|
|
Post by sharksrog on Aug 20, 2013 9:57:04 GMT -5
Randy -- I have yet to hear any overt statements that indicate they have lost faith, although there certainly is a fair amount of frustration. Rog -- There are two reasons the haven't issued statemnts tat indicate they have lost faith. he first is that they would be foolish to do, and the more important one is that they haven't lost faith. Randy -- Other more cryptic indicators would be sending Brown down a level Rog -- Almost never happens with a healthy prospect. Randy -- , lessening his playing time Rog -- Not going to happen with a former #1 pick barring fairly extreme circumstances Randy -- or openly shopping him, none of which has happened as of yet. Rog -- I agree with you that the Giants aren't likely to be openly shopping Brown, and how would we know if they were? When is the last time we heard of a minor league player being openly shopped? Here is something I think about once in a while. It was reported -- and seems likely -- that the Giants couldn't acquire Carlos Beltran without giving up a top pick. The question I have is this: . Did the Giants choose to keep Brown over Zack Wheeler, so that Brown wasn't offered? . Did the Mets choose Wheeler over Brown when given the choice between the two? . Or did the Mets demand Wheeler in order to make the trade? I doubt we'll ever know the answer to the questions, but I do think it is worthy of wonder. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1958&page=1#14014#ixzz2cWMsoTMt |
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Aug 20, 2013 9:58:22 GMT -5
Again, you don't come out and say he's a bust, for fear you hurt the kid's confidence and make yourself look bad as well. As for trying to trade him, calling him a bust while you're shopping him around the league isn't very bright, is it? What kind of trade value you think he has at this point? I would guess none.
|
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Aug 20, 2013 10:01:04 GMT -5
I was in NY for the trade, so I go the perspective from the NY writers. The impression they gave was that the Giants could've gotten Beltran for Wheeler OR Brown, but Sabean preferred to keep Brown because the organization was so much deeper in pitching than it was in offense. I remember Sabean making a comment about Tidrow assuring him that Wheeler was replaceable. That was a grievous error on Sabean's part, but to be fair, Baggs had an article that said Sabean was sure when he made the trade that he would be able to re-sign Beltran, and that blew up when Neukom was fired and replaced by Baer.
|
|
|
|
Post by dk on Aug 20, 2013 12:18:27 GMT -5
I was in NY for the trade, so I go the perspective from the NY writers. The impression they gave was that the Giants could've gotten Beltran for Wheeler OR Brown, but Sabean preferred to keep Brown because the organization was so much deeper in pitching than it was in offense. I remember Sabean making a comment about Tidrow assuring him that Wheeler was replaceable. That was a grievous error on Sabean's part, but to be fair, Baggs had an article that said Sabean was sure when he made the trade that he would be able to re-sign Beltran, and that blew up when Neukom was fired and replaced by Baer . dk ..it is always amazing to me that you always are ready to blame the Giants ownership for Sabean's bad trades and ready to praise HIM for the good ones....if the GM is forced to make trades he doesn't want to make, than I think he would pack his things and get another job.....and by the way, Liriano won again yesterday......but Nathan did lose one...and Schierholtz continues to do things with the bat that he didn't do with the Giants...where is Ellison now that the stars are alined for ex-Giants..  ..too bad the Cubs are so bad, Nate might be able to smile once in awhile.... |
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Aug 20, 2013 13:02:36 GMT -5
Liriano has a lot of bad, injury filled years between the good ones, but I'm happy for him that he has regained his stuff this year. I'm happy for Nate too, but he's still just being platooned and that's the same way the Giants used him. They also traded him to get Pence, so that was a good deal, unlike the Liriano, Nathan one. It's hard to be critical of the bad deals, DK, when he's won two World Series and made so many good ones. The Scutaro deal alone buys him lifetime immunity from me!
|
|
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 Aug 20, 2013 13:12:09 GMT -5
The only deal I blamed ownership for was the ridiculous Barry Zito contract. It's well known that Peter Magowan was behind this. Not that Sabean wasn't interested in signing Barry...but not for what Magowan was willing to pay. For all other signings and trades I give Sabes full credit.
