|
Post by Rog on Nov 21, 2017 15:02:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 21, 2017 15:11:03 GMT -5
Smith AIN'T that good, and coming off of his surgery, it'll likely be 2019 before he returns to form of any kind. Rog -- First of all, the Giants didn't even HAVE Smith when you thought they were a world-beating team in the first half of 2016. Secondly, was it Will's giving up no earned runs, five hits and seven walks while striking out 21 in his final 15 innings of last season through the playoffs that convinced him that he "AIN'T that good?" Or was it his 2.89 K/BB ratio with the Giants during the regular season? Or was it the 6.4 hits per nine innings he gave up? Or was it his 12.8 K's per nine? Are we looking at George Kontos all over again? Smith IS better than Kontos, even though Pittsburgh is delighted to have George. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4152/consider?page=2#ixzz4z6AJovIW
|
|
|
Post by donk33 on Nov 21, 2017 15:14:19 GMT -5
3-The continued downward spiral of Posey and his INABILITY to drive in runs. Rog -- Offensively Buster may have been the only Giants starter who had a BETTER season in 2017 than 2016. He improved his batting average by 32 points, his on-base percentage by 38 points, his slugging percentage by 28 points, and his OPS by 65 points. Regarding RBI's, Buster wasn't GREAT with runners on, but his 80 RBI's fell to 67 in good part due to having 21 fewer runners on first base and 26 fewer on second. With runners on base, Buster hit and slugged .311/.453 in 2016 and .309/.427 in 2017. With RISP he hit and slugged .287/448 in 2016 and .306/.447. That's pretty close. It strongly appears that Buster's added RBI's in 2016 stemmed more from opportunity than performance. Yet that's not what your eyes told you. I'm not picking on you. What we see and what we can remember are far from perfect. It's not surprising Buster had more opportunity for RBI's in 2016. The Giants as a team scored 76 fewer runs in 2017 and had 166 fewer base runners. Did your eyes tell you that, and if so, why didn't you factor it into your statement about Buster? Our eyes and brains can't assimilate that much information with precision, and even if it could, our brains can't remember it. That's why relying on our eyes and memory can be inaccurate. They say to err is to be human. We should also remember that to be a human is to be human. dk...at the risk of having the wrath of Mark falling on me , isn't it strange that your future HOF catcher didn't have one vote (even as a runner up) in the MVP voting despite winning the Silver Slugger Award...maybe for the fact that many on the Fielder's Bible agreed with me as he finished 8th best catcher per Rog...the other sad part was that Crawford didn't get a MVP vote, either, despite wining the Gold Glove and leading the Giants in RBI's... and so goes the theory that hitting catchers and fielding shortstops are valuable to a team... The fact that Posey didn't drive in enough runs can be written off by you, but the fact that Crawford lead the team doesn't mean that Posey's RBIs weren't their for the taking...his cut in number of homers might have something to do with it.... Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4152/consider?page=1#ixzz4z5uSXsrB
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 21, 2017 15:18:09 GMT -5
I don't know what you see, but I don't like what I see. Rog -- I don't like what I see either. But while I liked the Giants in the first half of 2016, I didn't grossly overrate them. So my own opinion decline hasn't been nearly as great as yours. Nor has my opinion of the Giants' outfield declined nearly as much as yours has in the past year. My overall point here Boly is that you're a fine baseball fan and understand the game well. Yet despite what your eyes told you, you didn't see this coming. In fact, if a season and a half ago we had told you this would happen, you would have questioned our sanity. My point isn't that any of the rest of us is brilliant either. My point though is that our eyes can be deceiving. We're not as smart about baseball as we think we are. To disregard all the information that is now out there is egotistical and foolish. There is no one that knows so much about baseball that he can't benefit from analytics. That's why teams are wising up and using them more and more. Why are we as fans lagging in that regard, when they know more than we do? Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4152/consider?page=2#ixzz4z6CokNVg
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 21, 2017 15:29:57 GMT -5
at the risk of having the wrath of Mark falling on me , isn't it strange that your future HOF catcher didn't have one vote (even as a runner up) in the MVP voting despite winning the Silver Slugger Award..
