|
|
Post by allenreed on Sept 6, 2013 23:37:55 GMT -5
As close as you can come to a perfect game without getting it.
He's still got a few starts left, but I think he's earned a shot at next year's rotation. We're worried about replacing Zito and possibly Timmy, and we may already have the answers in house.
|
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Sept 7, 2013 6:40:41 GMT -5
Amazing performance by Petit, but a contender with a high payroll is really rolling the dice with their rotation if it has Chad Gaudin, Yusmeiro Petit and/or Ryan Vogelsong at two of the three spots. I think you can gamble with one of them at the five spot, but as you've pointed out Allen, even Timmy is shaky if you re-sign him so this rotation won't be very good. I'm glad I'm not the one making the decisions, because these decisions will be tough ones. One of the most impressive things about this outing that makes you think he can be a possibility for next year though was that this was his second straight start against the Dbacks, so they were very familiar with him, and they couldn't do a thing with him.
|
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Sept 7, 2013 12:08:34 GMT -5
Amazing performance by Petit, but a contender with a high payroll is really rolling the dice with their rotation if it has Chad Gaudin, Yusmeiro Petit and/or Ryan Vogelsong at two of the three spots.
Allen- Not sure what the payroll has to do with it. If you limit yourself to thinking in terms of what Petit and Lincecum did prior to this year, then you may be right. If you look at how both performed this year, you may be wrong.
I think you can gamble with one of them at the five spot, but as you've pointed out Allen, even Timmy is shaky if you re-sign him so this rotation won't be very good.
Allen- Even Timmy? Timmy is nothing more than an inconsistent pitcher as likely to give up a run for every inning he pitches as he is to pitch a good game. Gaudin was very good as a starter, way better than Timmy. Petit's pitched well in all four of his outings, and spectacularly last night.
Take even the best teams, how good are their four and five starters? Boston has the best record in baseball, and we're talking Felix Doubront and Ryan Dempster. The Dodgers have caught lightning in a bottle with Nolasco, but before that they were running three or four different guys out there as bottom of the rotation starters. Lilly, Capuano, Fife, Beckett.
Basically you're looking for a guy to give you five or six innings and give up three runs, and maybe do a bit better than that now and again. Why spend $20 million on these guys, when it can be better spent on giving us someone who can provide some offense.
|
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Sept 8, 2013 8:20:40 GMT -5
Allen, I think you're underestimating the importance of starting pitching to a huge extent. You really think the Giants can compete next year with a rotation of Cain, Bumgarner, Lincecum, Vogelsong and Petit, when the Dodgers send out Kershaw, Greinke, Ryu, Nolasco, and a probably returning Chad Billingsley? Are you refuting one of the oldest baseball axioms in the world about pitching being 90 % of the game? In my opinion the rotation is THE most important part do the team by far.
