|
Chains
Sept 24, 2016 16:20:19 GMT -5
Post by klaiggeb on Sept 24, 2016 16:20:19 GMT -5
So, while I'm in an ornery, pissed off mood, let's all sing along to Chains, by the Beatles.
"Clowns.
This team is full of nothing but clowns.
Can't hit the ball, can't score no ruh-uh-runs.
Oh, oh this team of clow -ow-ons is killing me, a ee."
boly
|
|
|
Chains
Sept 24, 2016 20:50:27 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Islandboagie on Sept 24, 2016 20:50:27 GMT -5
While these last 3 months have been frustrating, I would stop far short of referring to any of the players who have been there for a significant amount of time as "clowns." Let's not forget many of these so called "clowns" have led us to 3 world championships since 2010. Those players are and will always be Champions in Giants history.
|
|
|
Chains
Sept 25, 2016 9:59:53 GMT -5
Post by klaiggeb on Sept 25, 2016 9:59:53 GMT -5
Boagie, I'm angry.
I'm pissed.
I'm disgusted.
Yeah, many of these players DID lead us to 3 World Championships.
That was then, this is now.
I cannot forget, nor forgive what they ALLOWED to happen this year.
I cannot.
From the best record to the worst.
That's not on Bochy.
That's not on Evans.
That's on the players.
Everyone seems to tippy-toe, or avoid entirely what I've been ranting about since we came back from the break.
These guys took their families on a 7 day or so vacation in SD.
Mentally, they lost their focus.
That could be for many reasons, but for ME, the biggest reason is that they took their success for granted.
They forGOT what got them those championships.
Belt has come back.
But Posey has NOT. Busey has been a flat out embarrassment this season.
Crawford has NOT, he's slumped since the break.
Span has tot EVER been what he should have been.
Panik has NOT. Something IS wrong with him.
Bumgarner's ERA is near 5 in the last 8 games.
Moore, who has great stuff, has been up and down.
And don't even get me started on whomever pitches the 9th.
What did Flannery say last night? Pitchers pitching that 9th have an ERA over 7!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
These guys, IMHO, based on the way they performed this second half are CLOWNS.
They've betrayed their fans.
They've betrayed ownership.
They've betrayed their teammates.
That's how I see it.
That's what they're 'vaction' did.
Betrayal.
There is nothing worse in my eyes than betrayal
We deserve better and they stuck a knife in everyone's back.
So you don't have to call them clowns, but based upon their play? Or rather, lack-there-of?
This group is a group of clowns.
Or, if you'd prefer, jackasses.
Harsh, but I believe it fits
boly
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Chains
Sept 25, 2016 14:02:26 GMT -5
Post by sfgdood on Sept 25, 2016 14:02:26 GMT -5
That's not on Bochy.
That's not on Evans.
That's on the players.
Dood - It's the fault of the entire organization, including both Evans AND Bochy. If we are to praise Bochy for being the grand manager of manly men he was in the title years, then he shares in the blame for the team losing focus this year. And Evans had plenty of opportunities to obtain a better closer, but he, Bochy and Righetti put all their eggs in Casilla basket. Then they overpaid for that bum Smith.
