What we need, what we'd have

[klaiggeb]

I'm using names as examples only.

I repeat, as examples ONLY.

They are NOT meant to be taken as players we could/should or would get.

Just to demonstrate what our line up NEEDS.

My contention, and in this order:

Power hitting OF

Power hitting 3B

Centerfield.

But actually we need all of them almost equally.

So if we could find players to fit my mold, a potential line up could look like:

Cain
Panik
Ozuna----20+ power
Posey----15+ power
Belt-----20+ power
Frazier--20+ power
Crawford-15+ Power
Span/Pence-Whom ever LF

I'd prefer Ozuna to Bruce for multiple reasons, not the least of which is that he's faster and hits for a better average.

My point IS, WE NEED 3 20+ Power guys in the line up to just compete, and I'm not sure THAT'S even enough.

these KINDS of players can also play pretty good defense, with LF being the weakest link.

boly

[Islandboagie]

I'm going to disagree that we need a power hitting outfielder or third baseman more than a good centerfielder. We don't NEED power, we NEED hitters that keep the line moving. We NEED hitters that aren't big gaping holes in our lineup. We NEED smart hitters, not muscle up and hope the ball goes over the fence hitters. To me, the latter is Jay Bruce.

We also NEED a leadoff hitter. Having Retard Span over these last few seasons has been a huge detriment to the Giants offense and defense.

We need gap power, good base runners and good defense, all around good fundamental ball players. I wouldn't mind Ozuna, but the other names you mention bore me to death, Boly. Just like Span did and just like Samardjiza did...

I'm not an expert like Bob Nightengale (HA HA), but over the years I've been fairly accurate in assessing these moves. The only one that really proved me wrong was Angel Pagan, but even then I was accurate on his bad routes and poor decision making. I just didn't know he was athletic enough to correct those bad routes.

Besides Pagan, I don't know of any player that I questioned the acquisition of that turned out good for the Giants.

[klaiggeb]

boagie-I wouldn't mind Ozuna, but the other names you mention bore me to death,

***boly says***

Boagie, PLEASE go back and read my post. "I'm using names as examples only.

I repeat, as examples ONLY."

Sheesh.

Boagie.

Please!


Not once did I say I wanted THOSE PLAYERS. I said, or implied pretty strongly, that those were the KINDS of players I wanted.

Not THEM specifically.

Now look at the numbers I attached to them:

20+ HR power.

NOT, repeat NOT station-to-station bashers; hackers with no clue at the plate just trying to club the ball into the next county.

That's why I did NOT include a name like Jay Bruce.

Cain and Ozuna both can run.

But I say again, those are examples of the skill set not THE guys.

boly

[Islandboagie]

I understand, Boly. I know you weren't specifically targeting those players, but those players have been mentioned here and in the media, so I did want to comment on some of those names.

I didn't notice you put Cain in the lineup, I like Ozuna and Cain and what they offer, although I'm not entirely enamored with Cain's age and I don't know if he's leadoff material. Frazier I don't like. He's one of those big lumbering guys that tries to hit a homerun every at bat.

Does Melky Cabrera not interest you?

[klaiggeb]

Cain was in the line up in the 1 hole, boagie.

Here's the cut and paste from the original post

Cain
Panik
Ozuna----20+ power
Posey----15+ power
Belt-----20+ power
Frazier--20+ power
Crawford-15+ Power
Span/Pence-Whom ever LF

I think we both agree that Evans MUST MAKE 3 DRAMATIC moves... or we're screwed for some time to come.

And I'm not sure/I don't think Martinez and his sub par defense is even part of the answer.

boly

[Islandboagie]

A good all around centerfielder and corner outfielder with some pop to protect Posey should be addressed.

A third baseman? I'm not convinced we need that. We have Pablo, Arroyo and even Tomlinson in a worst case scenario. But even Tomlinson, the worst case scenario I'd be ok with at 3b, as long as we're getting more production from the outfield.

Pablo wasn't great when he came over from the Red Sox, but let's not forget that he came over in what many considered not good playing condition. He still had a few game changing hits in his brief time with us last season. To me, he's said all the right things for me to forgive him. I believe, in good condition, he can return to being a middle of the order type.

Arroyo is the same, he wasn't great, but he had some big hits, and I love his attitude.

And you know I love Tomlinson.

Together, these three are all capable of being good. Arroyo could be a 20hrs 80rbis guy, and I believe Pablo could again too. Because of that, I don't see a strong need for a big name acquisition at 3rd. More depth in the infield? sure, perhaps a Juan Uribe or Joaquin Arias type.

