Major League Baseball should simply hand the post-season broadcast reins over to the Yankees Network. After all, the entire playoff schedule is based on making sure the Yankees are the prime time game. The Giants and the Cardinals, the last two World Series Champions, play at 1:00 p.m. Pacific Time today--that's 3:00 p.m. Central in St. Louis. That's a ridiculous time to start a baseball game. Unless, of course, you have to accommodate the Yankees. It's one thing to be the richest, most successful team. It's another to be constantly shoved down the throats of every baseball fan in America. Hey Bud, fans of other teams don't like the Yankees. Casual fans don't, either. The rest of the world is praying fervently that the Tigers send them packing. Look, we know that Steinbrenner, Inc. is on your speed dial and that you seek permission from them before you wipe your own ass, but maybe in the future you can be a little less obvious about it.
GO GIANTS!
--M.C.
Showing posts with label mlb. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mlb. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Saturday, December 24, 2011
Happy Christmas, mates
So you've picked up the story by now about Bud & His Billionaires giving the nod to the Athletics moving from Oakland to San Jose. I'm sure LarryB & The Consortium will fargle something about "territorial rights" and demand deceased presidents by the pallet-full, but I've no sense about money-making or corporate voodoo. If I did I'd be in The Marketplace making markets or something, fingering my filthy lucre. But you don't come to Raising Matt Cain for sober analysis. I assume Lewie & The Wolffs will have to make some kind of payoff, maybe they'll bungle it and scandals will ensue. That might make the thing exciting. I think the Giants should move their San Jose farm club to Oakland--that'll show 'em!
But it's Christmas Eve and all, don't want no Grinchitude spoiling things. I'll be posting a series over the next two weeks I'll call "Twelve for 2012." I'll look at twelve 2012 Giants and get excited about watching them play this upcoming season. It's the Twelve Days of Christmas, after all.
We'll have an epiphany at the end.
--M.C.
But it's Christmas Eve and all, don't want no Grinchitude spoiling things. I'll be posting a series over the next two weeks I'll call "Twelve for 2012." I'll look at twelve 2012 Giants and get excited about watching them play this upcoming season. It's the Twelve Days of Christmas, after all.
We'll have an epiphany at the end.
--M.C.
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Don't it go to show you never know
I followed this afternoon's action on-and-off at work via Gameday--when it was 4-2 Nationals I was sure we were toast. Then I had to leave my desk, and when I came back the score was 5-4 Giants! Big hit by Freddy Sanchez off ex-Giant Tyler Walker. Brian Wilson struck out Adam Dunn to end it.
Matt Cain tomorrow. Score some runs, me buckos.
GO GIANTS!
--M.C.
Matt Cain tomorrow. Score some runs, me buckos.
GO GIANTS!
--M.C.
Sunday, April 11, 2010
PhoneCo history
Kevin Elster and Barry Bonds were both born in 1964. Elster retired after the 2000 season. Bonds went on to win four more MVPs and set the all-time home run record.
--M.C.
Saturday, February 6, 2010
Pitching, uncertainty, and the NL West
Starting pitching will be interesting in the division this season. The Giants, as we know, have a stellar group, and expectations for their continued excellence are very high. Last year's champs, the Dodgers, have two young bucks that most teams should be coveting. Southpaw Clayton Kershaw and righty Chad Billingsley form an impressive 1-2 punch. Kershaw turns 22 in May and has fewer than 300 ML innings under his belt. His 185 K in 171 IP and his miniscule 3.08 FIP turned a lot of heads and his season rated 4.2 WAR. The Dodgers will be expecting a lot from their young phenom, but he'll have to show he can go a full season without shoulder trouble, and he'll have to cut down on walks (91). He's shown the ability to get people out (only 119 hits allowed) and has tremendous upside. Bill James and CHONE, however, say his FIP will go up almost half a run. That ought to have the fans seething, after all, we project our youngsters to keep improving, right? The righty half of this promising duo saw his ERA+ plunge last year to 98 from his excellent 133 in 2008. He also walks too many guys (86 in 196-1/3 IP), but his all-around Cain-like numbers (173 H, 17 HR, 179 K) make the 25-year old a valuable (3.1 WAR) asset. Bill James and CHONE see him improving slightly on his 3.82 FIP. Free agent Randy Wolf was not resigned, and the Dodgers will have to replace his team-leading 214 IP and his fine 122 ERA+. Expecting something similar from 31-year old journeyman Vicente Padilla is probably a reach (career 100 ERA+). Hiroshima Carp veteran Hiroki Kuroda gave them 20 serviceable starts (105 ERA+) and is probably good for two dozen or so this season as well. This team hits very well and has tremendous talent in the 'pen, so perhaps they are willing to live with some uncertainty at the back end of the rotation.
Speaking of uncertainty, the Diamondbacks have a big question mark with former ace Brandon Webb. The 2006 Cy Young winner and 2007-2008 runner-up pitched only four innings in 2009 after throwing over 1300 in his first six seasons. If he can give Arizona anything close to his previous greatness they would possess two sensational arms. Under-appreciated Dan Haren is the best pitcher in the West not named Tim Lincecum. He had an amazing 1.003 WHIP last season, and career-highs in IP (229-1/3), ERA+ (146), and strikeouts (223), while being worth an outstanding 6.1 WAR. This guy not only has an impressive array of pitches but ridiculous control (78 walks total in his last two seasons, 435-1/3 IP!). His only weakness seems to be homers. This team generated some controversy with a bizarre 3-way trade that saw them lose young, high-upside, JSanchez-like K-machine Max Scherzer, but gain solid mid-level starter (and former Dodger) Edwin Jackson, and young control-artist (and Yankee prospect) Ian Kennedy. Those two will round out the rotation. GM Josh Byrnes talks about the deal--among other things--on the SB Nation blog AZ Snakepit. Can you imagine our haughty and inaccessible GM being this refreshing and candid with anyone, particularly a bloody-fookin' blogger? Kudos to 'pit-meister Jim McLennan for pulling it off.
