|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 18, 2015 16:39:41 GMT -5
Remember how the Giants' bullpen blew only 14 saves (a blown hold is recorded as a blown save)? Only two bullpens blew FEWER saves. That shows the bullpen DIDN'T lose all those leads as was indicated here.
This, from Giants Extra, indicates the same thing:
"They didn't have a pinch homer until Parker hit one in September. They were forced into comeback mode too often, and those comebacks came up short. Don't blame the bullpen for that stretch in which the Giants lost 15 of 16 games decided by one run. The Giants finished the year 75-6 when leading after seven innings."
This is why we should rely more on statistics and less on our memories. Statistics are more accurate, although I forget why.
|
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Nov 18, 2015 17:00:18 GMT -5
What about tie games? What about games they blew the lead before the 7th? And as I said before, what about those games when the reliever came into the game with the starting pitcher's runners on and the lead changed after those runners scored?
As I said before, they weren't terrible, but they weren't good either.
I watched just about all the games give or take, guaranteed far more than you did, and I can tell you they were not as good as they were in 2010 or 2012, not even close.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 18, 2015 17:50:06 GMT -5
What about tie games? What about games they blew the lead before the 7th? And as I said before, what about those games when the reliever came into the game with the starting pitcher's runners on and the lead changed after those runners scored? Rog -- Memories. One of my favorite songs. And one of my fondest things in life. But they're not always accurate. Want me to give you an example? Just in the last day or two it was posted that a blown save is a lead lost in any game in which any other pitcher can get the win. That means that if the starter pitches five full innings and has the lead when he's relieved (even with runners on base), the reliever will record a blown save if he blows the lead. It appears a blown save can be recorded even BEFORE the sixth inning. The example given yesterday was the save earned by Madison Bumgarner in the 7th game of the World Series. Because it was reliever Jeremy Affeldt who was in line for the win, not the starter, Bumgarner was eligible for the hold or save even in the 5th inning. Since he completed the game, he was awarded the save. This was on the board just yesterday IIRC. Already you have forgotten it. So to answer your question "what about the tie games?" it depends on whether you're talking about games in which the reliever gave up a run or runs which tied the game, in which case it would be a blown save. And only four teams blew fewer saves than the Giants. If you're talking about a tie game where the reliever allows the other team to go ahead, well, they did pretty well there too. If the team lost the game, the relievers would get the loss in that situation (unless the lead run was put on by the starting pitcher). There were also only four teams with fewer losses than the Giants' bullpen. With regard to your question as to when they blew a lead before the 7th inning, if they did so after the pitcher had left with the lead and at least five innings pitched, they were charged with one of their 15 blown saves. So why do you feel the way you do? Either because you don't realize other teams have these things happen to them more than the Giants do, or because the blown opportunities were blown out of proportion in your mind. In terms of winning and losing games, the Giants' bullpen did pretty well. In games in which the bullpen was involved in the decision, in a save or in a blown save, the team went 60-34. In the team's other games, the Giants went 24-44. Clearly a pattern for winning was to get the bullpen involved where it could be involved directly in the decision, or could record a save or blown save. When the bullpen wasn't significantly involved, the Giants didn't fare very well. That's somewhat to be expected, but the point is that when given an important chance, the bullpen did pretty darn well. The bullpen wasn't the problem. Arguably the biggest problem was the bench, which was greatly depleted by the rash of Giants injuries. Get it? Got it? Good! Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3131/another-fact-shows-bullpen-leads#ixzz3rsrfP6BX |
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Nov 18, 2015 21:35:26 GMT -5
Rog, after doing some research, I'll admit, you're right. And I apologize for saying you weren't.
The Giants relievers as a whole had the lowest % of runners inherited scoring, while having the most runners inherited.
Surprisingly, Hunter Strickland was #1 in the NL, Javier Lopez was #2. Romo and Kontos were in the top 20.
