|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Mar 23, 2013 10:39:45 GMT -5
As we stand here literally on the door step of a new season, and I continue to read that Tim is continuing to struggle with location, and that his velocity is consistantly around 87-89, I have to ask the question;
"What will it take this season for posters here, and Giant fans in general, to realize that the Tim we have is not much more than a shadow of the CY Young award winner he once was?"
Last year, virtually everyone argued with me that he could right the proverbial ship, and get this all straightened out.
Before spring training this year, I read writers saying that they thought he could get back to, or at least close to back to being his old self.
Early reports sounded good, but the longer Spring Training has continued, more and more I read the same stuff we read and saw last year;
Command issues
Velocity issues
Strike zone issues.
Everyone has read what I think and have been thinking, so I'll close with one final question;
If Tim starts off the year as he was last year, how long into the season will it be before anyone will admit that there was, is, and will continue to be a problem?
boly
|
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 23, 2013 13:51:26 GMT -5
Boly- As we stand here literally on the door step of a new season, and I continue to read that Tim is continuing to struggle with location, and that his velocity is consistantly around 87-89, I have to ask the question
Boagie- Before you ask the question, Tim looked good against the Padres, and bad against the Rockies. Overall his numbers arent good, but again, this is just spring training. People were ready to trade Zito for a few broken bats last spring training. Even when Tim was winning Cy Youngs his ERA was in the 4's during spring.
Boly- "What will it take this season for posters here, and Giant fans in general, to realize that the Tim we have is not much more than a shadow of the CY Young award winner he once was?"
Boagie- I think we all know he's not the pitcher he was in '08 and '09. We know he can't throw 98, and the chance of him winning another CY Young again isn't good. This was all said last season "Tim is done, we need to trade him asap." But did you turn off the TV when Tim pitched during the post season? If you did watch, then you'll know that Tim is still capable of being good.
Boly- If Tim starts off the year as he was last year, how long into the season will it be before anyone will admit that there was, is, and will continue to be a problem?
Boagie- I admit right now there was a problem last season, I just think he, Righetti, Gardner and Bochy will fix it. I guess I'd say if Tim doesn't pitch the way we hope within 10 games, I'd then move him to the bullpen, then cut our losses at the trade deadline, unless he becomes the super reliever like he was in the post season. And Boly, I will fully admit you were right about his delivery being the cornerstone to his immediate success and his quick fall.
Now, what if Tim is great as a starter this year, Boly..It's been 4 years of success without you admitting you were wrong. If he gets back on track will you admit that Tim's delivery works in the long run, even if you don't like it?
|
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Mar 23, 2013 13:51:40 GMT -5
What are they going to do with him at this point. Trade him? Who is going to give anything for him with the huge contract that expires at the end of the season. There basically stuck. The good thing is that if he stinks this year, you're done with him. It isn't like Zito, where he was stinking it up and still had years to go on his contract.
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member 
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Mar 24, 2013 0:48:24 GMT -5
Boagie pretty much used up all my material so I'll just make a few adjacent points. Let's face it...ST numbers are pretty meaningless for veterans who are not competing for their spot on the team. ST is only a competition for very few veterans. For most, it's about practice and keeping sharp. Sure it would make us all sit easier if Tim was mowing everyone down but even that wouldnt guarantee that he would continue it when the bell rings on opening day. Health and continuing to work on mechanics is what counts right now.
As to Boly's question of how long before they look for replacements, I believe Sabean and his staff are already looking just because nobody in the Minors seems ready to step in in case of an injury. As to Timmy, it will take a lot for the Giants to look to replace him. Given how much work he's put in and how motivated he is to prove last year was an abberation, I would be SHOCKED if he had even a month comparable to his year last year. We're talking about a guy who is mentally as tough as anyone out there. Once he gets his mechanics straightened out, Im confident he'll be fine. His velocity seems to have upticked already.
~Dood
|
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Mar 24, 2013 10:30:32 GMT -5
I agree with you that it's way too early to panic on Timmy. Let's wait until he gets a few regular season starts under his belt.