The Rockies have never been known for pitching, but Dan O'Dowd and The Humidor are building a new type of Colorado team. Their 2007 World Series squad had a 111 ERA+ and their 2009 Wild Card team had a 108 ERA+. Obviously they are biased toward the run-scoring part of the equation, but improved pitching has clearly turned the club around from their long stretch (2001-2006) of sub-.500 baseball. 26-year old Ubaldo Jimenez emerged as the team ace, throwing a fastball that tops out at 100 mph, and a filthy slider and splitter that induce lots K's and ground balls. Bill James and CHONE say his impressive 3.38 FIP will rise by more than half a run in 2010. (What regression-istas they are!) He walks a lot of guys (103 in '08 and 85 in '09), but that's nothing new to fans of teams with young flamethrowers. Keep an eye on Jimenez--remember he beat Tim head-to-head last August. Reliable-but-not-flashy 31-year old Aaron Cook has been with the Rockies for 8 seasons, and has a career 111 ERA+ and 4.36 FIP, and projects about that for next season. DL-time hurt his WAR--his 1.9 was quite a drop from 2008's 4.7, and it is reasonable to think that a healthy Cook is at least a 2.5-3.0 guy. 27-year old Jason Hammel came over from Tampa Bay last season and became a starter, producing 3.8 WAR in 30 starts. He throws strikes and has a good repertoire, but the word is he lacks a true out pitch. Time will tell, and he projects about a 4.20 FIP. Journeyman lefty Jorge de la Rosa struck out 192 in 185 IP last season, with career highs in wins (16), ERA+ (104) and WAR (3.7) for either a "breakout" or an "outlier" season, depending on whether you are Rockies fan, I suppose. Ground-ball specialist Jason Marquis took the free-agent route and signed a fat deal with Washington. That's a lot of starts (33) and innings (216) to make up, adding some uncertainty to the otherwise-solid 2010 rotation, one of 2009's quiet success stories (5th in the NL in team FIP, just behind the Giants).
Down in San Diego they have little to get excited about and will likely be content with a spoiler's role down the stretch. They did play .527 ball in the second half of last season (39-35, same as the Giants), so all is not entirely bleak. Talented-but-mercurial Chris Young heads the depth chart, and the huge righty is just as huge a question mark for 2010. He's known for being a flyball pitcher (good for PetCo) and teams don't have a high average against him, but he's historically bad at holding runners, and given his injury history, doesn't project well. Veteran Jon Garland should give them 30+ starts and 200+ IP, he's a career 104 ERA+ and 4.72 FIP pitcher. Ex-Giant Kevin Correia was worth 2.4 WAR in his 33 starts--only a 94 ERA+ but a solid 3.81 FIP. I thought we should have kept Correia as a 5th starter, but I doubt the 29-year old has much upside. Young Mat Latos and lefty Clayton Richard round out the starting staff.
That's my look at the rest of the ro's in our division. We look good by comparison, eh? I'm not going to talk about 'pens or benches I'm sorry to say, as all this internet-research time is wearing out po' little ol' me. But I will be putting together my take on the West race as a whole sometime soon, certainly before Spring Training. By Opening Day the rosters will shake out and I'll have to update things. In the meantime, you might be curious about Baseball Propectus' PECOTA projections, they ought to fire up some debate.
Speaking of uncertainty, the Diamondbacks have a big question mark with former ace Brandon Webb. The 2006 Cy Young winner and 2007-2008 runner-up pitched only four innings in 2009 after throwing over 1300 in his first six seasons. If he can give Arizona anything close to his previous greatness they would possess two sensational arms. Under-appreciated Dan Haren is the best pitcher in the West not named Tim Lincecum. He had an amazing 1.003 WHIP last season, and career-highs in IP (229-1/3), ERA+ (146), and strikeouts (223), while being worth an outstanding 6.1 WAR. This guy not only has an impressive array of pitches but ridiculous control (78 walks total in his last two seasons, 435-1/3 IP!). His only weakness seems to be homers. This team generated some controversy with a bizarre 3-way trade that saw them lose young, high-upside, JSanchez-like K-machine Max Scherzer, but gain solid mid-level starter (and former Dodger) Edwin Jackson, and young control-artist (and Yankee prospect) Ian Kennedy. Those two will round out the rotation. GM Josh Byrnes talks about the deal--among other things--on the SB Nation blog AZ Snakepit. Can you imagine our haughty and inaccessible GM being this refreshing and candid with anyone, particularly a bloody-fookin' blogger? Kudos to 'pit-meister Jim McLennan for pulling it off.