Rog -- Not particularly. The Giants were HORRIBLE (which does affect the voting), and while Buster improved at the plate, he didn't have a GREAT season there. It was pretty darn good for a catcher though. If the Giants or Buster's fielding had been better, he likely would have received at least a smattering of votes. The primary issue was that the Giants were so horrible, which hurt Buster with the voters and robbed him of opportunities for counting stats.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 21, 2017 15:32:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 21, 2017 15:35:44 GMT -5
The fact that Posey didn't drive in enough runs can be written off by you, but the fact that Crawford lead the team doesn't mean that Posey's RBIs weren't their for the taking. Rog -- We have shown here that Brandon's higher RBI total than Buster was almost entirely due to greater opportunity. You may want to go back and re-read the topic. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4152/consider?page=2#ixzz4z6HrunoX
|
|
|
Post by donk33 on Nov 21, 2017 15:36:36 GMT -5
We sign Stanton and we trade the farm to get him meaning NO ONE in the pipeline that can compete with Arizona, Colorado much less LA Rog -- But what does that have to do with the Giants' having declined so much over the past year and a half? dk...when you look at the season's stats, the Giants have been declining since their first WS crown....the only thing that hid things was their amazing record of getting into the playoffs as a wild card with a declining record in the regular season...I remember when the major league owners and media used to laugh at the minor leagues for having playoffs with so many teams involved...that the majors don't look any different than the old International League is a shame...I would like to see a complete realignment of baseball ...add 2 teams and split into 4 leagues... and restrict the playoffs to the season winners ....the leagues should be grouped by time zones so that natural rivals would develop by neighboring cities....and inter league play should be limited to one or two games home and away.... Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4152/consider?page=1#ixzz4z6A0Ikg6
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 21, 2017 16:09:14 GMT -5
.when you look at the season's stats, the Giants have been declining since their first WS crown....the only thing that hid things was their amazing record of getting into the playoffs as a wild card with a declining record in the regular season Rog -- IMO you make an excellent point here, Don. I would like to point out though that the Giants' 94-68 regular season record in 2012 was slightly better than their 92-70 of 2010. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4152/consider?page=2#ixzz4z6QLXOcR
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 21, 2017 16:15:13 GMT -5
.I would like to see a complete realignment of baseball ...add 2 teams and split into 4 leagues... and restrict the playoffs to the season winners ....the leagues should be grouped by time zones so that natural rivals would develop by neighboring cities... Rog -- Once again I like your idea, Don. I'd like to add a little wrinkle though. If a team has a better record than a division winner, have a playoff between the two teams in which the non division winner has to win two games before the division winner wins one in order to remain in the tournament. That would reward both the division winner and the team with the better record. Might make for a little added excitement too. You know, Don, if you and I could agree more on Buster Posey, we'd agree on a lot of things. Even though to the best of my knowledge you are the oldest of those of us here, you still come up with creative thoughts and ideas. And kind of like my ideas, once in a while they even make sense! Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4152/consider?page=2#ixzz4z6RCilPr
|
|
|
Post by donk33 on Nov 21, 2017 19:52:15 GMT -5
The fact that Posey didn't drive in enough runs can be written off by you, but the fact that Crawford lead the team doesn't mean that Posey's RBIs weren't their for the taking. Rog -- We have shown here that Brandon's higher RBI total than Buster was almost entirely due to greater opportunity. You may want to go back and re-read the topic. dk...you have a short memory, I not only showed you that Crawford was more efficient in driving in runs than Posey, but Pence was the equal of Posey....I don't know how you measured your calculations that said Posey was better than Craw. but I'll show you how I came to the conclusions that I did.... Player Total Runners in Scoring Position RBI--RISP % Effective Craw 168 61 .363 Posey 139 50 .360 Pence 141 51 .360 My calculations include the number of times the batters came up with 2 runners in scoring position and include any time the runs scored by all facets of the game in which he received an RBI...walks, SF, HB, etc...now, repeat after me...Craw didn't really have greater opportunities, he was just more efficient... and Posey almost always nhad the better base runners on base when Craw was hitting down in the order... Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4152/consider?page=2#ixzz4z6HrunoX
|
|
|
Post by donk33 on Nov 21, 2017 19:56:12 GMT -5
.when you look at the season's stats, the Giants have been declining since their first WS crown....the only thing that hid things was their amazing record of getting into the playoffs as a wild card with a declining record in the regular season Rog -- IMO you make an excellent point here, Don. I would like to point out though that the Giants' 94-68 regular season record in 2012 was slightly better than their 92-70 of 2010. dk...almost all roads have a slight bump in them....however, if you had a best fit line running thru the number of wins per year, it would point on a downward slope... Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4152/consider?page=2#ixzz4z6QLXOcR
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Nov 21, 2017 21:29:28 GMT -5
roger, you asked for my reasons; my evaluation tools... and then you attempted to shoot each one down.
I don't agree with your evaluation on Posey, nor Belt.
yeah, Belt had more HRs... but his average was DOWN, and his K'S were up.
You can say what you want about Buster, but track his performance since 2012... and it's been down, somewhere, each year, and accelerating that downward trend.
You can argue that Bum is the same guy, and I'm telling you, he's not.