What I would question is your statement that Tim is as mentally tough as anyone out there. Last season seemed to bring a crisis in confidence, and we've even seen that a little this year. Timmy competes hard, but I wouldn't say he's mentally tougher than anyone else. In fact, I'd put the other four Giants starters ahead of him in that dept., especially Vogey and Cain.
|
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Mar 24, 2013 12:19:31 GMT -5
Boly -- As we stand here literally on the door step of a new season, and I continue to read that Tim is continuing to struggle with location, and that his velocity is consistantly around 87-89, Rog -- I agree with your comments in general -- although probably not to the same degree as you -- but Tim's velocity hasn't been just 87-89. Three starts back he likely averaged about 91 mph, and the last two starts he has averaged more like 89-90. Even now, aren't we seeing at least as many 90's and 91's as we're seeing 87's? I would go with Tim being more in the 88-90 range now, or just one mph higher than the 87-89 you mentioned here. Since the first inning or two of his start three back, though, his velocity hasn't been very good. I still think command is his big issue, and thus far in spring training he's doesn't seem to have solved it. I'm beginning to worry that Tim won't bounce back as far as I thought he would, and that was the reason I expected the Giants' rotation to be somewhat improved overall. I am approaching a situation in which I would believe the rotation will decline slightly along WITH the bullpen. I'm not panicking over the pitching by any means, but I'm not expecting it to be as good. League-wide ERA's have been declining as predicted the past four or five years, but at this point I doubt the Giants' ERA will head that direction. I do, however, still think that Tim, Brandon Belt, Pablo Sandoval and Hunter Pence will each improve. Maybe Gregor Blanco. Most of the rest of the Giants, though, seem poised to hold serve or go the other way. Earlier I predicted the Giants might win as many as 100 games. I'm not as confident of that now. Again, I'm not predicting gloom and doom, but I'm not quite as confident as I was. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1617#ixzz2OTgOtvB3 |
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Mar 24, 2013 12:23:49 GMT -5
Boagie- I admit right now there was a problem last season, I just think he, Righetti, Gardner and Bochy will fix it. I guess I'd say if Tim doesn't pitch the way we hope within 10 games, I'd then move him to the bullpen, then cut our losses at the trade deadline, unless he becomes the super reliever like he was in the post season. Rog -- I've been expecting that group -- and Tim himself in particular -- to solve the problem. But no one -- including Tim himself -- could figure it out last season, and -- disappointingly -- it doesn't appear he has figured it out yet. Perhaps a difference now may be that while he couldn't figure it out last season, he now has figured it out more -- but just hasn't yet been able to do it. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1617&page=1#ixzz2OTkdM6nP |
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Mar 24, 2013 12:52:03 GMT -5
Now, what if Tim is great as a starter this year, Boly..It's been 4 years of success without you admitting you were wrong. If he gets back on track will you admit that Tim's delivery works in the long run, even if you don't like it?
---boly says---
Absolutely! Boagie, you've known me long enough that, when I'm wrong, I fess up.
And I think a 10 game trial is fair. By 10 games, we'll know a lot.
I'm not hopeful, though honestly, I'd LOVE to say, "I was WRONG!"
After so many years of playing and coaching and studying mechanics, I just don't see it.
boly
|
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Mar 24, 2013 12:57:31 GMT -5
Boly -- As we stand here literally on the door step of a new season, and I continue to read that Tim is continuing to struggle with location, and that his velocity is consistantly around 87-89, Rog -- I agree with your comments in general -- although probably not to the same degree as you -- but Tim's velocity hasn't been just 87-89. Three starts back he likely averaged about 91 mph, and the last two starts he has averaged more like 89-90. Even now, aren't we seeing at least as many 90's and 91's as we're seeing 87's? I would go with Tim being more in the 88-90 range now, or just one mph higher than the 87-89 you mentioned here. Since the first inning or two of his start three back, though, his velocity hasn't been very good. I still think command is his big issue, and thus far in spring training he's doesn't seem to have solved it. I'm beginning to worry that Tim won't bounce back as far as I thought he would, and that was the reason I expected the Giants' rotation to be somewhat improved overall. I am approaching a situation in which I would believe the rotation will decline slightly along WITH the bullpen. I'm not panicking over the pitching by any means, but I'm not expecting it to be as good. League-wide ERA's have been declining as predicted the past four or five years, but at this point I doubt the Giants' ERA will head that direction. ---boly says--- Totally agree; way to early to panic. And Randy is right; Spring training numbers mean nada. Only there is one caveat; he's picking up this spring right where he left off last year; command issues. The MPH I listed I copied word-for-word on something I read in SF Gate. They have been watching the games, I have not. They're gun? Or the Giant gun? I haven't a clue. Just reporting what I've read. And honestly, Rog, other than one start I have NOT read the numbers you posted. Then again, I'm not a "velocity" gun. Never was. I'm a location with movement kind -o- guy. Tim may have the movement, but for a long while now, the only location I've seen from him is that when he's on the mound, he knows where HE'S located.  Boagie suggested 10 games for an evaluation. Randy: You still didn't answer my question. What will it take, and further WHEN will you acquiese to the fact that he isn't right, and likely never will be? boly |
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Mar 24, 2013 13:34:06 GMT -5
Randy: You still didn't answer my question. What will it take, and further WHEN will you acquiese to the fact that he isn't right, and likely never will be?