The Rockies have never been known for pitching, but Dan O'Dowd and The Humidor are building a new type of Colorado team. Their 2007 World Series squad had a 111 ERA+ and their 2009 Wild Card team had a 108 ERA+. Obviously they are biased toward the run-scoring part of the equation, but improved pitching has clearly turned the club around from their long stretch (2001-2006) of sub-.500 baseball. 26-year old Ubaldo Jimenez emerged as the team ace, throwing a fastball that tops out at 100 mph, and a filthy slider and splitter that induce lots K's and ground balls. Bill James and CHONE say his impressive 3.38 FIP will rise by more than half a run in 2010. (What regression-istas they are!) He walks a lot of guys (103 in '08 and 85 in '09), but that's nothing new to fans of teams with young flamethrowers. Keep an eye on Jimenez--remember he beat Tim head-to-head last August. Reliable-but-not-flashy 31-year old Aaron Cook has been with the Rockies for 8 seasons, and has a career 111 ERA+ and 4.36 FIP, and projects about that for next season. DL-time hurt his WAR--his 1.9 was quite a drop from 2008's 4.7, and it is reasonable to think that a healthy Cook is at least a 2.5-3.0 guy. 27-year old Jason Hammel came over from Tampa Bay last season and became a starter, producing 3.8 WAR in 30 starts. He throws strikes and has a good repertoire, but the word is he lacks a true out pitch. Time will tell, and he projects about a 4.20 FIP. Journeyman lefty Jorge de la Rosa struck out 192 in 185 IP last season, with career highs in wins (16), ERA+ (104) and WAR (3.7) for either a "breakout" or an "outlier" season, depending on whether you are Rockies fan, I suppose. Ground-ball specialist Jason Marquis took the free-agent route and signed a fat deal with Washington. That's a lot of starts (33) and innings (216) to make up, adding some uncertainty to the otherwise-solid 2010 rotation, one of 2009's quiet success stories (5th in the NL in team FIP, just behind the Giants).
Down in San Diego they have little to get excited about and will likely be content with a spoiler's role down the stretch. They did play .527 ball in the second half of last season (39-35, same as the Giants), so all is not entirely bleak. Talented-but-mercurial Chris Young heads the depth chart, and the huge righty is just as huge a question mark for 2010. He's known for being a flyball pitcher (good for PetCo) and teams don't have a high average against him, but he's historically bad at holding runners, and given his injury history, doesn't project well. Veteran Jon Garland should give them 30+ starts and 200+ IP, he's a career 104 ERA+ and 4.72 FIP pitcher. Ex-Giant Kevin Correia was worth 2.4 WAR in his 33 starts--only a 94 ERA+ but a solid 3.81 FIP. I thought we should have kept Correia as a 5th starter, but I doubt the 29-year old has much upside. Young Mat Latos and lefty Clayton Richard round out the starting staff.
That's my look at the rest of the ro's in our division. We look good by comparison, eh? I'm not going to talk about 'pens or benches I'm sorry to say, as all this internet-research time is wearing out po' little ol' me. But I will be putting together my take on the West race as a whole sometime soon, certainly before Spring Training. By Opening Day the rosters will shake out and I'll have to update things. In the meantime, you might be curious about Baseball Propectus' PECOTA projections, they ought to fire up some debate.
Monday, January 25, 2010
How the West Was Won: 2009
Are you an optimist or pessimist? Dreamer or skeptic? The 2009 Giants drew a line right down the middle of the fanbase with the "glass half-full" folks and "glass half-empty" folks picking sides and lining themselves up for 2010. How can this be? Easy--take a good look at last season. The 3rd-place Giants (88-74, overperforming by 2 games) scored only 657 runs (13th) but allowed only 611 (T1st). They had 18 team shutouts and a fantastic MLB-best 123 ERA+. Unfortunately, their hated arch-rivals in Chavez LAtrine also had great pitching, also allowing only 611 runs (T1st, 116 ERA+) while scoring 780 (4th). That was good enough for a West title (95-67, underforming by 4 games). The 18-28 Rockies fired Clint Hurdle at the end of May and surged into the Wild Card under Jim Tracy, going 21-7 in June and 74-42 overall to finish 92-70 (overperfoming by 2 games). They did it with the bats, of course, their 804 RS was second only to league champs Philadelphia, but their improved pitching (only 715 RA, 7th, 108 ERA+) was the difference. We've seen poor offenses win the West in our look back, but rarely do we see poor offensive squads beat out well-balanced teams. Both LA and Colorado present formidable obstacles to the G-men's chances of winning the West in 2010, as both have a core of young, talented players on both sides of the ball. San Diego (75-87) overperformed its Pythagorean percentage by 8 games--their RS/RA (638/15th, 769/12th) numbers were truly awful, they were lucky not to finish last. Their abysmal 84 ERA+ is hard to believe in their cavernous home yard. Arizona got the last spot (70-92, underperforming by 5 games), scoring 720 runs (8th) and yielding 782 (14th). Their ERA+ of 103 is likely a reflection of their hitting-friendly park.
The Giants finished 7 behind LA and only 4 behind Colorado, and their 88 wins were more than both Atlanta (115 ERA+, 86 wins) and Chicago (117 ERA+, 83 wins). Tim Lincecum nabbed another Cy Young, Matt Cain was an All-Star, and Jonathan Sanchez threw a no-hitter. Even Billion-Dollar Boy Barry Zito was reasonably effective (108 ERA+). Pablo Sandoval burst onto the NL scene with a .943 OPS (142 OPS+), thus proving the organization can produce a hitter. It was a great year, marred only by the front office and their idiotic trades of top prospects Tim Alderson and Scott Barnes for Freddy Sanchez and Ryan Garko. FSanchez was too hurt to play, and Garko, slumping in orange and black, never got a chance and was non-tendered in the off-season (while broken-down Freddy got a 2-year, $12M deal and won't be suited up for Opening Day). It is hard being a fan of this organization. The pitching is world class and screams for the complementary pieces to round out the club, and the Brain Trust tosses us bones like Aubrey Huff and Mark DeRosa. One of the top prospects in all of baseball, Buster Posey, got a cuppa-coffee-call-up in September and spent his time on the bench watching the final season of the old, slow, hackmeister catcher he was groomed to replace. Oh, wait, we re-signed that guy and Buster will have to wait some more. If there is one single thing the Giants did this off-season to empty my glass, it's that. Hotshot young'un Madison Bumgarner also made his debut, he's pencilled in as the 2010 5th starter despite being much younger than Posey and having under 300 IP of professional experience. Hey, I'm all for MadBum, but the illogic of that decision makes me question the Brian Trust's competence even more than I already do.
