Jeffy

[klaiggeb]

Holy crap!

That's actually pathetic!

Unfortunately, the entire Dodger staff is one of those in that group.

[Islandboagie]

That's great, Randy, your Rog impression is uncanny. But you know darned well a pitcher that is getting almost 20 mil a year should win more than 9 games out of 32 starts. A pitcher that is getting that kind of money needs to come out of the game leading more than trailing. That wasn't the case with Samardjiza in 2017.

I realize some people are convinced the game has changed, which I'm not ready to believe yet.

Unlike most people, I don't immediately buy into what I'm told. I will however point out that I commented on the transition to the "all or nothing" offensive trend before it became the mainstream opinion. But I don't think we are at the point of "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" theory just yet. I believe good baseball still beats those teams. The Giants just haven't played good baseball for a while now.

There have always been power offenses, just look at our first two World Series opponents. They both had free swinging, stacked lineups, and our good pitching beat them.

The only team that took us to the brink of elimination in the World Series was a team much like ours. Good pitching, good defense and timely hitting. They were a good team, and they proved not be a fluke the following season. The Giants and Cardinals have won a handful of the Championships in the last 10 years by playing good fundamental baseball. There's not enough history of success for this new style of play to be considered the new direction of baseball, despite what ESPN feeds you, Randy. The powers that be want the fans to believe that every game will be a homerun derby, because dumb fans like watching those games.

I got off the point...

Either way, good pitchers still find ways to win. Cueto won 8 games in 7 less starts than Samardjiza, and 2017 was considered an awful season for Johnny.

Again, I expect better from our 3rd pitcher in the rotation, if we don't get some major contributions from the 3, 4 and 5 starters in our rotation it's going to be another long season.

[sfgdood]

I'm not saying Jeff earned his salary...but 9 wins on a 98 loss team isn't so bad. There are a lot of players that didn't earn his keep last year on our team.

I thought our first two WS opponents were the Yankees and the A's...both bashing teams that beat us.

I have stopped watching ESPN ever since they became MSNBC with baseballs, basketballs and footballs

I'm not really saying the game itself has changed very much...merely that the trend at the moment is that good pitching is pretty scarce.

[Islandboagie]

I thought our first two WS opponents were the Yankees and the A's...both bashing teams that beat us.

Boagie- Obviously you know I was talking about the Rangers and Tigers, but since you mentioned it..the '62 and '89 Giants were bangers too, it's really the pitching that separated them from us.

[rog]

Likely not, but the Dodgers have managed to do it, why can't we?


Rog -- The Dodgers often accomlished a mid-three's ERA from their rotation for four primary reasons:

. They have one of the best pitchers in baseball history, which means the other four starters can have an ERA close to 4.00 and still have the staff be in the mid-three's.

. They have signed some good starting pitchers.

. They have signed MANY starting pitchers, meaning they can survive rotation injuries well.

. They have had a fair flow of starters from the minors.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4342/jeffy?page=2#ixzz5AFwqKvSX

[rog]

The one season in the 1960's when the Giants had good starting pitching it came from Juan Marichal, Jack Sanford, Billy O'Dell, Mike McCormick and Billy Pierce. Their respective career ERA's were 2.89 (fabulous), 3.69 (good), 3.29 (excellent), 3.73 (good) and 3.27 (excellent). The Giants had five very good starters that season, although few were in their primes.

The Giants' overall rotation had a 3.73 ERA that season, compared to 3.94 for the league overall. I would guess that the league average for starters was perhaps .10 lower, meaning that the Giants' starters in a very, very good season for them in the 1960's had an ERA that about .10 lower than the average starter.

This past season the Giants' 4.58 ERA from its starters was #15 in the majors, or by definition right at the median. We agree that the Giants had a very tough year from their starters, and yet they were average in that regard. Clearly they've been very good in other seasons.

One factor that is almost certain is that the ball is wound tighter than it was in 1962. It's wound tighter than it was prior to the 2015 All-Star game. Homers are up something like 60% in that two and a half years.

Including half a season with the tighter ball in 2015, the average NL ERA in the first half of that season (including relievers and their lower ERA's brought on by their shorter spurts of pitching, plus the starters) was right at 4.00. The average ERA last season was 4.34, or a third of a run higher.

With the tighter ball and swing planes designed to increase the angle with which the ball leaves the bat, homers are up a lot. The game has changed considerably in just the past two and a half seasons.

[rog]

Is Jeff an average #3 starter? Perhaps. But I'm expecting the Giants to be better than average, so naming 90 better pitchers is meaningless, and a meaningless argument.


Rog -- No it isn't. We were talking about #3 starters -- not better than average #3 starters, which would likely make them a #2 starter overall. So a better than average starter might need to be in the top 60. Off the top of your head, name 40 starters who are better than Jeff.

I'm certainly not saying there aren't 40, but if you know enough to make strong comments here, surely you can name 40 of the whatever the number is off the top of your head. If not, you really don't know HOW Jeff compares to other starters.

If we want to know what Jeff is and what he could be, he's an above-average starter right now and one who could be in the top 30 or fewer if he could conquer his home run problem. Are you ignoring the innnings pitched, the strikeout and the walk numbers from Jeff last season? Are you ignoring that even with the Giants' horrible outfield Jeff allowed less than a hit per inning?