|
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Aug 21, 2013 13:27:38 GMT -5
Mark -- but to be fair, Baggs had an article that said Sabean was sure when he made the trade that he would be able to re-sign Beltran, and that blew up when Neukom was fired and replaced by Baer. Rog -- I hadn't heard the Neukom thing, although it would seem to me the Giants could have afforded to re-sign Beltran had they wanted to (and perhaps the commet regarding Baer is that he didn't think Beltran was worth the risk). The Giants spent a lot at the trade deadline to add Hunter Pence, a move that wouldn't have been necessary had they re-signed Beltran. Which brings to mind the domino effect of some of the moves we talk about. A good move can hurt if it prevents making an even better one down the line whereas a poor move can be resurrected by a good recovery in the future. As for Sabean's deciding between Wheeler and Brown, one can see Brian's interest in keeping a top young player at a position the Giants would have trouble signing a free agent. Brown was an AT&T-type outfielder with speed and defense, who didn't overly rely on power that might be muted by the park. On the other hand, pitching seems to be a position of small supply and large demand. A pitcher like Wheeler could later be traded for an outfielder if that were the necessity -- which it might not have been had the Giants re-signed Beltran. Beltran's health was a risk in re-signing him, although it hasn't been an issue thus far. I believe Mark can attest to this, even though there is a position here that Beltran is a guy who won't play with any kind of hurt, as opposed to a player who has had significant injury problems over his career. Part of the reason I opposed the trade was the risk involved with Beltran's health. As I pointed out, it hasn't been an issue, but the Giants have had healh issues with several of the players they have acquired. That Sabean choose to trade Wheeler over Brown speaks to the talent Randy has seen in Brown, as well as a slow start by Wheeler which included some blister problems. I wouldn't have made the deal, and if I had, I would have chosen to trade Brown instead of Wheeler. But it is easy to see Brian's reasoning in each case. It is something he had said he WOULDN'T do (trade for a rent-a-player), and it is something he is very unlikely to do again. He likely also learned a lesson regarding both the value and the instability of starting pitching. They say you can't have too much of it, and even this year's Dodgers can attest to that. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1958&page=2#14024#ixzz2cd2LjRb2 |
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Aug 21, 2013 13:29:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Aug 21, 2013 13:38:53 GMT -5
Don -- Schierholtz continues to do things with the bat that he didn't do with the Giants Rog -- Nate has been quite good this season. Part of his improvement seems to have stemmed from playing very little against southpaws, but it is clear that he has improved. The improvement has come almost exclusively in the power area. Nate is pretty much right at his career averages in batting average and on-base percentage. Some of the power improvement may have stemmed from moving to a park more favorable for left-handed hitters. Nate's improvement seems to have stemmed from a new, crouching stance, which enables him to hit the low, inside pitch better. Nate's improvement this season has come from a changed stance, while Brandon Belt's rebound has come from a new position of his hands on the bat. Nate is really still a platoon player, but he should draw a lot of interest on the free agent market this winter -- especially since he is on the STRONG side of a platoon. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1958&page=2#ixzz2cd6oLlfG |
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Aug 21, 2013 13:58:56 GMT -5
Rog -- Nate has been quite good this season. Part of his improvement seems to have stemmed from playing very little against southpaws, but it is clear that he has improved.
Boagie- explain to me why you think playing less against lefties has made him better when his career OPS is almost 100 points higher against left handed starters vs. right handed starters?