There you have it--How the West Was Won. Next up--How to Win the West: a position-by-position look at your 2010 Giants, followed by an appraisal of our Division rivals. Pitchers and catchers report in mere weeks!
The Giants finished 7 behind LA and only 4 behind Colorado, and their 88 wins were more than both Atlanta (115 ERA+, 86 wins) and Chicago (117 ERA+, 83 wins). Tim Lincecum nabbed another Cy Young, Matt Cain was an All-Star, and Jonathan Sanchez threw a no-hitter. Even Billion-Dollar Boy Barry Zito was reasonably effective (108 ERA+). Pablo Sandoval burst onto the NL scene with a .943 OPS (142 OPS+), thus proving the organization can produce a hitter. It was a great year, marred only by the front office and their idiotic trades of top prospects Tim Alderson and Scott Barnes for Freddy Sanchez and Ryan Garko. FSanchez was too hurt to play, and Garko, slumping in orange and black, never got a chance and was non-tendered in the off-season (while broken-down Freddy got a 2-year, $12M deal and won't be suited up for Opening Day). It is hard being a fan of this organization. The pitching is world class and screams for the complementary pieces to round out the club, and the Brain Trust tosses us bones like Aubrey Huff and Mark DeRosa. One of the top prospects in all of baseball, Buster Posey, got a cuppa-coffee-call-up in September and spent his time on the bench watching the final season of the old, slow, hackmeister catcher he was groomed to replace. Oh, wait, we re-signed that guy and Buster will have to wait some more. If there is one single thing the Giants did this off-season to empty my glass, it's that. Hotshot young'un Madison Bumgarner also made his debut, he's pencilled in as the 2010 5th starter despite being much younger than Posey and having under 300 IP of professional experience. Hey, I'm all for MadBum, but the illogic of that decision makes me question the Brian Trust's competence even more than I already do.
There you have it--How the West Was Won. Next up--How to Win the West: a position-by-position look at your 2010 Giants, followed by an appraisal of our Division rivals. Pitchers and catchers report in mere weeks!
Sunday, January 24, 2010
How the West Was Won: 2008
The Dodgers had a shiny new manager in 2008, bringing in the Old Wise Man of east coast ball and fitting him out with a surfboard, convertible, and a pair of Bermudas. It worked. They won the West by two games with an 84-78 record. With 700 RS (13th) and 648 RA (1st), they underperformed their Pythagorean percentage by three games. You can bet the brainiacs at 24 Willie Mays Plaza got excited about a crap offense winning the division! Boy howdy, that's how to build a club! That's not to understate the importance of good pitching. The Central-winning 97-64 Cubs led the NL with a 119 ERA+, followed by the 82-80 D-backs (116), 92-70 World Champ Phils (113), and the West-winning LAtriners (113). The second-place Snakes (720/706, 10th/5th) came back down to earth after their wild-&-flukey 2007, matching their 82-80 projection exactly. Third-place Colorado (747/822, 8th/14th, 98 ERA+) finished ten games out at 74-88, also Even-Steven with Pythagoras. I remember predicting that the G-men would lose 100. Cy Young was on the team, though, and he rescued us from some of our well-deserved obloquy by going 18-5! The Bhoyos by the Bay scored 640 (15th) and allowed 759 (9th)--let's hear it for Bonehead, he beat the Greek by four games and finished 72-90 and fourth place. The Padres fell off a cliff (63-99) after four straight winning seasons, losing the Ty-D-Bol Cup to the hapless Nationals (59-102). A RS/RA line of 637/764 (16th/10th) will do that for you, and owing the Pythagoreans five games can't help either. A bad team AND bad luck--the gods are cruel. Here's the thing: the Giants had a 101 ERA+, and the Padres an 86 ERA+. The Pads allowed 100 more runs on the road (432) than at home (332), the Giants only 43 (401-358). You have to take your good pitching with you when you travel, eh?
p.s. The Park drew fewer than 3 million (2,863,837) fans for the 1st time since opening, and attendance wasn't any better in 2009 (2,862,110) despite the winning record. Still, that's in the top third for all of baseball.
p.s. The Park drew fewer than 3 million (2,863,837) fans for the 1st time since opening, and attendance wasn't any better in 2009 (2,862,110) despite the winning record. Still, that's in the top third for all of baseball.
Saturday, January 23, 2010
How the West Was Won: 2007
Timothy LeRoy Lincecum made his debut on May 6th, 2007. We all know now that this call-up started his "arb clock" early, thus making him a "Super Two" this off-season. The decision to bring him up, at the time, seemed a no-brainer. He was absolutely obliterating the PCL (31 IP, 12 hits, 1 run, 46 K), and it seemed silly to waste his Bonds-like talent in the minors. Sabes & Co. had probably convinced themselves that the team was "competitive" and thus needed all the help it could get. At 16-13, 1-1/2 games back in 3rd place, perhaps we were. As it turned out, we weren't. The Giants went 8-12 the rest of that month, utterly collapsing in June (9-18) and finishing last (71-91), 19 games back, underperforming their Pythagorean record by 6 games. It was also Ol' Boch's debut as skipper. The team scored only 683 runs (15th) but allowed only 720 (3rd). Interestingly, our 107 ERA+ put us among the top five in the league.