|
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Sept 8, 2013 10:49:58 GMT -5
Mark -- Amazing performance by Petit, but a contender with a high payroll is really rolling the dice with their rotation if it has Chad Gaudin, Yusmeiro Petit and/or Ryan Vogelsong at two of the three spots. Rog -- You're right that it is probably a good gamble that one of the trio can handle one spot well, but hoping for two is indeed risky. I'm fairly confident in Ryan, iffy on Chad, and very iffy on Yusmeiro. If the Giants can have all three next season, I would think they could get at least one good starter, one good middle reliever and one good long reliever out of the mix. By the way, I think it is because he just MISSED on the perfect game that Yusmeiro is now one of my favorite Giants. I so wish he had achieved it, but I probably like him BETTER because he didn't. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1996#ixzz2eJeCI84t |
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Sept 8, 2013 10:57:59 GMT -5
Allen, I think you're underestimating the importance of starting pitching to a huge extent. You really think the Giants can compete next year with a rotation of Cain, Bumgarner, Lincecum, Vogelsong and Petit, when the Dodgers send out Kershaw, Greinke, Ryu, Nolasco, and a probably returning Chad Billingsley? Are you refuting one of the oldest baseball axioms in the world about pitching being 90 % of the game? In my opinion the rotation is THE most important part do the team by far Allen- Yes, I do think they can compete. If they hit. In fact I'd replace Timmy with Gaudin. I hope the Dodgers pitch Billingsley, and they just caught Nolasco on a hot streak. he won't be that good next year. The league will adjust to Ryu. I think Petit would be an improvement over Zito. and Gaudin would be better than Lincecum. We need to score some runs though. |
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Sept 8, 2013 11:36:06 GMT -5
Mark -- Amazing performance by Petit, but a contender with a high payroll is really rolling the dice with their rotation if it has Chad Gaudin, Yusmeiro Petit and/or Ryan Vogelsong at two of the three spots. Allen- Not sure what the payroll has to do with it. If you limit yourself to thinking in terms of what Petit and Lincecum did prior to this year, then you may be right. If you look at how both performed this year, you may be wrong. Rog -- Yes, Mark may be wrong. But he rarely is. Petit's ERA this season is nearly as high as Tim's -- even though most of Yusmeiro's ERA has been established in AAA. Yusmeiro gave up 1.6 homers per nine at Fresno, while Tim has given up 1.0. Tim has yielded about a hit per nine less than Petit. Where Yusmeiro shines is in limiting walks. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1996&page=1#ixzz2eJi5g9cu |
|
|
|
Post by dk on Sept 8, 2013 12:45:12 GMT -5
please don't equate homers in SF to Fresno...even the league difference doesn't equal the way the ball travels in the PCL parks, especial against a pitcher that pitches to contact. Ah, walks do count more than hits in certain instances. Pitchers who are constantly pitching behind in the count have a way of getting hurt by mistakes on hitter's pitches...Petit must have set a record for going 0-2 on so many batters....
All the talk about Petit, no one commented on the catching of Sanchez...great low target, placed just right to frame the knee high pitch on the outside edge...this is one of the knocks I have against Posey..he squats too wide and doesn't get the calls on the black....and the thing that impressed me more than anything in the whole game was Sanchez kept calling for 2 strike pitches to be in the dirt where if the batter misses, the pressure is on the catcher to come up with the ball that could get the batter to first base...and the last time I looked, Sanchez has more RBI's per at bat than Posey...I'm sure Mark will let me know if I'm wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Sept 11, 2013 10:02:24 GMT -5
Doesn't matter if you're right or wrong, DK, I've already mentioned that I don't think much of the RBI stat, and the amount of at bats Hector has had this season is not enough to be considered significant anyway. By the way, Buster has a higher on base percentage than Hector does with RISP, which might indicate that pitchers are reluctant to pitch to Buster in those situations, while they welcome a shot at Hector. I don't mean to keep being harsh on Hector Sanchez, but if you're going to continue to compare him to Buster Posey, the reigning MVP and batting champion, you're simply not going to win. Boagie is on the right track though, comparing him to other backup catchers. Maybe you should try that.
|
|
|
|
Post by dk on Sept 11, 2013 13:00:13 GMT -5
Doesn't matter if you're right or wrong, DK, I've already mentioned that I don't think much of the RBI stat, and the amount of at bats Hector has had this season is not enough to be considered significant anyway. By the way, Buster has a higher on base percentage than Hector does with RISP, which might indicate that pitchers are reluctant to pitch to Buster in those situations, while they welcome a shot at Hector. I don't mean to keep being harsh on Hector Sanchez, but if you're going to continue to compare him to Buster Posey, the reigning MVP and batting champion, you're simply not going to win. Boagie is on the right track though, comparing him to other backup catchers. Maybe you should try that. dk..Posey didn't win those awards for his catching..the fielding experts rated him fair.....and if you look at the splits, Posey hits much better when he plays in the field.... |
|
|
|
Post by dk on Sept 11, 2013 13:02:04 GMT -5
Doesn't matter if you're right or wrong, DK, I've already mentioned that I don't think much of the RBI stat, and the amount of at bats Hector has had this season is not enough to be considered significant anyway. dk..I mentioned that because of your comment that things looked bad when the RBI guy, Posey, left the game..... |
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Sept 15, 2013 17:42:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Sept 15, 2013 17:48:46 GMT -5
The day Hector Sanchez is as good a hitter as Buster Posey, either Hector will have been traded away, or Buster will be playing another position.