However, I still think they were more efficient in previous years. But 2015 was quite a task for our relievers considering they found themselves in a lot of trouble, a lot of the time. But to their credit they still managed to get the job done.
|
|
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 Nov 19, 2015 23:01:12 GMT -5
Boagie is right, which is not to say that Rog's stats are incorrect. The problem is the stats do not tell the whole story. The Giants have had lights out bullpens for years prior to 2015. And for much of this last season, it was very good again. But late in the year you could clearly see the fatigue that settled in from too much work because of the inability of the starting rotation to consistently get deep into games. Both Romo and Casilla showed lots of wear and tear. Affeldt had his annual injury time. The young kids helped but the bullpen, especially in the second half, took a step down.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 20, 2015 15:45:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 20, 2015 16:12:15 GMT -5
The problem is the stats do not tell the whole story. The Giants have had lights out bullpens for years prior to 2015. And for much of this last season, it was very good again. But late in the year you could clearly see the fatigue that settled in from too much work because of the inability of the starting rotation to consistently get deep into games. Both Romo and Casilla showed lots of wear and tear. Affeldt had his annual injury time. The young kids helped but the bullpen, especially in the second half, took a step down. For relievers, WHIP likely tells a more accurate story than ERA. Here are a few facts about the bullpen. For September, I have taken out the September call ups: April 1.28 May 1.25 June 1.17 July 1.15 August 1.03 Sept. 1.11 Boagie has better stats on the relievers right now than I do, but here is OPS against. It's too hard to take out the September call ups, so they are included in this one. April .672 May .677 June .732 July .652 August .637 Sept. .666 I hope there is some learning going on here. For some of the reasons already mentioned, our memories aren't always accurate. As for stats not telling the full story, I agree that they don't. At least not singly. But when we see this many stats regarding the bullpen, it's darn hard to make the case that the bullpen wasn't very good or that they wore out. To be honest, I didn't expect to see stat after stat that point in the opposite direction. If someone wants to take the time to go through the season game-by-game to show that the stats are wrong and they are right, have at it. In reality, isn't it far more likely that our memories are wrong than a bevy of stats? Sometimes too we tend to see what we want to see. We went into the season with the idea that the rotation wouldn't get in enough innings and that it would wear down the bullpen. Certainly the rotation didn't pitch enough innings. Our premise was right on the money. It was our conclusion that was off base. But since we had that conclusion in mind all season long, we felt we saw it the way we had expected to. Here is the problem with those who continue to stay with their opinions even after the facts as presented show them to be wrong. When that happens to someone a lot, it can make us doubt their other conclusions. And there are no dummies here. Most people are right most of the time. But it does nothing for their credibility to continue to make statements that the facts don't back up. Statistics (at least individually) don't tell the whole story. But they do tell a decent part of the story. And they tell it objectively. Admit it now. We're not always objective ourselves. This thread on the 2015 Giants bullpen strongly backs that up. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3131/another-fact-shows-bullpen-leads?page=1#ixzz3s4Cym5NU |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 20, 2015 16:19:03 GMT -5
Sergio Romo WHIP and OPS-against by month and half:
April 0.96 .472
May 1.20 .652
June 1.56 .907
July 1.30 .789
August 0.49 .304
Sept. 1.14 .635
1st Half 1.35 .747
2nd Half 0.83 .503
Is it possible we are remembering Sergio's season incorrectly? Is there a pattern here?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 20, 2015 16:26:50 GMT -5
Santiago Casilla:
April 1.45 .798
May 1.50 .773
June 0.54 .290
July 2.10 .938
August 1.14 .671
Sept. 1.00 .511
1st Half 1.39 .753
2nd Half 1.13 .583
We didn't fare well with Santiago either, did we? To be honest, I'm surprised at how far off we are. It's not even close. If our memories are this wrong here, where else are they wrong? What does that say about the judgments we make from memory?
|
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Nov 20, 2015 16:34:17 GMT -5
You're right except one thing, Romo and Casilla were better toward the end of the season. If it were just wear and tear, they'd have declined as time went on, that wasn't the case.