This year his OPS against left handed starters is 1.104... Its a good thing he doesn't have more at bats against those left handers, he might be out of baseball by now.
|
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Aug 21, 2013 14:50:09 GMT -5
Rog -- Nate has been quite good this season. Part of his improvement seems to have stemmed from playing very little against southpaws, but it is clear that he has improved. Boagie- explain to me why you think playing less against lefties has made him better when his career OPS is almost 100 points higher against left handed starters vs. right handed starters? This year his OPS against left handed starters is 1.104... Its a good thing he doesn't have more at bats against those left handers, he might be out of baseball by now. Rog -- You make a good point here, Boagie. It is one I thought of as I made my post. But let's look a little deeper. You are right on the money that when Nate has started against a southpaw this season, his OPS is 1.104. But that includes ALL at bats in those games, including those against relievers of either hand. And it encompasses only 27 at bats. Nate has actually started only 3 games against southpaw starters, although clearly he has entered others as a pinch hitter or defensive replacement. Nate's OPS when actually FACING a southpaw this season is just .642. Last season it was just .444. It was just .562 in 2011. You brought up some good points here, Boagie, but when one looks below the surface, it's pretty much a no-brainer, right? Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1958&page=2#14106#ixzz2cdPHNIur |
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Aug 21, 2013 15:27:30 GMT -5
You're right, Rog. I didn't fully look into that stat, it seems rather meaningless now.
However, looking at Nate's entire career against southpaws, I really don't see a glaring issue that makes me believe he should only play vs. right handers. Even this season his obp is better against lefties. His career average is actually higher against left handers than it is against right. The slugging % is where he appears better against eighties, but a lot of that is probably due to not having consistent at bats against lefties.
You convinced me that my left handed starters stat was misleading, but I still think the reason Nate is succeeding this season is because he finally has a manager who doesn't hate him, because of that he's getting consistent at-bats.
|
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Aug 21, 2013 16:43:35 GMT -5
Boagie -- You're right, Rog. I didn't fully look into that stat, it seems rather meaningless now. However, looking at Nate's entire career against southpaws, I really don't see a glaring issue that makes me believe he should only play vs. right handers. Rog -- Again, you make a nice point here. Back through 2010 IIRC, Don was citing that Nate was doing QUITE well against southpaws, while I was citing that he hadn't done so and would likely (once again) regress to the mean. Certainly the past three seasons he has done so. (This doesn't make me a genius or anything; players far more often than not -- but not always -- regress to the mean. Itis almost like a law of nature.) Boagie -- Even this season his obp is better against lefties. Rog -- Again, a very good point. But a couple of things: First, the sample is small. Second, note that he has both walked AND struck out more against southpaws, indicating less contact. The contact isn't as solid, either. Nate has hit just 13.8% line drives against southpaws compared to 21.1% against righties. Boagie -- His career average is actually higher against left handers than it is against right. Rog -- But it has been going the other way the past three seasons. Boagie -- The slugging % is where he appears better against eighties, but a lot of that is probably due to not having consistent at bats against lefties. Rog -- Perhaps. I suspect that if Nate hit more against southpaws, his numbers against them would improve slightly. But those numbers are so far below his numbers against righties, that his overall numbers would almost certainly decline. Boagie -- You convinced me that my left handed starters stat was misleading, but I still think the reason Nate is succeeding this season is because he finally has a manager who doesn't hate him, because of that he's getting consistent at-bats. Rog -- I don't think Bruce Bochy hated Nate. I think Nate's actually a pretty good guy. At least that's what his dentist said, although perhaps that was because the dentist kept him gagged with spittle. I have read that Nate's reputation was as a guy who wouldn't play through aches and pains, but that might actually help the team, even though it goes against baseball's macho code. I think one thing that hurt Nate was his inability to stay healthy. He is an extreme streak hitter, and often those hot streaks gave way to either injury or to very cold streaks. Remember, I went to the same high school as Nate (although I was senior when he was a freshman)  , so I root for the guy. I know the player who moved Nate from shortstop to third base in youth ball. Nate and I shared the same dentist, so I thought of him (and usually discussed him) every time I got my teeth cleaned. If I needed to get a filling, I simply compared it to one of Nate's injury periods. I tried to play hurt, but perhaps I mostly hurt the team. One very good thing for Nate is that he should make a lot of money in the future via free agency eligibility. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1958&page=2#ixzz2cdlCUUvq |
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Aug 21, 2013 18:06:29 GMT -5
You're not selling me here. If you don't let someone get at-bats against a lefty he's going to eventually have trouble against them. Nate early in his career gave NO indication that he was inferior against southpaws. From 2007 to 2010 Nate hit better against southpaws than right handers. It was only AFTER 2010 when Nate started struggling against southpaws but that's primarily because in 2010 he was used as a pinch hitter against mainly right handers. Nate had a pretty good year in 2011 despite having trouble against lefties. In fact he was probably our best hitter outside of Pablo that season. Where did Nate find himself on opening day the next season? On the bench. Huff was in the outfield and Belt was at first...if I remember correctly. Bochy may not have hated Nate, but he sure didn't like playing him.