|
|
|
Chains
Sept 26, 2016 8:53:22 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Sept 26, 2016 8:53:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
Chains
Sept 26, 2016 9:33:47 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Sept 26, 2016 9:33:47 GMT -5
Betrayal. There is nothing worse in my eyes than betrayal We deserve better and they stuck a knife in everyone's back. So you don't have to call them clowns, but based upon their play? Or rather, lack-there-of? This group is a group of clowns. Or, if you'd prefer, jackasses. Rog -- Boly is a good man who may wish to stay that way by blowing off steam before it explodes into his everyday life. That said, it's not as if the team has given up and isn't trying. It's likely not that they independently sat down with their families over the All-Star break and decided they were good enough that they could win without giving it there all. No question this second half has been extremely frustrating, and even now with the Giants are still in Wild Card position by half a game, the situation isn't encouraging, and it would seem valid to say that even if the Giants make the playoffs, they haven't shown any spark that would indicate they would go far. But I'm not sure that the situation now looks any more bleak than things did on August 12, 2014. The Giants were still in a streak very similar to this season's second half, and unlike this year's team which has at least won two of its last five games, the 2014 team was on a five-game losing streak and had just witnessed Santiago Casilla losing to the White Sox in the 10th inning. That team, of course, found itself on August 13th and went on to become World Champions. Will this year's team do the same? I certainly don't like the odds. But then, I didn't like the odds back in 2014 either, and Randy had already given up -- even though there was over a month and a half left in the season. So why not find joy in the Giants' tremendous run and simply root for it to continue? We likely shouldn't take this season -- even if it turns out to be a twisted disappointment -- as a personal affront. Our lives will go on, the Giants will make adjustments over the winter, and they will still be considered a team with a chance in 2017. If and when the Giants are eliminated, let's look back at how it happened and try to figure out how they can improve themselves for next season and beyond. If they win the World Series, let's look back at how it happened and try to figure out how they can improve themselves for next season and beyond. Let's be honest here. The Giants have taken us on a ride this decade we could hardly imagine going into it. The ride may not be over. Every season a major league team wins the World Championship, it defies the odds. It has to best 29 other teams, and that's one heck of a challenge. On average, a team will win a little over three World Championships over this century. The Giants have already won three. Even if they don't win a single one over the rest of our lifetimes, they'll be ahead of the average pace for the century when we read our final box score. Let's not be disappointed quite yet, since that's showing a lack of faith in the Giants. Not saying the way they've played "deserves" our faith, but if we're true fans, we don't give up until the fat lady sings and the janitors have cleaned the auditorium. Should we be satisfied with what the Giants have done enough to remain satisfied even until the end of this season? Of course not. But shouldn't we keep things in perspective and be thankful for what we've already experienced? Or should we simply be fair-weather fans? If we give up on the Giants, aren't we as bad as if they give up on themselves? (Well, maybe not QUITE, but you get the idea.) Boly is going to complain virtually every day the Giants don't win, and many when they do. That's just Boly. His emotions run so hot that he'll likely explode if he doesn't let them out. One certainly can't say he's not a passionate fan. He wears his emotions not only on his sleeve, but on his nearly-slit wrist. Clearly the man loves the Giants. But his love also blinds him to their accomplishments. If they don't win -- especially if they lose in what he perceives as a dumb or lackadaisical manner -- he takes it personally. That probably isn't healthy, but that's why he lets it all hang out. He doesn't want it to kill him. Win, lose or draw, this year's team has been fun -- if highly frustrating -- to watch. They haven't been the type of team where we realized by mid season that they had no chance. They have a fabulous recent past, and they appear to have a future remaining. Regardless of how this season ends up, let's be big enough to take joy in the team's accomplishments this decade and retain great hope for the future. To do less would show us as impassioned, but easily blinded fans. The very best Giants fans aren't those who now expect them to win every year, but those who have suffered through the decades of hard times, not given up, and now realize the pure joy of their recent success. Let us not give up our joy, no matter how difficult the circumstances get. If we give up our joy, we say to the fan in Tampa Bay and many other baseball cities, you're better fans than we are. We've let success spoil us and lost our perspective. You have shown you are impassioned fans even as your team can't afford to spend with ours. That's true fandom. It's being a fan of your team, not simply of winning. Virtually everyone is a fan of winning. Those who are fans of their TEAM support them even without the glory. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3508/chains?page=1#ixzz4LN0J0UrN
|
|
|
Chains
Sept 26, 2016 9:39:17 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Sept 26, 2016 9:39:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
Chains
Sept 26, 2016 10:20:05 GMT -5
Post by klaiggeb on Sept 26, 2016 10:20:05 GMT -5
Fine. A disappointment.
Pick the term, Rog.
He isn't even close to his career norms.
He's killed 17 rallies with 17 ridiculous, DPs.
You look at numbers.
I look at the "eye" test, and what I see from Posey CONTINUALLY is this:
1-His legs AREN'T under him
2-He makes more off balance, "oops! I guessed wrong" again swings than any top player I've EVER seen!
I mentioned this last year when it started. But everyone ignored it.
It's so obvious now that when he DOES have a balanced swing... I'm flabbergasted.
3-For our "best hitter" hitting 3 or 4 all year long to NOT drive in 80+ runs... THAT'S an embarrassment.
I don't know any other way to say it.
I've watched him closely and if I CAN SEE what's happening with Posey's swing, I can't believe Muellens can't see it.