He goes less deeply into games, throws MORE pitches during that time, and really hasn't dominated in the last year 1/2 +
You may not agree, and that's okay, but I gave you MY reasons, and I stand by them.
boly
|
|
|
Post by donk33 on Nov 22, 2017 1:17:25 GMT -5
roger, you asked for my reasons; my evaluation tools... and then you attempted to shoot each one down. I don't agree with your evaluation on Posey, nor Belt. yeah, Belt had more HRs... but his average was DOWN, and his K'S were up. You can say what you want about Buster, but track his performance since 2012... and it's been down, somewhere, each year, and accelerating that downward trend. You can argue that Bum is the same guy, and I'm telling you, he's not. He goes less deeply into games, throws MORE pitches during that time, and really hasn't dominated in the last year 1/2 + You may not agree, and that's okay, but I gave you MY reasons, and I stand by them. boly dk...I was ready to write that the Giants should consider trading MadBum while he still has some value...he just doesn't look like the pitcher he used to be...Bum always had the benefit of an odd delivery, but he doesn't throw the batters off as much as in the past...his pitches never look unhittable....and he keeps giving up a lot of homers....I didn't write this because I didn't think I would have anyone else who saw the saw the same thing,,,,
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 22, 2017 2:03:00 GMT -5
Don, your RBI numbers show that Crawford, Buster and Pence were virtually equally efficient. IIRC my numbers showed Buster just ahead of Brandon with regard to runners driven in, and Brandon might have had the edge in driving in runners compared to RISP.
But I think the bottom line is that Brandon, Buster and surprisingly Hunter were very close in their efficiency -- which is what your numbers seem to indicate.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Nov 22, 2017 2:04:05 GMT -5
I believe that what I said, by the way, was that most of Crawford's added runners driven in compared to Posey were due to added opportunity.
|
|
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 22, 2017 2:21:01 GMT -5
I'm ALL FREAKIN IN...and more importantly Boagie, Stanton is in. The Giants are on his list of team for which he will waive his No Trade clause. So regardless of how sound your reasoning may be, it's a FACT that Stanton will play here if the trade is completed.
|
|
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 22, 2017 2:26:17 GMT -5
MLB.com's Chris Haft says that what the Giants can offer that is more enticing to the Marlins than prospects is cash. The Giants will take on long rich contracts that the Marlins wish to be free of.
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Nov 22, 2017 11:50:34 GMT -5
Weren't you all in on Samardzija and Span too?
|
|
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 22, 2017 12:07:19 GMT -5
Dude, getting the MVP is a LOT different from getting a journeyman and a greybeard. I liked Jeff and Denard but my expectations were lower because I wasn't expecting such a falloff from the rest of the roster. When Jeff and Denard joined we were not far off from a championship roster. Things are WAY different now...not just for us but the rest of the division.
Stanton is a BEAST, a game-changer...that is a FACT.
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Nov 22, 2017 12:50:26 GMT -5
They would have, and were, a poor team.
But Roger, you ASKED for my rationale as to just WHY I don't think we'll be competitive for another 4 or 5 years.
And then you give me reasons why we stunk.
One has nothing to do with the other.
I'm talking about the future; which is what you asked for.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Nov 22, 2017 14:59:40 GMT -5
Randy- Stanton is a BEAST, a game-changer...that is a FACT.
Boagie- He certainly put Florida over the top.
Do you not remember the Bonds era? Do you not remember the 3 championships after the Bonds era? Do we not learn from our mistakes?
Sorry, Randy, the Giants have been aggressive in the free agent market these last few seasons just like you wanted, and it's turned a Championship organization into a laughing stock. Your strategy has failed, and failed miserably. The players you wanted are the problem now, we need to get rid of them first and foremost. Then we need to replace them with a starter that can win in the double digits, a closer who can close out games, and a centerfielder who isn't borderline retarded.
|
|
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 22, 2017 16:03:17 GMT -5
The Giants won championships the same way Houston did...they parleyed a handful of high draft picks into a solid nucleus and got lucky with some other low level picks, skillfully manipulated by Bochy. But in order to get those high picks, the Giants will need to have a few more LOVELY seasons like this year's. Anybody want THAT?
The last time the Giants brought in an MVP player they immediately won 103 games. You can call the Bonds years failures if you want but the fact is they were perennially a playoff team that likely would have won at least one more title if it hadnt been for some poor postseason management. The team is a laughing stock now not because of the players they got in FA...it's because of the players they missed out on or those they kept instead of trading or letting go. The failure is mostly with the scouting team, making poor draft choices and the farm system failing to develop the decent ones. The Giants needed to be more aggressive obtaining legit hitters...they see that now. Unfortunately you do not. I'm not willing to gamble on waiting for some high draft picks to pan out and at least management is now wise enough not to trust their drafting and development skills. They need proven studs like Stanton and Gordon.
I'm baffled how some people really see a negative out of this. We're getting an MVP beast and a 200 hit/60 steals guy...where's the negative?