I'd much rather the Giants use the money to make a move to bolster the middle of their rotation. Samardjiza and Moore don't excite me as much as they do opposing hitters. I don't care how much sunshine Krukow blows up Samardjiza ass, he's not a #3. And I'm not sure Cueto is a #2. I'm not even sure Bumgarner is a #1 after the accident.

Doesn't that worry you more than 3rd base?

[rog]

We have Pablo, Arroyo and even Tomlinson in a worst case scenario.


Rog -- I'm pretty sure the Giants are hoping Arroyo comes around this season and have Pablo around as a Plan B (possibly in tandem with Tomlinson until Christian is ready). I still think Pablo might hit a little against right-handers, but since 2011 when he was a good fielder, he's been pretty lousy in the field. He was awful for the Red Sox and not a whole lot better after returning to the Giants.

If the Giants were an American League team, I would hold out some hope for Pablo as a platoon DH, but he's now a big liability in the field. If he gets into tip-top shape, perhaps he could at least not be a liability, although I think his days of being an asset in the field are over.

What likely makes the most sense is to develop Arroyo, whether that means a little more minor league time or if he can become the 2018 starter from day one or close to it. We overrated Christian when he first came up, in part because he was off to SUCH a great start at Sacramento and in part because he got a key hit or two early, disguising that he wasn't hitting all the great overall.

I'm not a big fan of Christian, and would sign Todd Frazier if I were trying to compete in 2018. But long-term, the Giants don't have anyone better than Christian, who is smart enough that he still might execute his plan to be more patient and wait for balls he can drive. As mentioned before, he makes too frequent contact but not enough overall quality.

Tomlinson is the type of player it's hard not to root for, but he's mostly a good backup. In a pinch, he could be the short side of a platoon. But his OPS has dropped from a good .762 to .700 to .646. He's a fine pinch runner, a good pinch hitter when a base runner is needed, and he has improved significantly in the field.

I think we got overly excited by his rookie season.



Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4189/#ixzz511LNfUW4

[rog]

You are right about Arroyo's attitude, and he is smart enough to be the salutatorian of his high school class. And he's still just 22. It appeared he was finally putting it together at Sacramento early last season.

[rxmeister]

I don’t agree with the “keep the line moving” philosophy. I don’t know if the bats are juiced, the balls are juiced or the players are juiced, but it’s all become about homeruns now and the Giants have been left behind. I’d suggest all moves except CF be addressed with power hitting. Frazier at third, Ozuna (preferably) because JD isn’t coming here or Bruce would be my choices.

[klaiggeb]

boagie-I'd much rather the Giants use the money to make a move to bolster the middle of their rotation. Samardjiza and Moore don't excite me as much as they do opposing hitters. I don't care how much sunshine Krukow blows up Samardjiza ass, he's not a #3. And I'm not sure Cueto is a #2. I'm not even sure Bumgarner is a #1 after the accident.

Doesn't that worry you more than 3rd base?

***boly says**

Actually, boagie, it doesn't.

I am okay with our rotation IF...IF they bounce back, stay healthy and perform at least to their normal numbers.

Jeffy the Stubborn is the # 4 guy.

But that said, I'd move him in a heartbeat to some club foolish enough to want an "innings eater" in lieu of a guy who can actually win.

boly

[rog]

Jeffy the Stubborn is the # 4 guy.


Rog -- Why not just call him Samardzija and recognize he is the Giants' #3 starter. When is the last time you remember a #4 starter leading the league in innings pitched? When is the last time you saw a #4 starter with a 1.14 WHIP in over 200 innings? When is the last time you saw a #4 starter with a K/BB ratio over six?

With the exception of his ERA (an important measure of success, but not the only one), Jeff pitched extremely well even for a #3. One could make an argument that he was actually the Giants' second-best starter last season and not get much of an argument.

I don't mean to be harsh, Boly. You know I think you're a great guy. But what is the point in giving a Giants player a derrogatory nickname? Not only that, but you say he stubbornly throws too many fastballs, but he's thrown fastballs on less than half his pitches each of the past three seasons.

Jeff's problem is that while on most of his pitches he's pretty good, he hangs way to many of those pitches.

You've pitched a lot. If you were Jeff's coach, how would you work with him to reduce the number of pitches he hangs?

He does a lot of the things you like, including getting ahead of the hitters. Last season he threw 65% first strikes. That's right at Madison Bumgarner's average over the past three seasons.



Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4189/#ixzz514xRL1lB

[rog]

Last season the Giants' pitching was more or less average. Their play in the outfield and at third base was historically awful. Where does that tell us the Giants should put their priorities?

[rog]

I thought wins and losses were a team stat. Jeff had a poor won-loss record last season (as is usually the case when a team doesn't win), and he didn't have the best of run support. He gave up more or less an average rate of runs, but his run support was below average.

The Giants won 13 of Jeff's 32 starts, which was right at the team average.

[klaiggeb]

Sorry, Rog, but I don't give a rip.

13 of 32?

And we're expected to be happy with that?

I'm not.

boly

[rog]

Sorry, Rog, but I don't give a rip.

13 of 32?

And we're expected to be happy with that?

I'm not.


Rog -- First of all, as we have discussed many times before, wins are a team stat.

Secondly, the Giants won games at about the same rate when Jeff started as they did when their other pitchers started. If we're going to pick on him, shouldn't we pick on the others just as much? Why single Jeff out?

The Giants likely got the least value out of Cueto, Bumgarner and Melancon, although in each of those cases injury was involved.

You don't think there is any value or potential in leading the league in innings pitched, finished #10 in WHIP, and coming up #4 in the majors in strikeouts to walks?

If I were another team, I would be quite interested in acquiring Jeff. If the Giants put him on the market, they could very likely get a lot back. If his ERA began to catch up with his WHIP and K/BB ratio next season, they might be able to get a huge return for him at the trade deadline or next winter.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4189/#ixzz5177Wih8o

[klaiggeb]

You've pitched a lot. If you were Jeff's coach, how would you work with him to reduce the number of pitches he hangs?

***boly says***

He wouldn't start on my team, Rog.

He'd be a closer or a set up man.

boly

[klaiggeb]

I've given my opinion often concerning Jeffy's issues, and I CONTEND they are ones of focus. He simply can't maintain focus the entire game, or for the duration of time he's in there.

He's not the first and he's not the last to have great stuff, but stuff that is NOT maintainable over the course of a game.

Thus, he pitches in short spurts. He doesn't start.

boly

[rog]

You've pitched a lot. If you were Jeff's coach, how would you work with him to reduce the number of pitches he hangs?

***boly says***

He wouldn't start on my team, Rog.

He'd be a closer or a set up man.


Rog -- You didn't answer my question. Whether he was a starter, closer or set up man, how would you work with Jeff to reduce the number of pitches he hangs? While I'm at it, do you agree that's his problem -- hanging pitches?

As for your idea of using him a closer, there's a big value to a pitcher who leads the league in innings pitched, which clearly he wouldn't do as a reliever. Remember how we used to say it takes a pretty good pitcher to lose 20 games? Same concept.

A reliever needs to bring it right away, since he doesn't have five, six, seven or eight innings to recover from a rough first inning. Jeff's first inning ERA was 6.47. ERA-wise, as a starter Jeff's ERA has been average. As a reliever, his ERA has been higher than average for a reliever.

He's not only pitched much longer as a starter, he's pitched BETTER compared to his average replacement for his role. In addition, the Giants have a few average or better relievers. The guy who would replace him in the rotation would rank somewhere between a Four A pitcher and a #5 starter. A starter is MUCH harder to replace than a reliever.

So my question is, what factors is it that you're seeing that overcome:

. Jeff's biggest strength last season was that he led the league in innings pitched, something he would give up as a reliever.

. Because pitchers pitch two, three or even four times as many innings as a reliever, they can have a much greater impact.

. Jeff's worst pitching last season came in his first inning of work. As a starter, he has a chance to overcome that. As a reliever in a close game, he quite possibly has blown the game in that one inning, likely the only inning he'll pitch.

. Over his career, Jeff has pitched better as a starter compared to other starters than he has as a reliever compared to other relievers.

. A starter is much harder to replace than a reliever?

That'a lot of important factors to overcome.

As an aside, you mentioned that you weren't happy that the Giants went 13-19 in the games Jeff started. No Giants fan was. But the Giants went only 4-13 when Madison Bumgarner, meaning that in the extra decisions Jeff had over Madison, Jeff went 9-6.

Should the Giants make Madison a reliever too?

There must be something I'm missing here. Virtually every factor I look at says Jeff should remain a starter.

Let's ask this: When was the last time a pitcher who led the league in innings pitched was then made a reliever?

I'm about as confused as I can be here.

[rog]

You mentioned that Jeff has a hard time keeping his focus. But he was AWFUL in the first inning last season and actually pretty good over the rest of the game.