Next time Posey hits, watch closely.
He crouches so much that WHEN he raises up out of that crouch to swing it changes his line of sight.
That change in line of sight causes him to swing over the ball, hitting the top of the ball, not the center or the bottom.
So, how does he fix it?
1-Don't crouch so much
2-It's a timing mechanism and his timing is mostly off. He has to come up out of that crouch eariler.
3-Me? I'd recommend he'd lose that crouch or most of it, period.
But what do I know.
I see his numbers declining.
I see him hitting into DPs at a 6-4-3 McGhee rate and that is unacceptable.
If I can see it, so can the hitting coaches.
Why hasn't he fixed it?
Why?
Belt and Posey's 2nd half, along with our fire starters who pitch the ninth have KILLED this team.
Flat out killed it.
And now the injury bug is back.
We're screwed.
As Randy says; I hope we don't make.
This group is an embarrassment.
Oh, and nice job, GEORGE!
Walking a punch and judy hitter and giving up the tying run.
Nice job... GEORGE!
Major Leaguers who can't throw strikes to AAA players.
How nice for us.
boly
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Chains
Sept 26, 2016 11:39:05 GMT -5
Post by sfgdood on Sept 26, 2016 11:39:05 GMT -5
Evans had plenty of opportunities to obtain a better closer, but he, Bochy and Righetti put all their eggs in Casilla basket.
Rog -- Which closer would you have traded for if you were the Giants' GM?
Dood - well the obvious choice would be Chapman, but obviously the Giants weren't willing to part with what would have been the cost for Aroldis. But at about the same price we paid for Smith, we could have gotten Melancon. That's the guy I was thinking of all through the pre-deadline push. But we ended up with Smith, who was so bad right off the bat, we never had a chance to move him into the closer role. Thanks for nothing, Bobby.
|
|
|
Chains
Sept 26, 2016 13:58:14 GMT -5
Post by klaiggeb on Sept 26, 2016 13:58:14 GMT -5
From what I read, we did NOT have the pieces to get Chapman.
But we DID have the pieces to get Melancon.
Not smart by Bobby, Bochy et. al. to back off.
Not smart at all.
boly
|
|
|
Chains
Sept 26, 2016 15:16:05 GMT -5
Post by donk33 on Sept 26, 2016 15:16:05 GMT -5
what is tragic to me is the way the Giant fans look at the results of this season....right now they at the same place in the standing where they were in 2014...and these same fans were ready to call the team a dynasty....could be they will slip one more notch and miss the playoff, but they are the same type of team that won 3 rings in 5 years..poor in the regular season and winners in playoffs....I don't expect it to happen again, but I wouldn't bet against it....even if I did mbet on sports...
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Chains
Sept 26, 2016 15:54:59 GMT -5
Post by sfgdood on Sept 26, 2016 15:54:59 GMT -5
The 2014 team didn't have a bullpen that gives away leads as if their lives depended on it.
|
|
|
Chains
Sept 26, 2016 20:04:06 GMT -5
Post by klaiggeb on Sept 26, 2016 20:04:06 GMT -5
Huge, HUGE differences, Don.
No.
More than Huge.
Astronomically different.
1-THAT team wasn't hitting something like .125 over the last 10 games or so
2-THAT team DIDN'T have the worse record in baseball after the All Farce Break
3-THAT team had a Bumgarner who was going strong, NOT the Bumgarner we have, with almost a 5 ERA over his last 6 or 7 starts.
4-THAT team was getting players back off the DL.
We keep either putting them on, or they are badly hurt and can't play.
Cueto, Nunez, Blanco
5-THAT team had options to close, this group does NOT.