I think it really comes down to Bochy being able to use his bullpen pitchers how he wants to use them, rather than having to use pitchers who are out of their comfort zones.
Romo was used against lefties because Affeldt was unable to pitch, and Osich hadn't yet proven himself.
Sometimes Lopez was used against righties in situations that Romo would normally come in, but because he was used the 2 nights before, or he'd already been used in that game, Lopez was tasked with something that isn't his strength.
Of course, the lack of our starters going deep into games played a major role in that. But, the inconsistency of roles also was also a clear difference between 2010-2014 and 2015.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 20, 2015 17:35:36 GMT -5
Of course, the lack of our starters going deep into games played a major role in that. But, the inconsistency of roles also was also a clear difference between 2010-2014 and 2015. Rog -- I'm going to look at Romo only to see what the percentage of left-handers he faced was in 2010 through 2014 compared to 2015. I'm guessing it hasn't changed all that much and might actually have declined. What I think HAS changed is his effectiveness against the lefties, so I'm going to also include OPS against lefties by season. 2010 -- 32% .652 2011 -- 28% .599 2012 -- 29% .491 2013 -- 44% .745 2014 -- 39% .777 2015 -- 35% .929 We see that as Sergio has become less effective against left hitters the past three seasons, he's seen more of them. One thing about Affeldt is that of the three lefty relievers, he was the one with the biggest history of facing right-handeds as well as lefty hitters. I think there is little doubt he WOULD have faced some of the lefty hitters that Sergio faced, but perhaps not as many as we would have expected, since Affeldt himself was a guy who frequently pitched full innings. Anyway, it is clear that Sergio didn't wear down in the second half as was originally indicated. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3131/another-fact-shows-bullpen-leads#ixzz3s4afS0nc |
|
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 Nov 20, 2015 18:39:51 GMT -5
Boly - Consider who we've taken flyers on that were considered BAD to poor defenders in the outfield.
Burrell, Morse, and now Blanks.
Those first 2 really did well for us in their first season with us.
Dood - the big difference I see between the first two and Blanks is that Morse and Pat both had achieved some measure of success at the big league level. Thus the flyers held less risk for those two and bigger potential upside.
|
|
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 Nov 20, 2015 18:41:54 GMT -5
this freakin site flipped me mid post into a different thread and I have no clue why...please don't respond here to the above post because I'm going to put it in the thread in which it belongs
|
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Nov 20, 2015 21:46:07 GMT -5
I'm not sure if you're agreeing with me or not, Rog. To reaffirm my position, I still think the Giants bullpen was the best when they had the luxury of using Romo as a right handed specialist, and Casilla as a 7th or 8th inning pitcher. Not to say either one has done a good job in other roles, but in their best roles they were historically great, and it made the bullpen deeper and more effective.
My point of all this is the Giants could benefit greatly by landing a closer, or a solid eighth inning guy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 20, 2015 21:58:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 20, 2015 22:09:14 GMT -5
Romo hasn't really been a ROOGY. He's actually pitched to a pretty high percentage of left-handed hitters over the years.
I think the difference is becoming that other teams are pinch hitting more left-handed hitters against him now that he is still strong against righties buy now has fallen off against lefties. You are right that at this point in his career, Romo is best-served to be used as a ROOGY or maybe a TORGY (Two out right-handed guy).
Casilla isn't very good against lefties anymore either.
Casilla did a decent job of closing, but he'd be great as a TORGY. Maybe the Giants should trade either Casilla or Romo -- or get another really good lefty to make for a complement between the two righties and three lefties plus Strickland. Let Kontos handle the longer assignments. Really, they should trade one of the righties and get another lefty. That should make for a good balance. Probably means 13 pitchers again though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 20, 2015 22:13:13 GMT -5
I think the Giants may need to acquire their outfielder and a reliever in trade.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 20, 2015 22:14:20 GMT -5
Unless the Giants can somehow unload Pagan, acquiring a top pitcher, a good one, an outfielder and a reliever begins to get really expensive.
|
|