Maybe if he had to pitch only an inning or two, Jeff would have focus right out of the chute. I could see that, and perhaps you're right. But with Jeff's history and the Giants' already struggling for starters, why take that chance?

This might be a way to frame the situation: Jeff's trade value RIGHT NOW is likely higher than his trade value would be if he is successful as a closer, and especially if he's successful in the set up role. How many relievers do you know who are making $18 million per season as Jeff is?

Relievers just aren't as valuable as starters, and thus are paid less. When the Giants signed Mark Melancon, one could have made the argument he had been the best closer in the game over the previous four seasons. Yet teams were willing to pay more for longer for the starter you're not wanting to convert to a reliever.

Samardzija would have to be a very special reliever to have as much value as he has as a #3 starter. Anyone who calls Jeff the Giants' #4 starter (Jeff pitched right after Bumgarner and Cueto) didn't understand how poorly Matt Moore pitched last season.

Here's what's odd. Since Bumgarner missed a lot of the season and didn't pitch his best after he returned and Cueto suffered through blisters and arm problems, one could make an argument that Jeff was the Giants' most valuable pitcher last season.

That subject is arguable, and one could make good arguments for each of the trio. But it's tough to argue that a reliever is more valuable than a starter. On a per-inning basis, sure. But starters usually pitch three times as many innings.

Was Willie Mays as valuable in 50 games as Joe Panik in 150? Would Jeff jump to a Willie Mays level as a reliever if he were given that role?

If Jeff can jump from a Joe Panik level as a starter to a Willie Mays level as a closer (and the Giants have him close), possibly it would make sense. Even then, would you rather use Mark Melancon in Jeff's place rather than Ty Bloch?

Speaking of Blach, you don't like him as potential LOOGY even though he has excelled against lefty hitters. You don't want Jeff Samardzija starting even though he led the league in innings pitched, had the 9th-lowest WHIP in the majors, and possessed the 4th-best K/BB ratio in the majors.

It seems to me that you don't want guys using their strengths.

I understand your thought that Jeff might concentrate right out of the chute if he were a reliever, even though he was awful in his first inning last season as a starter. Maybe you're right. But a starter has a much greater impact on a game, and if you move Jeff to relief and he's not at least very good, moving him back to the rotation would be a little challenging, especially in the middle of a season.

Why take a guy away from his strengths? If you're going to do that, why not tell Jeff to throw as hard and focus as much as he can for five innings? That way he might significantly improve his performance and still get in 150 innings while doing so. Pitch him that way every fourth day instead of ever fifth, and he might go close to 200 innings.

Or how about three innings every three days? That should get him about 160 innings. If Jeff's problem is concentration and he needs to pitch fewer innings per game to improve that, why not use him briefly as a starter -- and use him far more often in that role? Maybe some of the Giants' other starters would benefit too from being used that way.

How about pitching Madison Bumgarner five or six innings every fourth or fifth day and fill in with three other starters pitching three innings on the other days? Or simply telling the starters to let it all hang out, and you don't care how many innings they can go. If they can pitch three innings, you'll be very happy with them. In exchange you want them to pitch every third game.

The Giants' starters would very likely pitch better if they had to go only three innings than they pitch in five, six or seven innings now.

Maybe you're on to something here.

[klaiggeb]

Rog -- You didn't answer my question. Whether he was a starter, closer or set up man, how would you work with Jeff to reduce the number of pitches he hangs? While I'm at it, do you agree that's his problem -- hanging pitches?


***boly says***

I did, Rog. Just no quite in the way you expected.

I contend his problem is focus, not stuff.

So by pitching out of the bullpen, he throws LESS pitches in a game, and that allows him to BEAR DOWN and focus on each pitch, not having to worry about setting hitters up for later.

boly

[rog]

So by pitching out of the bullpen, he throws LESS pitches in a game, and that allows him to BEAR DOWN and focus on each pitch, not having to worry about setting hitters up for later.


Rog -- How about pitching him three innings every third game then? He wouldn't have to worry about setting up hitters for later, and he could still throw over 150 innings per season. That's less than the 208 he threw to lead the NL last season, but it's a lot more than the 60 or 70 he would likely throw as a reliever.

One thing about relieving too is that relievers are even more likely to be injured than starters. Especially, I would imagine, if the starters were limited to three innings.

Getting back to more practical stuff though, you don't think Jeff is concentrating as hard in the first inning as he is later in the game? Why would that be?

Another question about using Jeff in relief is, do we know how long it takes him to warm up? He's relieved before, so perhaps that's not a problem. But when a pitcher pitches his worst in the first inning, might that not indicate a problem with getting loose?