There are more, but you get my point.
boly
|
|
|
Chains
Sept 27, 2016 12:40:16 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Sept 27, 2016 12:40:16 GMT -5
Fine. A disappointment. Pick the term, Rog. He isn't even close to his career norms. He's killed 17 rallies with 17 ridiculous, DPs. Rog -- Which are really, really, really close to his 16.6 GDP's over his first five seasons (counting 2010 and 2011 a one combined season). In the specific area you brought up here, he is as close to his career norm as possible. Buster has had a bad season (for him) at the plate, but his GDP's don't properly illustrate the point. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3508/chains#ixzz4LTkSqpFd
|
|
|
Chains
Sept 27, 2016 12:58:25 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Sept 27, 2016 12:58:25 GMT -5
You look at numbers. I look at the "eye" test, and what I see from Posey CONTINUALLY is this: 1-His legs AREN'T under him 2-He makes more off balance, "oops! I guessed wrong" again swings than any top player I've EVER seen! I mentioned this last year when it started. But everyone ignored it. Rog -- Please, Boly. I'm not sure any of us ignored it. I know I didn't, if in fact I hadn't already mentioned it. Anyone who knows baseball could see that Buster often got out in front with his body and rolled over ground balls to his pull side. A personal complaint I have is this thing about "You look at the numbers," implying that is pretty much all I look at. I didn't suddenly go blind or lose my baseball knowledge when I began to pay closer attention to the numbers. What I found was that the numbers added depth to my observations and opinions. Did the numbers back up what I "saw?" If not, why not? Was I misinterpreting the numbers, was I not truly seeing what I thought I saw, or a little of both? I see the game better now than I did 20 years ago. In great part because I check my observations against the numbers rather than blindly thinking I am right. I don't mean to pick on you, Boly. You are a very fine mind. But when you stated that George Kontos was always putting runners on when he came into the game, I pointed to his WHIP -- which specifically (except for HBP's) measures the runners a pitcher puts on base. It would be kind of like your saying that Buster Posey doesn't get enough hits (not this season, but overall) -- if you had indeed done so. I would point out that he has a career .307 batting average, which clearly shows he does get enough hits (at least as far as almost any player who plays the game gets enough hits). Something like 10,000 players have played the game in the majors, and Buster's .307 career average ranks #137 among them. In other words, Buster gets more hits than about 99% of the players to play the game. If he doesn't get enough hits, almost no one does. George Kontos did not always put runners on base. He still doesn't. His 1.16 season's WHIP compares rather nicely with the National League average of 1.32, which shows as clearly as anything truly could that he DOESN'T always put runners on base. I didn't really want to bring this subject up again, Boly, but clearly in this case at least, you disregarded the numbers. If I disregarded the numbers, I wouldn't have that "second look" at situations as they come up. My judgments would almost certainly be worse (you think they're bad NOW Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3508/chains?page=1#ixzz4LTls8RGv
|
|
|
Chains
Sept 27, 2016 13:17:34 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Sept 27, 2016 13:17:34 GMT -5
I've watched him closely and if I CAN SEE what's happening with Posey's swing, I can't believe Muellens can't see it. Rog -- Hensley almost certainly can see what we see -- and more. On top of that, he knows Buster's swing better than we do. Plus he has the advantage of tons of videotape analysis. Finally, he knows how to work with Buster better than we do. Buster also has input available from Steve Decker (not that Steve was a great hitter, but knowing how to hit and being able to do so aren't always the same). If he wants it, I believe he can get help from Will Clark, Willie Mays, Willie McCovey or Orlando Cepeda. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3508/chains?page=1#ixzz4LTsalJAH
|
|
|
Chains
Sept 27, 2016 18:08:12 GMT -5
Post by klaiggeb on Sept 27, 2016 18:08:12 GMT -5
Roger said-A personal complaint I have is this thing about "You look at the numbers," implying that is pretty much all I look at. I didn't suddenly go blind or lose my baseball knowledge when I began to pay closer attention to the numbers. What I found was that the numbers added depth to my observations and opinions. Did the numbers back up what I "saw?" If not, why not? Was I misinterpreting the numbers, was I not truly seeing what I thought I saw, or a little of both?
***boly says*** No offense taken, rog.
You're my friend, if we can't argue, or disagree, even loudly or vehemently there's something wrong with us.
But what I 'see' from what you 'write' is that you only talk about numbers.
That's what leads me to say "you only look at numbers."
I do understand you're trying to back up a point. I get that.
And you KNOW, because I've told you many times, you've really AIDED me in looking at baseball a different way.
It's changed my perspective.
Notice, too, that I backed off on Kontos.
Your numbers proved conclusively that I was wrong.
And I was.
I still DON'T like the fact that he, and Bumgarner go to TOO many 3 ball counts, but that's another issue.
For me, the 'eye' test tells me a lot. And that's why I go there first.