2007 gets even stranger when you look at our competition. The 90-72 Diamondbacks won the West even though they allowed (732--5th) more runs than they scored (712--14th). Their 115 ERA+ was tops, followed buy the Cubs (114) and Rockies (111). The Wild Card Rockies (90-73) needed a 163rd game to edge past the Padres (89-74) for the last playoff spot. Colorado (860/758, 2nd/8th) underperformed by one game. San Diego (741/666, 9th/1st, 107 ERA+, 20 team shutouts) matched their projection, and had to have been disappointed not to win the West for the third straight season. The Rockies finished the season winning 14 of 15 and rode their hot streak all the way to the World Series. The 4th place Dodgers (82-80) matched their projection with 735 (10th) RS and 727 (4th) RA, and an ERA+ of 106. It is always nice to be reminded that outcomes in sports are not entirely predictable, and that improbable things can occur. We fans tend to discount luck and happenstance, as we like to attribute good results to pluck, grit, and clutchness. Failure is seen as a reflection of character, and variations in performance are explained away with a panoply of clichéd sportswriter-isms. If I've learned anything in a lifetime of watching games, it's that random chance is the Great Umpire in the Sky, that "winners" and "losers" are often separated by a hair's breadth, and that separation is mostly unexplainable by rational analysis. The best you can do when building a squad is muster all the talent you can and then find ways to maximize the success opportunities for the unique skills each individual brings. The rest is up to the gods.
Speaking of talent--the great Barry Bonds played his last baseball game in 2007. At 42, he still led all of baseball in OBP and walks and slugged .565! We we were lucky to have seen him in orange and black for all those years. He was cut loose by Magowan & Co. in the off-season ("fired" was Barry's term), and the sporting press, talking heads, hand-wringers, moralists, and casual fans all though it was a fine idea. Lots of chatter about "moving on" and "new directions" and etc. smothered over the obvious fact that the man could still play, and, in fact, should have kept playing. He finished his career 65 hits short of 3000, 4 RBI short of 2000, 12 IBB short of 700, and 24 TB short of 6000. I can't think of any player who was so close to such historic milestones and who could still play at a high level who was denied the opportunity to keep making history. Thanks, Bud, you're a douchebag. Magowan at least had the class to step down after giving Barry the axe, but bungled horribly the transition to the Neukom era by retaining Brian Sabean as GM. Giants fans, if we want to win in 2010 and beyond, we'll have to hope for some damn improbable good luck and some other-worldly talent that will overcome the cluelessness of the front office. Hey, I won't say it's impossible, especially with the emergence of The Franchise. But it won't be easy. But who said being a Giants fan was easy?
2007 gets even stranger when you look at our competition. The 90-72 Diamondbacks won the West even though they allowed (732--5th) more runs than they scored (712--14th). Their 115 ERA+ was tops, followed buy the Cubs (114) and Rockies (111). The Wild Card Rockies (90-73) needed a 163rd game to edge past the Padres (89-74) for the last playoff spot. Colorado (860/758, 2nd/8th) underperformed by one game. San Diego (741/666, 9th/1st, 107 ERA+, 20 team shutouts) matched their projection, and had to have been disappointed not to win the West for the third straight season. The Rockies finished the season winning 14 of 15 and rode their hot streak all the way to the World Series. The 4th place Dodgers (82-80) matched their projection with 735 (10th) RS and 727 (4th) RA, and an ERA+ of 106. It is always nice to be reminded that outcomes in sports are not entirely predictable, and that improbable things can occur. We fans tend to discount luck and happenstance, as we like to attribute good results to pluck, grit, and clutchness. Failure is seen as a reflection of character, and variations in performance are explained away with a panoply of clichéd sportswriter-isms. If I've learned anything in a lifetime of watching games, it's that random chance is the Great Umpire in the Sky, that "winners" and "losers" are often separated by a hair's breadth, and that separation is mostly unexplainable by rational analysis. The best you can do when building a squad is muster all the talent you can and then find ways to maximize the success opportunities for the unique skills each individual brings. The rest is up to the gods.
Speaking of talent--the great Barry Bonds played his last baseball game in 2007. At 42, he still led all of baseball in OBP and walks and slugged .565! We we were lucky to have seen him in orange and black for all those years. He was cut loose by Magowan & Co. in the off-season ("fired" was Barry's term), and the sporting press, talking heads, hand-wringers, moralists, and casual fans all though it was a fine idea. Lots of chatter about "moving on" and "new directions" and etc. smothered over the obvious fact that the man could still play, and, in fact, should have kept playing. He finished his career 65 hits short of 3000, 4 RBI short of 2000, 12 IBB short of 700, and 24 TB short of 6000. I can't think of any player who was so close to such historic milestones and who could still play at a high level who was denied the opportunity to keep making history. Thanks, Bud, you're a douchebag. Magowan at least had the class to step down after giving Barry the axe, but bungled horribly the transition to the Neukom era by retaining Brian Sabean as GM. Giants fans, if we want to win in 2010 and beyond, we'll have to hope for some damn improbable good luck and some other-worldly talent that will overcome the cluelessness of the front office. Hey, I won't say it's impossible, especially with the emergence of The Franchise. But it won't be easy. But who said being a Giants fan was easy?