Nate was probably my favorite player during his time here, I felt he was being treated unfairly long before he spoke about it in 2012. I'll admit it, when Nate hit that game winner against us this season, part of me cheered for him.
|
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Aug 21, 2013 18:06:32 GMT -5
One thing to remember about Nate was that he was traded for Hunter Pence, so trading him was a good idea. If you want to make the case they could've gotten Pence for someone else, remember how unhappy Nate was, and then think about how unhappy he would have been if he stayed and then they acquired ANOTHER corner outfielder. Trading Nate worked out well for both the Giants and Nate.
|
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Aug 21, 2013 22:22:04 GMT -5
Noagie -- You're not selling me here. If you don't let someone get at-bats against a lefty he's going to eventually have trouble against them Rog -- You're right. I'm not selling; merely stating facts. I agree with you that if a hitter doesn't face pitchers of a certain hand, it usually makes it tougher for him to hit them. But in Nate's case, there might be an issue with that. I'm almost certain he didn't hit southpaws as well as righties when he was playing against lefties in the minor leagues. If a lefty hitter is going to hit southpaws, I think he's going to hit them almost no matter what. In 1962 the Giants went to the World Series. Do you know how many at bats Willie McCovey had against southpaws that season? 10. TEN. Incredibly he was once pinch hit for in a clutch situation by Joey Amalfitano. The following season he had a more normal 158 -- and hit just .228. Yet somehow he managed, and wound up with over 2000 at bats against southpaws. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1958&page=2#14132#ixzz2cenbzfM9 |
|
|
|
Post by dk on Aug 22, 2013 1:30:26 GMT -5
Noagie -- You're not selling me here. If you don't let someone get at-bats against a lefty he's going to eventually have trouble against them Rog -- You're right. I'm not selling; merely stating facts. I agree with you that if a hitter doesn't face pitchers of a certain hand, it usually makes it tougher for him to hit them. But in Nate's case, there might be an issue with that. I'm almost certain he didn't hit southpaws as well as righties when he was playing against lefties in the minor leagues. If a lefty hitter is going to hit southpaws, I think he's going to hit them almost no matter what. In 1962 the Giants went to the World Series. Do you know how many at bats Willie McCovey had against southpaws that season? 10. TEN. Incredibly he was once pinch hit for in a clutch situation by Joey Amalfitano. The following season he had a more normal 158 -- and hit just .228. Yet somehow he managed, and wound up with over 2000 at bats against southpaws. dk...once more, Rog looks for a way to back his opinion...why talk about Nate's stats against LH'ers in the minors, when in his first 3 years as a Giant he hit .500, .333,and.306...and then he started to have some problems... and I guess I haven't convinced you yet that it is wrong to talk about a young player regressing to the average...a young player has to establish what he is going to be as he learns and makes improvements..or the league finds some holes....after his career is complete, you can establish his average and see where he bettered it or didn't perform to it..... |
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Aug 22, 2013 9:33:24 GMT -5
dk...once more, Rog looks for a way to back his opinion...why talk about Nate's stats against LH'ers in the minors, when in his first 3 years as a Giant he hit .500, .333,and.306...and then he started to have some problems... Rog -- Please name me the many lefty hitters who have hit worse against southpaws in the minors and then come on against them a the major league level. Don -- and I guess I haven't convinced you yet that it is wrong to talk about a young player regressing to the average... Rog -- Of course you haven't, since most young players do regress to their mean. Don -- a young player has to establish what he is going to be as he learns and makes improvements..or the league finds some holes.... Rog -- Very true, although one can usually project from his minor league numbers whether a hitter is going to be good, decent or poor. Don -- after his career is complete, you can establish his average and see where he bettered it or didn't perform to it..... Rog -- Naturally, the larger and more recent a sample, the more accurate it tends to be. And when a career is complete, a player neither bettered it or underperformed it. But player evaluation is mostly about performing it accurately while a player is playing. I continue to try to improve my methodology of evaluating young players, but particularly with regard to hitters, it's worked pretty well. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1958&page=2#14151#ixzz2chxf2Ea8 |
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Aug 22, 2013 10:57:35 GMT -5
Rog- I'm almost certain he didn't hit southpaws as well as righties when he was playing against lefties in the minor leagues.