Why?
Because I've been around the game and in the game for so long I react to , and reflect what I see.
Often times I am remiss in NOT stating the period of time to which I'm referring.
My fault.
I get angry, frustrated with these clods and I don't do what I should do; PROOF my words before sending them.
I'm not wrong about Posey coming out of that crouch and hitting the top of the ball too often.
I'm not wrong about Belt and that goofy bat angle through the hitting zone.
I don't know of any numbers that can prove that one way or the other.
So, here's my suggestion.
If you will talk more about what you 'see' and THEN back it up, I'll stop saying all you do is look at numbers.
Fair enough, old friend?
boly
|
|
|
Chains
Sept 27, 2016 18:17:37 GMT -5
Post by klaiggeb on Sept 27, 2016 18:17:37 GMT -5
Roger says-It would be kind of like your saying that Buster Posey doesn't get enough hits (not this season, but overall) -- if you had indeed done so. I would point out that he has a career .307 batting average, which clearly shows he does get enough hits (at least as far as almost any player who plays the game gets enough hits).
***boly says***
Here's where I can be more succint. This season, Posey's high batting average and paltry 70ish RBIs are flat out not very good.
Thus, his career numbers are moot because I'm talking about this Buster, not the career Buster.
2016 Buster, for a team's TOP HITTER, which ever expert says he is, is simply unacceptable.
And thus my statement, he's had a below average season.
If he had just put up "normal" Buster numbers:
IF Belt had NOT gone on a 2 1/2 month mental fishing trip...
IF Panik had not gotten beaned.
IF Pence hadn't gone down again!
IF our bullpen had just performed as they normally perform in the 9th...
This would have been a different season.
But all teams lose players.
But a team canNOT have 2 of their top guys, Belt and Posey, have the 2nd halve's they've had, and a team canNOT have you're 9th inning pitches stink up the lot like they did, and NOT shoulder the majority blame for a LOT of what's gone wrong with this club.
It's really that simple to me.
It's that simple, and it's that complicated.
It really is.
29 blown saves.
A 9th inning ERA over 7.00
A pittance of RBI's by your 3/4 hitter
And a 2 1/2 collapse by one of your top hitters... and there's the season in a nut shell.
Pretty much everything else can be over come or worked around.
But not that.
And here we are, players and fans alike; embarrassed... no humiliated by a team that was so bad in the 2nd half that even the terrible Braves had a better 2nd half record.
We couldn't even win a series from the AAA Padres!
That's humiliation.
Thanks, guys.
Thanks.
I hope you're off season is as miserable as mine will be.
I really do.
no.
I take that back.
I hope yours is worse because you were on the field. YOU made this happen.
boly
|
|
|
Chains
Sept 28, 2016 14:16:18 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Sept 28, 2016 14:16:18 GMT -5
well the obvious choice would be Chapman, but obviously the Giants weren't willing to part with what would have been the cost for Aroldis. But at about the same price we paid for Smith, we could have gotten Melancon. Rog -- Melancon is an excellent call. He is the guy Mark (Wolf) and I have discussed. He's a very good closer. The downside is that he may be merely a rental, since he is eligible for free agency this winter. As we all know, the Giants' experience with top-level rentals hasn't been good. In convenient timing, Jon Heyman writes that Bobby Evans is lamenting not making a stronger run for Melancon, although Evans felt he made a comparable offer to what the Pirates accepted from the Nationals. Heyman also writes that the Giants pursued Andrew Miller, but the Yankees wanted Joe Panik. I suspect Chapman was indeed the Giants' top choice, but the closer market was overpriced at the deadline, and the Giants likely would have had to give up something like their top two or three prospects for a player they would control for only two months. Heyman says he expects the Giants to take a run this winter at top free agent closers such as Chapman, Melancon and the Dodgers'(wouldn't that be nice!) Kenley Jansen. Closers are expected to be the strength of the free agent market, while the quality of starters is down. That melds well with the Giants' needs after they acquired Johnny Cueto, Jeff Samardzija and Matt Moore in the past year. The Giants wound up with Will Smith in a deal I agree with you that the Giants gave up too much. That said, they control Smith for three more years, by the end of which it is possible Smith himself will be a solid closer. Recovering from off-season knee surgery, Smith got off to a slow start with the Giants, but since then hasn't given up a run in nearly six weeks. My only complaint -- aside from the price and perhaps a stronger