Now that Pablo is gone

[Rog]

Now that Pablo Sandoval has agreed to a five-year contract with the Red Sox, some intriguing discussion has materialized.

The Giants were willing to essentially match the Red Sox offer.

Pablo wanted a new challenge and was intrigued by the possibility of replacing David Ortiz -- who apparently helped convince Pablo to sign with the Red Sox -- as DH sometime during his contract.

In the spring the Giants made a low-ball 3/$40 offer to Pablo, who countered with 5/$90.  The Giants tried to compromise with an offer of 4/$75 with a vesting option that would have brought the contract to 5/$85.  


To be honest, I wonder if the Giants were truly willing to pay that much in the spring for Pablo.  If they were, though, IMO Pablo should have taken it.  He "bet on himself" instead, and it worked out for him.  But given his horrible start to the season, it could have backfired big time, and rather than make a bunch of extra millions as it turned out, he could have cost himself at least that much.

His outstanding post season helped him out big-time.

The Giants are said to be strongly in on Tomas and Moncada and are reported as one of the teams in on Jon Lester.  It has been said that Chase Headley is their likely target for third base, but that may not be true.  On the other hand, Headley is considered a very good defensive third baseman and likely will be easily the better of the two come the end of Pablo's contract.  He can bat in the middle of order and in fact three seasons back let the league in RBI's with 115.  The most Pablo has had is 90.  Despite his fine post season hitting, Pablo has driven in only 20 runs in 154 at bats, about a 70-RBI pace over a full season.

Not signing Pablo doesn't mean the Giants have to give up on 2015.  The two previous odd seasons they probably signed too MANY of their own players, and didn't make the playoffs either season.

I think Pablo will be hurt more by his not re-signing with the Giants than they will be.  How well they execute Plan B or C and how well Pablo is treated in Boston -- especially if he struggles for a while -- will help determine that.  I'm rooting for both the Giants and Pablo.  The ideal would be that this works out well for both parties.

[rxmeister]

I think Lester might be a bit too high priced for their tastes, but perhaps the chance to pitch at AT&T will turn him on the same way it turns off hitters. Larry Baer confirmed today that they're looking at starters first, and with the Panda savings, they'll start right at the top. I think Scherzer is out as well because of the Boras factor, which is why I think there's a good chance they pursue Big Game James Shields. Don't be turned off by his poor WS outings, he's a solid pitcher.

[klaiggeb]

One of the things Sabean has always done is consider team chemistry before he signs anyone.

I'm with you, Mark, I'm not discouraged by Shields' poor outtings. The guy can flat out pitch, and he'd be JUST the type of guy I'd want us to sign. Even more than Lester.

boly

[sfgdood]

I AM disturbed by Shields' postseason performance. If our only goal was to qualify for postseason, I'd want him. But he chokes when the lights get brightest. Some guys can handle the pressure (Bum, Cain, Lincecum) and some can't (Shields, Kershaw).

[Islandboagie]

I'm with Randy. I'm not impressed by players who choke on the big stage.

I haven't looked much at the free agent list, and I don't think we have many desired players we'd part with in trade possibilities. But if we get a starter, I'd prefer the Giants look for a lefthander, although I'm sure I'd make an exception for Scherzer.

[rxmeister]

Let me remind you of something. World Series Game four: Six innings pitched, two runs allowed, 4K 1 BB on the road. Is that a choke or a well pitched game? Would you have taken that from ANY Giants starter not named Madison Bumgarner? Did Hudson, Peavy or Vogelsong put up a performance like that? That's a well pitched game but he ran up against the WS MVP. I would happily take Big Game James. And in the post season he wouldn't match up against a number one starter like he did with KC, he would match up with a number three on a staff with Bum and Cain. Oh by the way, in the Angels series, he was the winning pitcher in game three, again going six inning yielding two runs and striking out six. Real choker there.