Friday, January 22, 2010
How the West Was Won: 2006
If the 2010 Giants are looking for inspiration, a gander at the 2006 NL West standings would serve them well. The Padres, 2005 winners with a pathetic 82-80 record, repeated their feat in 2006 but managed to win 88 games. That Bruce Bochy is a hell of a manager, eh? The team exceeded their Pythagorean percentage (86-76) by two games. The Wild Card Dodgers were also 88-74, exactly matching their projection. It was a funny year--the World Series champion Cardinals won the Central with an 83-78 record, beating the 97-65 Mets in a thrilling LCS and the 95-67 Tigers in an anti-climactic Series.
Pitching was not the story in the NL. The best teams in terms of ERA+ were the Astros (109), Dodgers (106), Rockies (105), D-Backs (105), Mets (105), and Padres (104). The Padres RS/RA (731/679) put them 13th and 1st. The more balanced Dodgers RS/RA (820/751) put them at 4th and 4th. It never hurts to be number one in something, eh? And if you have to pick something, pick pitching, at least if you play in the NL West. We Giants fans can get behind that. Speaking of the G-men, they finished 3rd, 11-1/2 back, with a 746/790 RS/RA line (11th and 8th). They--like LA--matched their projected record. Felipe Alou would get booted upstairs at the end of the season and Ol' Boch would get the call. Funny how the Padres got rid of him after back-to-back titles. It almost worked for them as they won 89 games the next year under Bud Black, and the Giants finished in last place. I remember thinking then that the Pads got the better man. They played .389 ball in 2008, so perhaps not. But that's something for another post.
p.s. Did you see this shite? (Hat tip to BCB.)
Pitching was not the story in the NL. The best teams in terms of ERA+ were the Astros (109), Dodgers (106), Rockies (105), D-Backs (105), Mets (105), and Padres (104). The Padres RS/RA (731/679) put them 13th and 1st. The more balanced Dodgers RS/RA (820/751) put them at 4th and 4th. It never hurts to be number one in something, eh? And if you have to pick something, pick pitching, at least if you play in the NL West. We Giants fans can get behind that. Speaking of the G-men, they finished 3rd, 11-1/2 back, with a 746/790 RS/RA line (11th and 8th). They--like LA--matched their projected record. Felipe Alou would get booted upstairs at the end of the season and Ol' Boch would get the call. Funny how the Padres got rid of him after back-to-back titles. It almost worked for them as they won 89 games the next year under Bud Black, and the Giants finished in last place. I remember thinking then that the Pads got the better man. They played .389 ball in 2008, so perhaps not. But that's something for another post.
p.s. Did you see this shite? (Hat tip to BCB.)
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
How the West Was Won: 2004
The 91-71 Giants fell agonizingly short of the title by two games. Again, they overperformed their projected (88-74) record. I suppose having a guy go .362/.609/.812 helps a bit. The Giants were 2nd in the league in RS with 850, which was 100 more than the NL average. Unfortunately they were 12th in RA with 770. That rated a 100 ERA+. The Dodgers had only a slightly better staff (102 ERA+) but were 4th in RA with 684. They were 9th in RS at 761. I suppose if you lack balance, it pays to have better run prevention than run scoring. That should give all of us hand-wringing, teeth-gnashing, and sackloth-wearing Giants fans some hope. The Dodgers also overperformed their Pythagorean projection (89-73). I can only assume Jim Tracy was a genius.
The Cardinals were the best club, number one in RS (855) and RA (659). The Braves and Cubs led with a 115 ERA+, the Cards were 2nd at 114. Their 105-57 record was five better than projected (100-62). That pesky Tony LaRussa!
It gets ugly from here on out, boys and girls. 294-353 (.454) for the next four years ('05-'08). That's what made 2009 so surprising and so special. Of course, it also inflated our expectations for 2010! After all, if you win 88 games one year with a mostly young club, you expect to improve. In other words, it is natural to assume that 88 wins reflects accurately the talent level of the club, and so some minor tweaking should get you to 90+ wins and a fair shot at the title. That kind of thinking is a little sloppy in my view--it doesn't account for luck and circumstance. It expects that all the things that happened in the previous year are perfectly repeatable. It does not account for normal random variation. It does not account for changes in the schedule and the quality of the opponents. I tend to believe that the competition in MLB is pretty fierce, and that advantages gained one season can disappear the next in the blink of an eye. I've said it before--the gods are cruel. Check out the Bonds Giants from 2000 to 2004. Look at the variation in wins, and in RS and RA. This was when we had the Greatest Player of All Time! The 2010 Giants may have the stuff to win the West. I sure hope so. I'll admit I don't like the squad (well, the lineup) much. Too many Sabean-types for my taste. But what the hell, I'm "all-in" at this point and I'm going to root like hell that the gods will smile on us.
GO GIANTS!
The Cardinals were the best club, number one in RS (855) and RA (659). The Braves and Cubs led with a 115 ERA+, the Cards were 2nd at 114. Their 105-57 record was five better than projected (100-62). That pesky Tony LaRussa!