I HOPE that happens, since it would significantly aid the Giants. But it is very unlikely.
Don can't have it BOTH ways. Buster is considered a MUCH better player than Hector. Yet Don says Hector is the better fielder. If that is true, clearly Buster is MUCH the better hitter of the two.
|
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Sept 15, 2013 17:55:14 GMT -5
Don -- if you look at the splits, Posey hits much better when he plays in the field.... Rog -- We've been through this before, Don. Against southpaws, Buster hits .351/.414/.616/1.029. When he plays first base, he hits .362/.425/.583, or just about the same. Because Hector Sanchez is a switch hitter while Brandon Belt hits lefty, Buster usually plays first base against southpaws. Add in that when he plays first base, he gets a comparative mental break which wouldn't be the same if he played first ball all the time, since he wouldn't have catching to compare it to, and your point that Buster hits better when he plays first base loses a lot of its punch. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1996&page=1#ixzz2f0LB59P6 |
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Sept 15, 2013 17:56:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by dk on Sept 15, 2013 18:49:27 GMT -5
dk..Posey didn't win those awards for his catching..the fielding experts rated him fair..... Rog -- Actually, they didn't. You could look it up. You get Bill James' Baseball Analyst each year, don't you? Look it up. dk...once more. you are dead wrong...Posey was considered 3rd best catcher only because he got a couple of guys out of the 10 who rated him high, the rest had him rated low...in fact he won by default because the rest of the guys were split between the other catchers....on the 2 fielding categories, Posey was rated far down the list... in this weeks rating of the leading ball players in each position by the Sporting News, Posey was rated #2 because , as they noted, of his hitting and that his fielding was highly over rated.......look it up and try telling he truth...even though it is pretty hard for you to do so... |
|
|
|
Post by dk on Sept 15, 2013 18:56:12 GMT -5
Doesn't matter if you're right or wrong, DK, I've already mentioned that I don't think much of the RBI stat, and the amount of at bats Hector has had this season is not enough to be considered significant anyway. dk..I mentioned that because of your comment that things looked bad when the RBI guy, Posey, left the game..... Rog -- Doesn't matter why you made the comment, Don, Mark's still stands. dk..w I don't give a hoot what ridiculous argument you use, the statement was wrong ....the topic was in regards to the statement Mark made about the Giants losing their RBI man and I pointed out that Sanchez had more RBI's per plate appearances...and with that once more Rog is wrong....and to enter the statement that you don't like RBI's as a measure is painfully weak even for a stats nerd.... |
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Sept 16, 2013 13:05:29 GMT -5
Doesn't matter if you're right or wrong, DK, I've already mentioned that I don't think much of the RBI stat, and the amount of at bats Hector has had this season is not enough to be considered significant anyway. dk..I mentioned that because of your comment that things looked bad when the RBI guy, Posey, left the game..... Rog -- Doesn't matter why you made the comment, Don, Mark's still stands. dk..w I don't give a hoot what ridiculous argument you use, the statement was wrong ....the topic was in regards to the statement Mark made about the Giants losing their RBI man and I pointed out that Sanchez had more RBI's per plate appearances...and with that once more Rog is wrong.... Rog -- We're talking about what Mark said, Don. How the heck did I become wrong? Incidentally, I hadn't mentioned it, but while Mark is right about Sanchez's sample and you are right that Buster has more at bats per RBI than does Sanchez, the two's numbers for runners on per RBI and runners in scoring position per RBI are pretty close. In other words, what you said was right, but as Mark and I have pointed out, you weren't looking broadly enough at the picture. I have yet to come across anyone nearly as prejudiced against Buster as you are. Don -- and to enter the statement that you don't like RBI's as a measure is painfully weak even for a stats nerd.... Rog -- I wasn't aware that Mark was a stats nerd, but he's certainly right that RBI's are