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Nov 22, 2017 18:10:49 GMT -5
Randy- The Giants won championships the same way Houston did..
Boagie- The Giants won with great pitching, great defense and timely hitting. The Astros won with a bunch of midgets strangling the bat handle and trying to hit 500 ft homeruns. The Astros played a sloppy style of baseball with glaring weaknesses, the only reason they won is because the Dodgers were sloppier and Kershaw is a choke artist.
The 2010 and 2012 Giants would have likely put both the Dodgers and Astros out in 5 games or less.
I never want to see the Giants adjust to this style of sloppy, high scoring baseball.
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Nov 22, 2017 18:15:20 GMT -5
With that, I must bow out from posting for the next few days, I have a lot of cooking to do. I wish everyone a happy Thanksgiving. I'm thankful for all you guys and your posts, even if I don't agree with them. And I'm VERY thankful this trade seems to be stalled.
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Nov 23, 2017 10:37:30 GMT -5
Happy Thanksgiving, boagie and EVERYONE!
boly
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Nov 23, 2017 13:55:19 GMT -5
Testing
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Nov 23, 2017 13:56:18 GMT -5
Yes. Happy Thanksgiving. Even without a trade or free agent signing we all have plenty to be thankful for.
|
|
|
Post by donk33 on Nov 24, 2017 0:53:25 GMT -5
at the risk of having the wrath of Mark falling on me , isn't it strange that your future HOF catcher didn't have one vote (even as a runner up) in the MVP voting despite winning the Silver Slugger Award.. Rog -- Not particularly. The Giants were HORRIBLE (which does affect the voting), and while Buster improved at the plate, he didn't have a GREAT season there. It was pretty darn good for a catcher though. If the Giants or Buster's fielding had been better, he likely would have received at least a smattering of votes. The primary issue was that the Giants were so horrible, which hurt Buster with the voters and robbed him of opportunities for counting stats. dk...your comment is full of baloney...the runner up in the voting was Joey Votto of the Reds ..those Reds which gave a run to the Giants to be the worst team in the NL... and when I criticized Posey's fielding you were 100% opposed to what I wrote...
|
|
rog
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by rog on Nov 24, 2017 3:27:37 GMT -5
dk...your comment is full of baloney...the runner up in the voting was Joey Votto of the Reds ..those Reds which gave a run to the Giants to be the worst team in the NL... and when I criticized Posey's fielding you were 100% opposed to what I wrote... Rog -- I understand your points here, Don, but let's analyze them. I commented that given how poorly the Giants played this past season it wasn't surprising that none of their players received even a single MVP vote. You cite the Reds, where Joey Votto finished a very close second in the voting (and could easily have won the award if it were based solely on how well the player performed). A valid point, but let's look at the other side of the story. First, the Reds weren't expected to play well, while the Giants were. The Giants' player might be looked at as less valuable, since they failed badly in meeting expectations. Second, Joey was probably the best player in the National League. Through hits, walks and HBP, Joey accumulated a massive 475 bases while making only 402 outs. Any player who accumulates more bases than outs has had one heck of a season. By accumulating nearly 20% more bases than out -- MORE than 20% if we remove his six sacrifice files, which seem a shame to hold "against" him -- he had a Bondsian-type season. Stanton too was marvelous, tying for the 9th-highest home run total ever. But he accumulated close to the same number of bases (469) as outs (445). No question it was a great season by Stanton (who played for another non-playoff team), but especially given that Joey was likely the better fielder, Joey had an even greater season. In other words, Votto was simply too GOOD not to get a lot of votes -- especially when the other top competitor also played for a non-playoff team. Meanwhile, Buster had a down defensive season at an important defensive position, and hit well but not extremely well. You weren't surprised when he didn't get any votes, were you? I wouldn't have been surprised either way. As for your criticizing Buster's fielding, I probably wasn't ever 100% opposed it. 100% is a lot of percent. Meanwhile most would say you yourself likely OVER-critize it. Buster's fielding -- not bad to begin with -- improved through 2016. But 2017 certainly wasn't his best season behind the plate, which I have discussed for some time. In fact, Boagie has taken me to task for doing so. The guy I think of when I think of players from bad teams winning MVP's is Ernie Banks, who won two straight. But little was expected from the Cubs -- as was usually the case back them -- and Ernie turned baseball around by becoming the first shortstop to hit a lot of home runs and drive in a lot of runs. In those two seasons he hit 92 home runs and drove in 272 runs. To put Ernie's performance in perspective, Hank Aaron never hit more than 89 homers in back-to-back seasons, and his top RBI total over two seasons was 258. Not bad for a traditionally light-hitting position. Incidentally, my comment couldn't have been full of baloney. I'm a hot dog guy. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4152/consider?page=2#ixzz4zKlbFbD9
|
|