It gets ugly from here on out, boys and girls. 294-353 (.454) for the next four years ('05-'08). That's what made 2009 so surprising and so special. Of course, it also inflated our expectations for 2010! After all, if you win 88 games one year with a mostly young club, you expect to improve. In other words, it is natural to assume that 88 wins reflects accurately the talent level of the club, and so some minor tweaking should get you to 90+ wins and a fair shot at the title. That kind of thinking is a little sloppy in my view--it doesn't account for luck and circumstance. It expects that all the things that happened in the previous year are perfectly repeatable. It does not account for normal random variation. It does not account for changes in the schedule and the quality of the opponents. I tend to believe that the competition in MLB is pretty fierce, and that advantages gained one season can disappear the next in the blink of an eye. I've said it before--the gods are cruel. Check out the Bonds Giants from 2000 to 2004. Look at the variation in wins, and in RS and RA. This was when we had the Greatest Player of All Time! The 2010 Giants may have the stuff to win the West. I sure hope so. I'll admit I don't like the squad (well, the lineup) much. Too many Sabean-types for my taste. But what the hell, I'm "all-in" at this point and I'm going to root like hell that the gods will smile on us.
GO GIANTS!
How the West Was Won: 2003
The wire-to-wire West winners got a new manager in 2003, thus proving the importance of managers in the grand scheme of things. The 100-61 Giants overperformed their Pythagorean record by SEVEN games (93-68) and crushed the 2nd-place Dodgers by 15-1/2 games. By league standards, it was a fairly pedestrian offense, only 755 RS, good for 6th place. The NL average was 747 or 4.61 R/G. I guess when your big bat fails to get an .800 SLG% you are in for some disappointment. The pitching, on the other hand, was superb with only 638 RA (2nd), good for a 113 ERA+ (tied for 3rd best). The 85-77 Dodgers had a tremendous staff, allowing only 556 runs (128 ERA+, league-best) and racking up 17 team shutouts. They scored only 574 though, worst in the league, but still overperformed their 83-79 projection. The 3rd-place Diamondbacks were 84-78, matching their projection exactly. They had excellent pitching (5th with 685 RA and 2nd with a 122 ERA+) but only managed 717 RS (10th).
The Florida Marlins (751 RS--8th, 692 RA--6th) won the Wild Card at 91-71, overperforming their 87-75 projection. The perennial playoff-losing Atlanta Braves scored 907 runs to lead the NL (the 2009 Yanks scored 915!), but allowed 740 (105 ERA+) to finish 9th. They overperformed by five games due to Bobby Cox' managerial wizardry.
Next up: 2004!
The Florida Marlins (751 RS--8th, 692 RA--6th) won the Wild Card at 91-71, overperforming their 87-75 projection. The perennial playoff-losing Atlanta Braves scored 907 runs to lead the NL (the 2009 Yanks scored 915!), but allowed 740 (105 ERA+) to finish 9th. They overperformed by five games due to Bobby Cox' managerial wizardry.
Next up: 2004!
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
How the West Was Won: 2002
The division winning Diamondbacks over-performed their Pythagorean record (95-67) by three games, finishing 98-64. The wild-card Giants finished two-and-a-half games back at 95-66, under-performing their Pythagorean projection (98-63) by three games. AZ led the NL in RS with 819, and finished 5th in RA at 674. SF was 3rd in RS with 783 and 2nd in RA with 616. (It is interesting to note that the 2009 Giants and Dodgers led the NL in 2009 with 611 RA.) You want to talk run prevention? How about the 2002 Atlanta Braves only allowing 565 runs to lead all of baseball? Wow! That was good for another impressive ERA+, this time 133. The Snakes took the second spot in the league (116) and the Giants the third (109). Those were two well-balanced clubs fighting it out in the West that season.
The Braves, on the other hand, had a mediocre offense, despite an outfield of Chipper Jones (153 OPS+), Andruw Jones (127 OPS+), and Gary Sheffield (138 OPS+). They scored only 708 runs (10th), below the league average of 720, yet they went 101-59, over-performing their predicted 96-64. That ought to give Giants fans some hope. A 27-year old super-sub by the name of Mark DeRosa put up a .768 OPS in 72 games for the Braves that year, and was 3-for-7 in the NLDS against the Giants. Y'all stand up and gimme a "V-S-C" chant!
p.s.
Take a look at this piece on Tim and arbitration.
(A wink-and-a-nod to Giants Win for the link.)
UPDATE Monday 0850: JSanchez avoids arb and signs for $2.1M. Good!
The Braves, on the other hand, had a mediocre offense, despite an outfield of Chipper Jones (153 OPS+), Andruw Jones (127 OPS+), and Gary Sheffield (138 OPS+). They scored only 708 runs (10th), below the league average of 720, yet they went 101-59, over-performing their predicted 96-64. That ought to give Giants fans some hope. A 27-year old super-sub by the name of Mark DeRosa put up a .768 OPS in 72 games for the Braves that year, and was 3-for-7 in the NLDS against the Giants. Y'all stand up and gimme a "V-S-C" chant!
p.s.
Take a look at this piece on Tim and arbitration.
(A wink-and-a-nod to Giants Win for the link.)
UPDATE Monday 0850: JSanchez avoids arb and signs for $2.1M. Good!
Monday, January 18, 2010
How the West Was Won: 2001
The 2001 Giants lacked the pitching of the previous year's squad. The staff allowed 748 runs, 9th in the league, posting an ERA+ of 96. The Braves led the way with a 124 ERA+ (643 RA, 1st), the D-Backs just behind at 120 (677 RA, 2nd). The Snakes won the West by two games (92-70), underperforming their 95-67 Pythagorean record. With 818 RS, they were 3rd best, ahead of the Giants who were 5th with 799. The Bay City Boys finished 4 games better than their Pythagorean percentage (86-76), and missed out on the Wild Card by three games to the 93-69 Cardinals. The Giants did draw 3,311,958 fans, best in the league. This guy hit a lot of homers, and you know how fans like that sort of thing.
