean that younger guys are better. Look at how many young guys the Giants have brought up who really haven't wowed. Willamson. Parker. Slater. I'll include Duggar, not that he doesn't show promise (as have they all). It's exciting to see a new face and hope for the best. Fortunately, our young pitchers have looked very good, backed up by a veteran and fairly sound bullpen. That is the reason for our improvement this season, which for all my bitching, has actually been fairly dramatic. Baseball follows trends and the trend now is young. If the Giants jump on that trend I will want to see an improvement, not JUST a lower average age.

Ron said...

Not saying lower the average age just for the sake of lowering the average age. But, the Giants, just like the Blazers up here in the NBA, have shown a total naivete, when it comes to the nuances of salary cap rules, etc. & have boxed themselves into an untenable corner. Having no cap flexibility is a recipe for disaster. The only way out is to have a cadre of good, young, controllable players, some of whom have obvious skills (as opposed to the pie-in-the-sky projects you mention - did anyone really think that Williamson or Parker were ever going to be very good?). So, sometimes, you have to trade beloved Veterans for these proven youngsters, just to maintain cap room. I used be unwilling to accept the fact that that became the awful, but mandatory choice - it means that you can never get attached to any player or group of players, or your heart will be broken. Now, I accept it, but don't really like it. But, ask yourself why some of these Teams (MLB & NBA) just seem to be able to add & add & add & never face horrific financial consequences (exclude the Yankees from this analysis - they just don't care), while everyone else just spins their wheels year-after-year. Why did Houston win it all last year? But, why will they not be a dynasty (unless they either start to trade some of their awesome young players, or have a bunch more in the pipeline)? The Giants to extract themselves from the box that they've created as soon as possible. They may suck for a bit, but they need to do it. I don't think that Sabean / Evans / Bochy are capable of it - they are way too attached to players who are past their prime. Time for a new regime.

Ron said...

That & better International Scouting.