push for Melancon -- is that the Giants haven't used Smith with higher leverage. We know what the Giants gave up for Smith, and as much as I like him, I thought it was too much. The price for Chapman was likely far too high for the Giants. Melancon might have been do-able, but we don't know what the Giants offered or how much more it would have taken. If we look at the Giants' deadline deals, I think we have to be somewhat satisfied. They picked up nary a lame duck, and each of the three players acquired has made a contribution. The frosting is that the Giants control Nunez for one more year, and both Moore and Smith for three each. Not a single Carlos Beltran deal among them. Before we get too critical of the Giants' front office, let's look at whom they have acquired in the past year. We've mentioned almost all of them -- Cueto, Samardzija, Moore, Smith and Nunez. Plus the previously unmentioned Denard Span. That's a quarter of a roster of pretty good players -- all in less than a year. And of course, let's not forget Gordon Beckham! Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3508/chains#ixzz4LZoo4DUT
|
|
|
Chains
Sept 28, 2016 14:28:03 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Sept 28, 2016 14:28:03 GMT -5
I have a question for the board, and I don't know the answer. Have the Giants ever acquired as much in less than half a year as they have these past 10 months or so?
And isn't it nice that they haven't given up any of what they considered to be their top prospects to do so? The highest cost may have been the popular Matt Duffy, whom they would have controlled for another four years.
|
|
|
Chains
Sept 28, 2016 16:06:49 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Sept 28, 2016 16:06:49 GMT -5
For me, the 'eye' test tells me a lot. And that's why I go there first. Rog -- Believe it or not, me too. Even when I already knew something about them from reading, watching tape and looking at numbers, I probably was the first here to watch Tim Lincecum, Madison Bumgarner and Buster Posey in the flesh. After I give players the eye test, I try to check them out statistically to back up my impression. Likewise I use stats to check out if when someone writes something here that I may disagree with or may not point out all sides of an issue, I use stats to see if my first impression was on the money, or if I was off base. Here's the other reason I think stats are important. If someone here posts about something and I see it another way, I can talk about my point of view, but why would anyone change his mind because of what I say? It's my opinion against his, and most of us value our opinion higher than any others. If nothing else, our opinion is the one that "closest" to us. But numbers are facts. How do we know, for instance, that Mike Piazza was a better hitter than say Buster Posey? Because as well as Buster has hit, he hasn't been able to truly approach Mike's numbers. Willie Mays didn't have the most mechanically sound swing, but his numbers tell us he was among the greatest hitters ever. Barry Bonds had a smooth and powerful swing, but is his numbers which tell us how great he was. How do we compare two players such as Sandy Koufax and Clayton Kershaw, for instance? I know you've seen a fair amount of each, and you think it's pretty clear that Sandy was the better pitcher. I've seen them both too, and just looking at them, I'd agree with you to the max. Koufax had BEAUTIFUL mechanics, while Kershaw seems like he's awkwardly pulling on a very high light chain that he's trying to move forward. But if we look at their numbers, it's SHOCKING how closely they compare. I have already listed the many, many very close similarities between the two. The stats don't completely settle the argument either, but they do reaffirm that Clayton thus far has been close to as good as any pitcher ever at this stage of his career. I think Clayton is underrated, both here and elsewhere. I think a significant difference in Koufax and Kershaw is that most realized just how great Koufax was in his prime, while many still don't fully appreciate how fabulous Kershaw has been. Fantasy baseball certainly isn't real baseball, and it's not fantasy stats that I rely on, but I think it is worth mentioning that Kershaw has been so good this season that Yahoo ranks him the #4 player on the season even though he has missed something approaching 40% of it. Kershaw's carer 2.37 ERA is the lowest of any starting pitcher since the dead ball era. ERA+ is a nice way to compare players of different eras, since it both compares the players to their peers and makes adjustments for the type of home park a pitcher pitched in. Kershaw's 159 ERA+ (59% better than average) is the best of any starter in history. Kershaw's career is far from over, and like almost all pitchers, he will go through a decline phase in