an overrated stat. One should look at opportunities as well as RBI's themselves. The other night was an example of why RBI's are overrated. Buster Posey came up with a runner on second. One of his jobs was to get a hit. He did so -- but hit it so hard that the runner didn't even think about scoring from second. If we truly want to know how a guy is performing with runners on base look at the bases he advances runners compared to the outs he makes with runners on -- and the number of runners he had the opportunity to advance. We speak about productive outs, but not enough is said about productive hits -- which don't always result in RBI's. We speak about reaching first base (BA and OBP) and about reaching home plate (runs and RBI's), but we almost never talk about advancing runners to second and third bases, which aren't exactly unimportant themselves. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1996&page=1#15007#ixzz2f4z3SyEX |
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Sept 16, 2013 13:40:46 GMT -5
All those things you mention are also important, Rog. But, if hitters aren't getting those runs home, the team isn't winning. The Giants getting a lot of runners on and getting them into scoring position but not scoring isn't a positive outcome. I don't see how plating those runners is overrated. Perhaps you should word it as the players who do the things you're talking about are often underrated, that I can surely agree with.
|
|
|
|
Post by dk on Sept 16, 2013 17:17:12 GMT -5
Doesn't matter if you're right or wrong, DK, I've already mentioned that I don't think much of the RBI stat, and the amount of at bats Hector has had this season is not enough to be considered significant anyway. dk..I mentioned that because of your comment that things looked bad when the RBI guy, Posey, left the game..... Rog -- Doesn't matter why you made the comment, Don, Mark's still stands. dk..w I don't give a hoot what ridiculous argument you use, the statement was wrong ....the topic was in regards to the statement Mark made about the Giants losing their RBI man and I pointed out that Sanchez had more RBI's per plate appearances...and with that once more Rog is wrong.... Rog -- We're talking about what Mark said, Don. How the heck did I become wrong? Incidentally, I hadn't mentioned it, but while Mark is right about Sanchez's sample and you are right that Buster has more at bats per RBI than does Sanchez, the two's numbers for runners on per RBI and runners in scoring position per RBI are pretty close. In other words, what you said was right, but as Mark and I have pointed out, you weren't looking broadly enough at the picture. I have yet to come across anyone nearly as prejudiced against Buster as you are. dk..wow, Rog reaches a new height of stupidity and gross behavior...yes, the figures I stated were right, but I am biased because I used them...I am not biased against Posey as a hitter, just of his catching....I am 100% biased a stats nerd who uses a stat (bases per hit) to diss one player (Burriss), but thinks I am biased when I point out the long stretches that another player (Posey) puts up the same lack of power numbers.... Don -- and to enter the statement that you don't like RBI's as a measure is painfully weak even for a stats nerd.... Rog -- I wasn't aware that Mark was a stats nerd, but he's certainly right that RBI's are an overrated stat. One should look at opportunities as well as RBI's themselves. dk...no, Mark rises well above your level...I don't have to look at stats to know who is the RBI man and who isn't....you can watch how he performs in a close game.....and isn't odd, that certain guys are always near the top of the RBI list...no matter what the breakdown is..... The other night was an example of why RBI's are overrated. Buster Posey came up with a runner on second. One of his jobs was to get a hit. He did so -- but hit it so hard that the runner didn't even think about scoring from second. dk...and this is why he is so far down on RBI's?  ? If we truly want to know how a guy is performing with runners on base look at the bases he advances runners compared to the outs he makes with runners on -- and the number of runners he had the opportunity to advance. dk...no, look at he game, who the runners are and how the other team plays him.....you don't think we should consider productive outs, but we should marvel over productive hits.... We speak about productive outs, but not enough is said about productive hits -- which don't always result in RBI's. We speak about reaching first base (BA and OBP) and about reaching home plate (runs and RBI's), but we almost never talk about advancing runners to second and third bases, which aren't exactly unimportant themselves. dk..well, I know you don't, but I keep mentioning the value of Scutaro as a 2 hitter because he has the great value of taking a lot of pitches (which gives the runner a chance to steal) and then to hit behind the runner to advance him...I put Scutaro in a class with Billy Herman and Al Dark....two of the best I ever watched.... |