boly
Dood - the problem is twofold Boly. 1, the cupboard is bare in the minor leagues for someone who could step in and do the job this year. 2, Timmy's upside is such that if you feel like he's close to turning it on, it's hard to just pull the trigger on a trade. If you want to send him to the bullpen, how much can the Giants afford to pay a veteran to come in and replace him in the rotation? For these reasons, I don't think the Giants are in a position to just say, ok, let's put him on probation for x number of starts. I think it has more to do with how the team is doing overall. If things get desperate, that is when you might see the team consider a change.
I don't think you can say he NEVER will be (right) again...you said that about Zito last Spring, I recall. He's way too young to completely write his career off. Clearly he's not right now but you need to give him a chance to work it out.
~Dood
|
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 24, 2013 22:35:52 GMT -5
Rog -- I've been expecting that group -- and Tim himself in particular -- to solve the problem. But no one -- including Tim himself -- could figure it out last season, and -- disappointingly -- it doesn't appear he has figured it out yet.
Perhaps a difference now may be that while he couldn't figure it out last season, he now has figured it out more -- but just hasn't yet been able to do it.
Boagie- I thought you've been saying for a while now that he had a much better second half? We all saw his post season. I think it's a work in progress, but there has been definite progress.
|
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 24, 2013 22:49:28 GMT -5
Rog -- I agree with your comments in general -- although probably not to the same degree as you -- but Tim's velocity hasn't been just 87-89. Three starts back he likely averaged about 91 mph, and the last two starts he has averaged more like 89-90. Even now, aren't we seeing at least as many 90's and 91's as we're seeing 87's?
I would go with Tim being more in the 88-90 range now, or just one mph higher than the 87-89 you mentioned here.
Since the first inning or two of his start three back, though, his velocity hasn't been very good.
Boagie- In his last start his velocity was pretty good, he hit 93 on the gun a few times, I was actually encouraged by Lincecum's last start, he had the velocity and good stuff, he just wasn't locating.
|
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Mar 25, 2013 9:41:17 GMT -5
Boly -- And honestly, Rog, other than one start I have NOT read the numbers you posted. Rog -- My memory has Tim at a high of 94, followed by a high of 92, followed by a high of 91. You and I don't differ much on his speed, Boly, but I think I'm about one mph higher than you seem to be. Either way, Tim hasn't regained velocity, although it briefly appeared in the first start I saw that he had done so. We both certainly agree that command is the primary issue. Regardless of the speed of his fastball, it works fine when he locates it. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1617&page=1#9730#ixzz2OYw6PlPB |
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Mar 25, 2013 9:44:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Mar 25, 2013 9:55:08 GMT -5
Randy -- If you want to send him to the bullpen, how much can the Giants afford to pay a veteran to come in and replace him in the rotation? Rog -- If the Giants were going to add another starter, the time to do so has almost certainly passed. Maybe one of the young guys will have a Bumgarner-like breakthrough. Likely not. The Giants won't do this, and the 5-inning rule for a win by a starting pitcher makes it very unpopular by starting pitchers, but if Tim struggles as a starter and can be good as a reliever, the Giants would probably benefit from mimicking the Rockies' four-man rotation of last season. Yeah, I know the Rockies didn't succeed with that strategy last season. But that was more