which his numbers won't be as impressive. Because of his tragic arm condition, Sandy's career was cut far too short, and he avoided a decline phase. On the other hand, Sandy had a hard time getting started, both because of the bonus baby rule and because until he hit Dodger Stadium, he pitched in horrible pitchers' parks. If we look at the peak performance period of every pitcher who has pitched, we see that Sandy and Clayton have had among the very best. Clayton's has lasted a little longer, although in terms of innings pitched, they aren't that far apart. Walter Johnson likely has the best peak ever, since it lasted 13 seasons IIRC. Who knows? Maybe Clayton's will too, although he still has five more seasons to reach that longevity. Here's something that is kind of fun. Sandy's ERA in 1377 innings during his five (peak) Dodger Stadium seasons was 1.95. Clayton's ERA over 1270 innings in his last six seasons has been 2.06. Pretty close. Sandy's ERA was below the league mean by an average of 1.60 runs per season. Clayton's ERA was below the league mean by an average of 1.83 runs per season. Pretty close. In those five seasons, Sandy win three Cy Youngs, had a #3 finish, won an MVP, and twice finished #2 in the MVP voting. Over the past five seasons, Clayton has three Cy Young awards, a #2 and a #3 finish, and an MVP. Pretty darn close; almost shockingly close. The primary difference is that because the fences were 10 more feet away from home plate, Sandy got more advantage from Dodger Stadium than Clayton has, although each got plenty of advantage from the field. Because of that, Clayton's ERA+ figures were even better than Sandy's. But for a period of about 1300 innings, Sandy and Clayton have been about as good as anyone ever. (Pedro Martinez comes to mind as perhaps being even better over a similar period, and the Big Train matches up well over just about any period up to 13 years, which is why most consider him to be the best pitcher of all time.) One can argue on behalf of Sandy, and another can argue on behalf of Clayton. The numbers -- which are objective and show each pitcher to have pitched in a similar run environment (with Clayton's being a bit higher) -- indicate the two pitchers have been very close, although based on his two seasons wit 2.79 and 2.91 ERA's that I haven't included here, Clayton's has been longer. The awards each won over a five-year period indicate they have been very close, as well. You say po-TA-to, I say po-TAH-to, and it is quite possible that Sandy, Clayton and Lefty Grove (considered by many to be the best southpaw ever) had the three best peaks of any southpaw ever. Former Giant King Carl Hubbell wasn't far behind. Stats are objective and can give us as good a way of comparing players of different eras as anything available. They don't always tell the whole story, but they go a long way in corroborating it. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3508/chains?page=1#ixzz4La43iHz5
|
|
|
Chains
Sept 28, 2016 16:08:49 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Sept 28, 2016 16:08:49 GMT -5
2016 Buster, for a team's TOP HITTER, which ever expert says he is, is simply unacceptable. And thus my statement, he's had a below average season. Rog -- Given that Buster has had his worst full season at the plate while Brandon Belt has had his best, one can make a strong argument that this season Brandon has been the team's best hitter. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3508/chains?page=1#ixzz4LaSSRcB8
|
|
|
Chains
Sept 28, 2016 17:17:08 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Sept 28, 2016 17:17:08 GMT -5
We've talked about Buster's rolling over on pitches more this year. We've talked about over shifts taking away base hits. We've discussed the possibility that injuries may have contributed to the down season. I'd like to quantify one other factor I have brought up -- how Buster has dropped off so far on his batting average on fly balls from his MVP season of 2012.
That season Buster hit an amazing .394 with a Bondsian 1.094 slugging percentage on fly. The rest of his career, he has hit a much more normal .221 on fly balls, with a .640 SLG. This season he has hit just .178 with a .574 SLG. Cleary Buster fell off a huge amount on fly balls.
How did Buster fare when he WASN'T hitting a fly ball (as in hitting a ground ball, a line drive, or simply striking out)? In 2012 on non-fly balls, he hit .317 with a .376 SLG. The rest of his career he has hit .324 with a .403 SLG when not hitting a fly ball. This season he stands at .314 with a .407 SLG.
What we see is that Buster has hit about the same over his career when not hitting fly balls, but has fallen off a ton -- especially this season -- when he hits fly balls. If he were rolling over a lot more, I would expect ground balls to be his biggest problem, not fly balls.