[sfgdood]

2014 postseason ERA 6.12

Career postseason ERA 5.46

No thank you

[rxmeister]

Whether you're good or not in the post season is irrelevant if you don't get there first. Shields is a top flight pitcher and he'll help you get there. And how many times have you seen a bad post season player turn it around? Pablo got benched in the 2010 playoffs. Madison Bumgarner gave up 10 runs in 8 innings in the first two rounds of the 2012 playoffs before turning it around in the World Series. And now people are calling him the best post season pitcher ever! Barry Bonds had a dreadful playoff record until 2002. Judging players on post season and their short sample sizes is simply a terrible way to evaluate players. That being said, I'd prefer Lester or Scherzer because they're legit number ones. I would be happy with a consolation prize of Shields though.

[Rog]

I'm glad Mark pointed out how quickly players can change in the post season. Small samples tend to facilitate that.

A question: If Pablo had remained a Giant and the Giants made next year's post season, is it reasonable to think that in the 2015 post season he would more closely approach his regular season of the past three seasons or his post season numbers in 2012 and 2014?

[sfgdood]

yes the postseason samples are small, but not miniscule. 11 Starts is not an insignificant number. When a wide discrepancy exists between regular season numbers and postseason numbers I feel it shows a propensity for letting the pressure get to you.

[Rog]

yes the postseason samples are small, but not miniscule. 11 Starts is not an insignificant number. When a wide discrepancy exists between regular season numbers and postseason numbers I feel it shows a propensity for letting the pressure get to you.
~Dood

Rog -- It can show a lot of things.

It could indeed show that the pressure gets to a player. It could show that a batter hits good pitching well or poorly, since the pitching is better overall in the post season.

But most of all it shows a small sample.

We have shown at separate times how fabulously Reggie Jackson hit in the post season over a decent-sized sample -- until he didn't hit anymore. We have shown how his World Series numbers were fantastic, but how his other playoff games weren't so good. He had a bigger sample than Pablo has in which he was even better than Pablo has been. Then he suddenly became a very average player in the post season.

Mark mentioned some players -- including Madison Bumgarner -- who have seen a radical change in their post season performance levels.

Carlos Beltran has been one of the best post season performers of this generation. But ask Boagie how clutch he was for the Giants after they traded Zack Wheeler for him in 2011. Beltran himself shows how a great post season player can suddenly not be such a good one.

Carlos began his post season experience hitting .363 with 14 homers in 124 at bats. Since then, he's hit .268 with 2 homers in 56 at bats. Mark mentioned Barry Bonds, who went from a post season bum to putting in one of the best post seasons of all time.

As for clutch pitchers, did you know that the Giants have won every post season game Ryan Vogelsong has started? If we assume every game was a coin flip (not necessarily true, but let's assume it to help us estimate the odds), the chances of that happening would be 127 to 1. Ryan has pitched in six post season series. His ERA's by series have been 1.80, 1.29, 0.00, 1.59 -- and then suddenly 12.00 and 9.82. Based on his first four series, we would have expected him to be close to an ace in series five and series six -- but of course that didn't come close to happening. Pretty much the opposite was true.

Players hit hot streaks and cold streaks. Post season samples are small, often leading to distorted results -- either plus or minus.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2594/pablo#ixzz3K9hXH9fN

[Islandboagie]

Rog- A question: If Pablo had remained a Giant and the Giants made next year's post season, is it reasonable to think that in the 2015 post season he would more closely approach his regular season of the past three seasons or his post season numbers in 2012 and 2014?

Boagie- it's more reasonable to assume he would perform as he usually does. That goes for all the Giants. But the Giants in the post-season aren't reasonable. For whatever reason they get better, and not by a little. They grind every at-bat and play almost flawlessly in the field. Some pitchers decide they are going to be unhittable, and others decide they are going to out-pitch the best pitchers in the game.

Since you're a numbers guy, I'm sure you're going to go with Pablo performing closer to his average... But after watching this same thing three times..how can you assume someone in a Giants uniform won't step it up in October?

[rxmeister]

Rog explained it well but he missed the most obvious reason why players do better in the regular season than the post season. The level of competition! You're not facing the Mets, Marlins, Dbacks, Astros, etc. anymore, you're facing the best teams in the game and of course that's going to affect your stats. Buster Posey was terrible in the 2014 WS. Is he now a choker? Every series is different and any player can blow hot or cold in a short series. I'm not worried about a player's post season numbers. I want him to take us there first.