If a lefty hitter is going to hit southpaws, I think he's going to hit them almost no matter what.
Boagie- And that's exactly what Nate has done. I've given you his career stats against southpaws, I've given you year by year stats. I'll say it again, from 2007 to 2010 he had a higher avg. Against left handers than he did righties, each year. It was only until 2011 when his numbers started to slip against left handers, because Bochy decided he couldn't hit lefties, so he didn't play him against them. Since that point I believe a higher percentage of his at bats have come against left handed specialists out of the bullpen rather than starters. The larger sample -- Nate is batting still 3 points higher against southpaws in his career. The facts are there, you just fail to recognize them when they point at you being wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by dk on Aug 22, 2013 13:53:44 GMT -5
dk...once more, Rog looks for a way to back his opinion...why talk about Nate's stats against LH'ers in the minors, when in his first 3 years as a Giant he hit .500, .333,and.306...and then he started to have some problems... Rog -- Please name me the many lefty hitters who have hit worse against southpaws in the minors and then come on against them a the major league level. Don -- and I guess I haven't convinced you yet that it is wrong to talk about a young player regressing to the average... Rog -- Of course you haven't, since most young players do regress to their mean. Don -- a young player has to establish what he is going to be as he learns and makes improvements..or the league finds some holes.... Rog -- Very true, although one can usually project from his minor league numbers whether a hitter is going to be good, decent or poor. Don -- after his career is complete, you can establish his average and see where he bettered it or didn't perform to it..... Rog -- Naturally, the larger and more recent a sample, the more accurate it tends to be. And when a career is complete, a player neither bettered it or underperformed it. But player evaluation is mostly about performing it accurately while a player is playing. I continue to try to improve my methodology of evaluating young players, but particularly with regard to hitters, it's worked pretty well. dk..you are just too pig headed to learn.....tell me again on how Crawford will never make it because he had a high K/ one year in A ball...golly, do you really believe that within 3 years you can tell what a players mean will be??? Don't the real facts ever sink into your computer?? How many examples of players have I pointed out to you that go against your models" for predicting careers?  ] |
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Aug 22, 2013 23:11:23 GMT -5
dk..you are just too pig headed to learn..... Rog -- How the heck would you know? Don -- tell me again on how Crawford will never make it because he had a high K/ one year in A ball... Rog -- Can't tell you again, since I didn't tell you a first time or more. Don -- golly, do you really believe that within 3 years you can tell what a players mean will be??? Rog -- Depend on which three years you are talking about. Don -- Don't the real facts ever sink into your computer?? Rog -- Most facts are real. Don -- How many examples of players have I pointed out to you that go against your models" for predicting careers? Rog -- Don't know. You certainly haven't disproven a general model. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1958&page=2#14165#ixzz2clIp3OTp |
|
..too bad the Cubs are so bad, Nate might be able to smile once in awhile....
, so I root for the guy. I know the player who moved Nate from shortstop to third base in youth ball. Nate and I shared the same dentist, so I thought of him (and usually discussed him) every time I got my teeth cleaned. If I needed to get a filling, I simply compared it to one of Nate's injury periods.