because they had bad pitchers than that the strategy isn't sound. Remember how at midseason last year we were arguing against the bullpen-by-committee because it hadn't ever worked, ignoring that it might not have worked because the pitchers who caused teams to "resort" to it weren't very good? Some day perhaps baseball will reduce the inning threshhold for wins to four innings, and teams will more and more use pitchers in shorter bursts, where they are clearly better. Let me ask a simple question: Do rotations usually have better pitchers than bullpens? If the opposite were true, teams would move the bullpenners into the rotation where they would pitch more innings. Yet bullpens had an average ERA that was over half a run lower than rotations. Clearly, pitching in shorter bursts makes most pitchers more effective. That appeared to be the case in spades with Tim Lincecum in this last postseason. But for now, Randy is right. The Giants have almost no options to replace Tim. If he continues to struggle through the trade deadline, it is possible the Giants would trade for another starter. I've been very disappointed with Tim's performances this spring, but I too would stick with him at this point. It is FAR too early to write him off. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1617&page=1#ixzz2OYxldHrM |
|
donk
New Member
Posts: 23
|
Post by donk on Mar 25, 2013 12:09:37 GMT -5
Randy -- Timmy's upside is such that if you feel like he's close to turning it on, it's hard to just pull the trigger on a trade. Rog -- Tim will become a free agent at the end of the season. His trade value is extremely limited. The time to trade him was a year ago, and there were at least four here who would have done so, including Boly and Don, both of whom would likely have traded him even before. dk..I have never suggested trading Tim.....if they hit him on the rump with a 2by4 and got him to disown his father's coaching and learn how to pitch, he might recover....he will never have command if he keeps using his long stride and throwing the ball "on the run"...he needs to stabilize his body and get consistancy in his release point... what is easy to forget is that Tim has never had real command of his fast ball...his control was never great...as I said before, batters should look for his breaking ball or change and disregard his fastball.... |
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 25, 2013 12:12:31 GMT -5
Boly -- And honestly, Rog, other than one start I have NOT read the numbers you posted.
Rog -- My memory has Tim at a high of 94, followed by a high of 92, followed by a high of 91. You and I don't differ much on his speed, Boly, but I think I'm about one mph higher than you seem to be.
Either way, Tim hasn't regained velocity, although it briefly appeared in the first start I saw that he had done so.
We both certainly agree that command is the primary issue. Regardless of the speed of his fastball, it works fine when he locates it.
Boagie- I believe Boly is focusing more on Tim's poor outings. In the poor outings i'd say the velocity on his fastball ranges from 88-90, but that's when he's keeping the ball up. When he's getting the ball down he can hit the gun at 93-94. He did this in his last start, his problem in his last start was his locating, which is why he had 4 walks, but also stuck out 5.
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Mar 25, 2013 12:50:54 GMT -5
I saw Saturday's start which, by his own account, wasnt a good one for Tim...his velocity was mostly between 92 and 94.
~Dood
|
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Mar 25, 2013 14:32:12 GMT -5
dk..I have never suggested trading Tim..
Rog -- Intriguing. I am likely Tim's greatest supporter here, yet a year ago both Allen and I suggested trading Tim. I'm pretty sure Boly would have supported the idea.
It was a good one, and I gave you a chance to join in. Thanks for being honest though. It is appreciated.