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Sept 18, 2013 9:34:44 GMT -5
Boagie -- All those things you mention are also important, Rog. But, if hitters aren't getting those runs home, the team isn't winning. Rog -- Here is what I feel you aren't properly understanding, Boagie. There are three steps to most runs. First, the runner gets on base. He gets credited with the run. Unless the RBI guy homers, the RBI guy's RBI isn't possible. Second, a batter advances the runner. Usually he does that with a hit, but sometimes he does so with a walk or (the highly valued here) productive out. This batter gets no statistical credit for the run, even though without his contribution, the run wouldn't have scored. Third, a batter drives in the runner. He gets credit for an RBI. The Giants getting a lot of runners on and getting them into scoring position but not scoring isn't a positive outcome. I don't see how plating those runners is overrated. Perhaps you should word it as the players who do the things you're talking about are often underrated, that I can surely agree with. The guy who scored the run and the guy who drove it in receive statistical credit, while the "middle man" gets none. For a guy who values the productive out so highly, I'm surprised you (statistically) miss the "middle man" and thus give too much credit to both the guy who scores the run and the one who drives it in. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1996&page=1#15027#ixzz2fFqx0izz |
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Sept 18, 2013 9:37:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Sept 18, 2013 9:58:51 GMT -5
Boagie -- Perhaps you should word it as the players who do the things you're talking about are often underrated, that I can surely agree with. Rog -- First of all, as long as the "middle man" gets no credit, BOTH the guy who scored the run and the guy who drove it in are comparitively overrated. Second, when we look solely at RBI's and don't compare them with opportunities, we can easily overrate or underrate a player. An example would be Hunter Pence last season. He drove in an impressive 104 runs last season. But that number begins to lose its luster when we consider that he had a huge 505 runners on base, 276 of them in scoring position. In a nutshell, Hunter's RBI's were overrated. I think we'd all agree that despite his mallet finger, Marco Scutaro has had a pretty good season. Yet he has only 31 RBI's -- or one for every 15 at bats. Clearly we would consider RBI's to be overrated in his case, or we wouldn't think he had put together a decent season at the plate. Marco's usually more of a "middle man." Angel Pagan has only 28 RBI's in 246 at bats. Then again, he has put together those RBI's with only 114 runners on base. In other words, Angel has driven home more of the runners he has had on base than Hunter Pence did last season when Hunter drove home the impressive 104 runs. Angel's ratio of runners on to RBI's is just under one RBI per runner on base, while Hunter's was just under one RBI per FIVE runners on base. And that is even though Hunter had 25 homers compared to just four for Angel. Hunter drove in 79 out of 505 runners, or not even one out of six runners driven in. Angel has driven home 24 out of 114 runners, or better than one out of FIVE runners on base ahead of him.' We look at Hunter's 2012 season as an impressive RBI year. We don't think much of Angel's 2013 season in that regard, one way or the other. Yet Angel has actually done a better job of driving in runners this season than Hunter did last year. Hunter's 104 RBI total was overrated. Because RBI's usually rely on positive efforts from two other hitters, RBI's are overrated -- especially if we don't look at how they compare with opportunities. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1996&page=1#ixzz2fFt0rA4p |
|
?