If we look by field, he really hasn't fallen off as badly when he hits the ball to the left side. In 2012 he hit .415 with a .683 slugging percentage. Over his entire career, he has hit .403 with a .698 SLG, or roughly the same. This season he has fallen off a bit, but still shows a nice .371 with a .619 SLG.
It's in center that he's fallen off a lot, hitting .412/.668 in 2012, .335/.502 over his career, and .310/476 this year. He's fallen off at least as much in right field, hitting .400/.659 in 2012, .349/.503 over his career, and just .333/.454 this season.
Despite the rolling over, Buster is still hitting well when he pulls the ball. But when he goes to center or right, his effectiveness has fallen off considerably. And this season he's gone to right field more. That could indicate he's out in front of the ball, but it would seem more like he's just not hitting the ball as hard when he hits it to right and center. The over shift likely hurts him there more too, as I think it is more effective on that part of the field, and he doesn't seem to be hitting the ball as hard toward those areas, making it easier to defend against him. He's hit the ball to right field this season more than before.
The numbers indicate Buster might be pulling off the ball a bit this season. And we've seen (or noticed) him rolling over more. What I'm not sure how to explain is how Buster went from being such a great fly ball hitter in 2012 to not a very good one this year. Maybe a little more upper cut? It does seem he's been underneath more high pitches this season. That said, it is his ground balls, not his fly balls, that went up this season. Maybe he's hitting more low pitches and missing more high ones.
I haven't looked closely enough to know if these things are true. I'd say I've seen indicators, but they certainly weren't strong enough to make me turn my head (even if he turned his slightly).
I'm curious to see what others think or are seeing. Beyond everything else, how the heck did he hit so well on fly balls in 2012? He's still closer to being the same hitter on ground balls and line drives he was back then. He strikes out less now. But when he hits a fly ball, it is much more likely to find leather and less likely to find the seats.
|
|
|
Chains
Sept 28, 2016 17:25:24 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Sept 28, 2016 17:25:24 GMT -5
These guys took their families on a 7 day or so vacation in SD. Mentally, they lost their focus. That could be for many reasons, but for ME, the biggest reason is that they took their success for granted. They forGOT what got them those championships. Rog -- The Giants were actually off four days, which may have included some travel time. Why would they suddenly take their success for granted? And even if they did, wouldn't they have figured out after a month or so that they couldn't afford to do that? Maybe that is precisely what happened, but it doesn't seem to pass the litmus test. Remember too that the Giants had a similar period in 2014, and that started over a month before the All-Star game. What would our explanation for their 2014 slump be? And how did they suddenly turn it back on to the point where they won the World Series? Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3508/chains?page=1#ixzz4LakBjWin
|
|
|
Chains
Sept 28, 2016 19:20:01 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Sept 28, 2016 19:20:01 GMT -5
It doesn't appear that the Giants backed off on Melancon. It seems that they made an offer they felt was as good as the Nationals', but the Pirates disagreed with their assessment. Or perhaps felt the Nationals were going to make the playoffs no matter what, but that the Pirates had a better chance of beating the Giants if they didn't trade Melancon to SF.
It appears the Giants now wish they had gone harder after Mark, but it doesn't appear they backed away from their deal. The Pirates just didn't think it was as good as the Nationals'.
One thing I learned this year was that even at the last minute, the Giants had a lot of offers out to other teams, and a lot of other teams had offers out to them. I think it may be easy to underestimate how difficult it is to juggle all the offers, avoid overpaying, get player control, and fill a team's needs at the deadline or in the off season.
|
|
|
Chains
Sept 28, 2016 20:00:56 GMT -5
Post by klaiggeb on Sept 28, 2016 20:00:56 GMT -5
Understand, Rog. Hind sight is so much better.
But Randy's point, and the same point I made but to a lesser extent, was that a closer was what we needed.
That being the case, IF the Pirates said, "no," we should have at least tried to up the anty.
Our deal for Melancon, from what I remember, was FAR better than what the Nationals gave up.
I don't know, but I'm suggesting that perhaps we gave up too soon.
boly
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Chains
Sept 28, 2016 22:25:46 GMT -5
Post by sfgdood on Sept 28, 2016 22:25:46 GMT -5
And I still say that had the Giants kicked Belt's lazy ass to the curb, TOLD Posey to put away his catcher's gear and stick with his first baseman's mitt, we would not be having this discussion about lack of production
|
|