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4189/#ixzz51Jb7CsuD

[klaiggeb]

Less pitches, less need to 'repeat the stroke,' less chances for error.

[Islandboagie]

Jonathan Sanchez and Shawn Estes had focus issues, in my opinion Samardjiza just isn't very good. He doesn't have a plus secondary pitch, his "out pitch" is his fastball, and even that doesn't have good movement.

[klaiggeb]

I don't agree that he's not "very good," boagie.

He goes through spurts where he's very good.

He just can't sustain them over the length of the season.

Does he have a'great' out pitch?

No, he doesn't.

But he can come in a 'blow' for an inning or two.

Plus he's very durable, thus all of the innings he can pitch.

He reminds me so much of Eckersley.

Look him up. when he was pitching near or at or more than 200 Innings, his ERA was consistently in the high 4's or 5's.

But when they put him in the pen... wow!

Totally different story.

boly

[Islandboagie]

Boly- But he can come in a 'blow' for an inning or two.

Boagie- I suppose that's better than him "blowing" for 7 innings.

[rog]

Does he have a'great' out pitch?

No, he doesn't.

But he can come in a 'blow' for an inning or two.


Rog -- Maybe I'm mis-remembering, Boly, but wasn't your criticism of Ty Blach in the far less demanding role of a LOOGY that he didn't have an out pitch?

If the Giants WERE to use Jeff as a reliever, I think he should be a super reliever who pitches a lot of innings.

Looking back at Jeff's first four years when he WAS used mostly as a reliever though, he mostly pitched in small spurts of two innings or less. And he wasn't particularly good at relieving. We can make the excuse (reason) that it was at the beginning of his career, but whatever the reason, the result was below average.

Let's put it this way: He wasn't as good as George Kontos!

Last season Jeff led the league in three categories:

. Losses. Cleary this isn't a great endorsement, but as we said yesterday, a pitcher has to be pretty decent to lead the league in losses.

. Innings pitched. This is quite positive and augurs against making him a reliever.

. Lowest walk rate. Jeff's high homer rate points toward a possible lack of focus. His lowest walk rate points the other direction.


One thing is certainly the case: Barring injury, Samardzija is almost certain to open the season in the Giants' rotation.

Meanwhile, the Pirates are delighted to have George Kontos in their bullpen. He posted a 1.84 ERA for them in 14.2 innings after being claimed on waivers from the Giants. Even more impressive was Kontos' 0.82 WHIP.

George has a career 3.00 ERA and 1.14 WHIP. By comparison, Samardzija has a career 3.84 ERA and a 1.45 WHIP as a reliever. Pretty clear which guy has been better out of the bullpen.

Meanwhile, the guy we're talking about moving to the bullpen has pitched over 200 innings in each of the past five seasons and has averaged over 200 innings per season in his six full years as a starter.

If the Giants wanted a good reliever, they should have simply held onto Kontos and continued to allow Samardzija to pitch his usual 200 innings as a starter.

By the way, the only other starter to have pitched at least 200 innings in each of the past five seasons is Max Scherzer.

You could be right about moving Jeff to the bullpen, Boly. It's just that there are SO many reasons not to. It must gall you a bit too that Kontos has been much better out of the pen than Jeff.


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4189/#ixzz51MGQWFdb

[rog]

He reminds me so much of Eckersley.

Look him up. when he was pitching near or at or more than 200 Innings, his ERA was consistently in the high 4's or 5's.


Rog -- Eckersley's career ERA as a starter was 3.71 in over 2400 innings. He had only one season in which his ERA was in the high fours or fives. He had one other one where his ERA was in the mid-fours.

Paul Simon starred in the movie "One Trick Pony" in 1980. The movie featured his song of the same name. IIRC in the movie, Paul was pitching to his son as if he were Eckersley. At the time the movie was made, Dennis had starting ERA's of 2.60, 3.43, 3.53, 2.99 and 2.99.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4189?page=1&scrollTo=42621#ixzz51Mb0JV3l

[rog]

Twenty of Jeff's 32 starts in 2017 were quality starts.

[klaiggeb]

You can argue FOR Jeffy all you want, Rog, but don't expect me to agree.

I also do not agree with that, "quality start" stat.

My idea of a quality start and what they consider a quality start are miles apart

[rog]

I'm don't expect a guy who says ...

"He reminds me so much of Eckersley.

Look him up. when he was pitching near or at or more than 200 Innings, his ERA was consistently in the high 4's or 5's."

... to agree.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4189/#ixzz51MjHsM5I