|
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Mar 25, 2013 14:37:38 GMT -5
Boly -- The MPH I listed I copied word-for-word on something I read in SF Gate. They have been watching the games, I have not. They're gun? Or the Giant gun? I haven't a clue. Just reporting what I've read. Rog -- I have always thought there is often a slight difference between guns. Remember, you and I are only about one mph apart in our estimates. And it is hard to refute what was written in the Chronicle (SF Gate). Due to some technical difficulties I encountered, I wasn't able to see all of his previous start. And I've been too busy with other things this spring to pay as much attention as I usually do. Andrew Baggarly said today on KNBR that Tim no longer throws 95, but that he has hit 92 and 93. I think his speed is about the same as last season, although after that first start, I suspect it has been about half a mile slower than in 2012. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1617&page=1#ixzz2Oa8KJjMm |
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Mar 25, 2013 14:41:58 GMT -5
Boagie- I thought you've been saying for a while now that he had a much better second half? We all saw his post season. I think it's a work in progress, but there has been definite progress. Rog -- What you say here is correct in all regards. Given that improvement after the All-Star game, I have been disappointed this spring, especially in his past two starts, when he was consistently up in the zone. (That's not to say, by the way, that he was throwing up in the zone.) It's way too early to judge Tim's season, but I must say that I have been disappointed so far. Don't know how much the blister has affected his progress, and he's never been a great spring training pitcher. He did, however, pitch a 5-inning no-hitter against the A's in his final pre-season start after the teams broke camp for NorCal in 2008. Let's see how he fares this weekend -- and far more importantly, on April 3rd and beyond. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1617&page=1#ixzz2Oa9bumrU |
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Mar 25, 2013 14:45:13 GMT -5
Boagie- In his last start his velocity was pretty good, he hit 93 on the gun a few times, I was actually encouraged by Lincecum's last start, he had the velocity and good stuff, he just wasn't locating. Rog -- If I haven't deleted Tim's last start, I'll try to watch it again. I don't recall the 93, although I do remember his hitting 92 once and 91 a few times. I saw a lot of 89's and 90's and the odd 88. He probably hit just 87 too, but I don't remember it happening often at all. You could be right, Boagie, that is velocity was up slightly in this past start from the one before. But not by much IIRC. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1617&page=1#ixzz2OaAjEWCF |
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Mar 25, 2013 15:00:56 GMT -5
Randy -- I saw Saturday's start which, by his own account, wasnt a good one for Tim...his velocity was mostly between 92 and 94. Rog -- You know, I may have missed the first couple of innings of Saturday's game due to technical difficulties. I did listen to them, although not much was said about his velocity. I believe Jon Miller said that his second pitch came in at 91. So Tim may have thrown a little harder than I realized, although I was disappointed in most of his late reading being between 88 and 90. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1617&page=1#ixzz2OaBYaczi |
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 25, 2013 15:28:08 GMT -5
dk..I have never suggested trading Tim..
Rog -- Intriguing. I am likely Tim's greatest supporter here, yet a year ago both Allen and I suggested trading Tim. I'm pretty sure Boly would have supported the idea.
Boagie- Why would Don want to trade Tim? Obviously the problem here isn't Tim, it's the negative vibe that Buster Posey has created in the clubhouse. It's the fact that when Tim throws to Buster, Buster can't even catch the ball. And on the days when Tim pitches, Buster's lack of power makes the Giants lineup inable to score runs so Tim can get a win. The answer here is clear, trade Posey. The question is, what can you get for the worst player in baseball history?
|
|
donk
New Member
Posts: 23
|
Post by donk on Mar 25, 2013 18:44:23 GMT -5
dk..I have never suggested trading Tim.. Rog -- Intriguing. I am likely Tim's greatest supporter here, yet a year ago both Allen and I suggested trading Tim. I'm pretty sure Boly would have supported the idea. Boagie- Why would Don want to trade Tim? Obviously the problem here isn't Tim, it's the negative vibe that Buster Posey has created in the clubhouse. It's the fact that when Tim throws to Buster, Buster can't even catch the ball. And on the days when Tim pitches, Buster's lack of power makes the Giants lineup inable to score runs so Tim can get a win. The answer here is clear, trade Posey. The question is, what can you get for the worst player in baseball history? dk...don't you have anything better than to make up all those lies...all I want out of Posey is to shift to 1B and give up catching...and I never ever said any thing else about Buster....I just think Posey would be better off playing the field...and Belt can play LF and thus put a better bat in the outfield than what is out there now....did you get to hear the comments that Kuiper made about Posey's catching??? Why not ask him if the Giants should trade Buster?  |
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Mar 25, 2013 23:16:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Mar 25, 2013 23:18:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Mar 25, 2013 23:23:32 GMT -5
Don -- I just think Posey would be better off playing the field...and Belt can play LF and thus put a better bat in the outfield than what is out there now.... Rog -- You make a good point about Brandon Belt's being better than the Blanco/Torres platoon. But you seem to forget a couple of things: First, it isn't Belt who would be replacing Blanco and Torres in the lineup. It would be either Hector Sanchez or Guillermo Quiroz. Second, moving Buster to first base and Brandon to the outfield would hurt the Giants defensively at a third of their defensive positions. How do you feel about a catching tandem of Sanchez and Quiroz? I like the platoon of Blanco and Torres a lot better. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1617&page=1#ixzz2OcGgUpKj |
|