[Rog]

Boagie -- But after watching this same thing three times..how can you assume someone in a Giants uniform won't step it up in October?

Rog -- I can't and don't. I don't know what to make of the Giants' fabulous success in the post season despite having good but not great teams. This past year's team was perhaps the most baffling, since they became World Champions without two of their most important players -- Matt Cain and Angel Pagan.

Speaking of Pagan, the past two seasons there has been a myth about him that he is the engine that makes the Giants run. Certainly their record between when he was injured those two seasons and when he came back wasn't at all good.

But let's take a look at this past season. It is easy to say the Giants were playing well with Pagan, slumped when he was out, then became a very good team again when he returned. That overlooks a few things though.

Such as the little fact that they won became World Champions without him. Such as the fact that the Giants were already in a slump before Angel left and remained in it for nearly a week after he returned. Yes, the Giants lost 5 of the last 6 games Angel played before his injury and the first five after he returned. That's losing 10 of 11 AROUND his injury.

Angel is an important player for the Giants. It appears his importance has been overstated though.

My point? Just because two things exist at the same time doesn't mean there is a cause and effect among them. That Pablo has hit well in the post season doesn't mean that he hits well BECAUSE it is the post season. Pablo's best stretch of 2014 actually came from mid-May through mid-June, when he hit .361 with 7 home runs. It might be noted too that during this stretch, Pablo drove in 27 runs, compared to the 5 he knocked in during the post season.

RBI's are team dependent, but 27 to 5? (It should be noted that Pablo had a little more than twice as many at bats during his May/June hot streak as he had in the 2014 post season. Still, he drove in runs at twice the rate he did in the post season. For all his success in the post season, Pablo has driven in only 20 runs in 154 at bats.

We might not forget either that in his first post season, Pablo went 3 for 17 and was benched for about 2/3rds of the games.

Yes, the Giants have stepped it up amazingly their past three trips to the post season. And no, we don't know that was simply coincidence. But we also don't know that it was.

When they suffered through their summer slump during which they were something like the 2nd-worst team for nearly two months, were they trying any less hard than they were during their fabulous 2014 post season?

From June 9th through August 12th, the Giants were 20-36, a .357 winning percentage. The rest of the season and post season they went 80-43, a .650 winning percentage. For a period of just over two months, the Giants played at a 58-win clip. The rest of the season and post season they played like a 105 win team. For two months, they were essentially a mirror image of the way they played the other five months.

I guess based on that, we could say the Giants had a five out of seven chance of being good enough to win the World Series. But in those other two chances, they wouldn't even have made it past the play-in game.

It seemed they couldn't win without Angel Pagan, but then they went on to win the World Series without him, without Matt Cain, and for much of the post season, without Mike Morse in the starting lineup. Instead the Giants had Jake Peavy, Gregor Blanco and a combination of Travis Ishikawa playing out of position and Juan Perez playing without a bat.

In a way, this year's team was almost as baffling as Tim Lincecum's career has been. And that's pretty baffling.

The Giants' post season success in 2014 may have come about due mostly to their great chemistry. But that chemistry didn't hold up very well for two full months in the middle of the season.

I don't understand Tim Lincecum. I don't understand their 2014 World Championship. And I don't understand their chemistry.

A question: Does chemistry slump? I can't see why it should, but I can't say it doesn't, either. If it was important to the Giants' World Championship (and it almost seems that it HAD to be), where did it go during those horrendous two months?

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2594/pablo#ixzz3KBmw2JVC

[Rog]

Mark -- but he missed the most obvious reason why players do better in the regular season than the post season. The level of competition!

Rog -- Actually I did mention in another thread that one of the reasons a player might do better in the post season than another is that he might be able to hit good pitching better than the other player.

Here's the thing though. During the regular season the Giants went a combined 8-15 against the four teams they played in the post season. In the post season, they went 12-5 against those same four teams -- essentially a complete turnaround.

There are things that happen in baseball that we struggle to understand. Perhaps that is because they aren't understandable.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2594/pablo?page=1#ixzz3KByuH3a0