Saturday, January 16, 2010
How the West Was Won: 2000
The San Francisco Giants had the best record in baseball in their first season in the new ballpark at 2nd and King. The team was 3rd in the league in runs scored at 925, and 4th in the league in runs allowed at 747. It was an era of big offense--NL teams scored and gave up an average of 5 runs per game. At 97-65, the Giants exactly matched their Pythagorean projection, and smoked the 2nd place Dodgers by 11 games. Despite the lack of a truly dominant starter, the Giants led the league with 15 team shutouts. The Atlanta Braves once again had the best pitching staff, yielding only 714 runs (4.41 per game) for an ERA+ of 113. (The Giants were 8th at 101.) For comparison, the 2009 Giants had a team ERA+ of 123, the best mark in San Francisco history. You have to go back to New York's 1954 World Series champs for a better one (132). Of course, there were only 8 teams in the league then, and none west of the Mississippi!
This is the first of a series of posts about the NL West. I am interested in runs scored, runs allowed, Pythagorean record, and ERA+. I thought it might be fun to mine the vast info bank known as Baseball-Reference and see if we find out anything interesting. After all, we all want to win the West. Is their anything we can learn from the last 10 seasons? I decided to start with year 2000 because we had a great ballclub, the Park was brand-spankin' new, and the league and playoff configuration was the same as it is today.
n.b.
ERA+ = 100 * (lg ERA/tm ERA) with a park adjustment
Pythagorean W-L (Bill James' formula) = RS^1.83 / (RS^1.83 + RA^1.83)
Tim Lincecum filed for arbitration yesterday.
This is the first of a series of posts about the NL West. I am interested in runs scored, runs allowed, Pythagorean record, and ERA+. I thought it might be fun to mine the vast info bank known as Baseball-Reference and see if we find out anything interesting. After all, we all want to win the West. Is their anything we can learn from the last 10 seasons? I decided to start with year 2000 because we had a great ballclub, the Park was brand-spankin' new, and the league and playoff configuration was the same as it is today.
n.b.
ERA+ = 100 * (lg ERA/tm ERA) with a park adjustment
Pythagorean W-L (Bill James' formula) = RS^1.83 / (RS^1.83 + RA^1.83)
Tim Lincecum filed for arbitration yesterday.
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Barry & Bobby
Great article by John Brattain at THE HARDBALL TIMES dated 9 April called See Windmill, tilt at windmill . . . rinse, lather, repeat.
All fans of Barry & Bobby should read it. That's ALL Giants fans, isn't it?
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Isn't this strange?
"The Giants have become accustomed to excellence at first base, but this year they'll settle for mere competence." "[Outside of signing Aaron Rowland]...they've made no moves to strengthen the offense, which ranked at or near the bottom of most significant statistical categories." Sounds like the lunatic fringe, right? Actually, it is from the Giants website, sfgiants.com. Both snippets are by Chris Haft, a writer from MLB.com. These posts are not terribly complimentary of the Giants, even if true. Settle for mere competence? Offense ranked at or near the bottom of most significant statistical categories? Surprisingly, these articles both appear on the Giants website, sfgiants.com, or more precisely: sanfrancisco.giants.mlb.com.
http://sanfrancisco.giants.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080108&content_id=2342011&vkey=news_sf&fext=.jsp&c_id=sf
http://sanfrancisco.giants.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20071217&content_id=2328740&vkey=news_sf&fext=.jsp&c_id=sf
Why would the Giants have such critical articles on their own website? Isn't the number one rule on any team that you can't criticise your teammates, management, fans or opponents (which is one reason we get, "yes, thanks to my teammates and the good lord above, I was lucky tonight and sound as intelligent as a rock"). Can it be that they can't even control their own website content anymore? It was clear a couple of years ago when mlb took over all the team websites (making them much less interesting to visit) that they were being standardized and homogenized. And, I guess, marginalized, in that you can find much more interesting and insightful content on dozens of websites and blogs that can pick up on news almost as fast as the Giants can. Nevertheless, I find this just a little weird, that the Giants have SO little control over their own website content. What the hell is the point of having a website if not to post YOUR spin on stuff, not some other hack's? I guess Darth Selig has made it illegal for teams to have websites, maybe he is afraid it would spur fan interest. Maybe they would post MOC's vignettes there.
http://sanfrancisco.giants.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080108&content_id=2342011&vkey=news_sf&fext=.jsp&c_id=sf
http://sanfrancisco.giants.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20071217&content_id=2328740&vkey=news_sf&fext=.jsp&c_id=sf
Why would the Giants have such critical articles on their own website? Isn't the number one rule on any team that you can't criticise your teammates, management, fans or opponents (which is one reason we get, "yes, thanks to my teammates and the good lord above, I was lucky tonight and sound as intelligent as a rock"). Can it be that they can't even control their own website content anymore? It was clear a couple of years ago when mlb took over all the team websites (making them much less interesting to visit) that they were being standardized and homogenized. And, I guess, marginalized, in that you can find much more interesting and insightful content on dozens of websites and blogs that can pick up on news almost as fast as the Giants can. Nevertheless, I find this just a little weird, that the Giants have SO little control over their own website content. What the hell is the point of having a website if not to post YOUR spin on stuff, not some other hack's? I guess Darth Selig has made it illegal for teams to have websites, maybe he is afraid it would spur fan interest. Maybe they would post MOC's vignettes there.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)