Jeff has a big home run problem. It's accentuated by the tighter ball and elevating swing planes. But if he could get on top of the homers and with a better outfield, he could become close to elite.

Will he ever get to that level? Probably not. Will his ERA be below four this season? Probably.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4342/jeffy?page=2#ixzz5AG4R3no8

[rog]

On the other hand, getting predictability out of his sequencing would almost always be a good thing.


Rog -- That was rather poorly stated. Who was it who said that so poorly?

Oh, it was me? Gee, that was exquisitely stated!

What I was trying to say is that eliminating or reducing sequence predictability would almost be a good thing. Better sequencing is just one more reason pitchers are getting better and better. Two others are throwing harder and pitching in shorter bursts, allowing the ball to be pitched even faster yet.

Rare is the hitter who does his best hitting against power pitchers.

[rog]

If league average is ok with you, then Jeff is going to be just fine, and not making the playoffs anytime soon will be fine too.


Rog -- More straw man's stuff again, Boagie.

And incidentally, the Giants made the playoffs in 2016 with Samardzija. While his ERA didn't show it, Jeff pitched better last season than in 2016.



Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4342/jeffy?page=2#ixzz5AGMR6ViM

[rog]

I'm not saying Jeff earned his salary...but 9 wins on a 98 loss team isn't so bad.


Rog -- There's really little point in getting hung up on pitcher wind. Sure, Jeff's .375 winning percentage was bad, but it was a whole lot better than Madison Bumgarner's .308.

What Randy is pointing out here is that wins and losses are a team thing, not a starting pitcher thing. And the Giants' TEAM last season was one of the worst in their history.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4342/jeffy?page=2#ixzz5AGNDMsa9

[rog]

I'm not really saying the game itself has changed very much...merely that the trend at the moment is that good pitching is pretty scarce.


Rog -- Perhaps we're merely saying the same thing in two different ways, but the game HAS changed considerably and is changing more rapidly than it has in perhaps a century. Historically good pitching abounds, and hitters have never been better either. The tide has turned in the direction of the hitters since the ball was tightened around the 2015 All-Star game.

The tighter ball is resulting in humidor usage again.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4342/jeffy?page=2#ixzz5AGOB5jgs

[rog]

Good pitching will beat bad hitting. Good hitting will beat bad pitching.

[Islandboagie]

Rog -- More straw man's stuff again, Boagie.

And incidentally, the Giants made the playoffs in 2016 with Samardzija. While his ERA didn't show it, Jeff pitched better last season than in 2016.

Boagie- Why do you think that?

[rog]

Rog -- More straw man's stuff again, Boagie.

And incidentally, the Giants made the playoffs in 2016 with Samardzija. While his ERA didn't show it, Jeff pitched better last season than in 2016.

Boagie- Why do you think that?


Rog -- That's an excellent question, Boagie. In order to answer it, let's look at what pitching is:

. As Warren Spahn said, it's all about upsetting the hitter's timing. In other words, it's about inducing soft contact, not allowing the ball to be hit hard.

. It's about striking batters out, not allowing the ball to be put into play, where even softly-hit balls can find holes and become hits.

. It's about not walking batters, not allowing them to reach base for free, without even hitting the ball.


So let's see how Jeff did in each of those three categories in 2017 compared to 2016.

. Jeff gave up 30% hard-hit balls in 2017 compared to 32% in 2016. A slight but noticeable improvement. He limited batters to 21% softly-hit balls in 2017 compared to 18% in 2016. A clear improvement, although softly-hit balls can sometimes be hit so softly that they result in bloops or infield hits. He did yield 22% line drives compared to 20% in 2016, and his ground ball rate fell from 47% to 41%. The last two would be considered negatives. Overall a slight positive, one which would be more impressive had his ground ball rate not fallen significantly.

. He struck out 24% of batters in 2017 compared to 20% in 2016. His swinging strike percentage rose from 9% to 10%. He was clearly more dominant.

. His walk percentage dropped from 7% in 2016 to 4% in 2017. That's a tremendous improvement. His 1.4 walks per nine innings led the majors, better even than Clayton Kershaw.

. As a result of these last two, his K% - BB% spiked from 13% to 20%, another spectacular betterment. His 6.4 K/BB ratio was fourth best among all pitchers.

In summary, Jeff allowed less hard contact and less of it. He walked far fewer hitters. On the negative side, he allowed more fly balls which, despite the lesser contact, went out more often. Further, while he allowed less contact, batters hit .303 on balls in play against him in 2017 compared to .285 in 2016. That likely spoke more to the Giants' worse fielding (especially in the outfield) than to Jeff's pitching.

Jeff's Fielding Independent Pitching (FIP) dropped from 3.85 to 3.61. Pleasantly, FIP is a better preditor of future ERA than is actual ERA in a given season. That, along with the net positives mentioned previously bode nicely for an improved ERA in 2018.

One of the best indications that Jeff is improving is that his WHIP has dropped from 1.29 to 1.14 over the past three seasons. That's an impressive reduction.

Anyway, do we now see how Jeff did pitch better in 2017 than in 2016, yet he had worse fielding behind him and likely a little less luck, causing his ERA to rise?

Jeff pitched better in 2017 than in 2016. He simply got fewer results in terms of ERA. But there is little question he PITCHED better. And that seems more encouraging for 2018 than his failure thus far in spring training to show further improvement.

Make sense?

[Islandboagie]

I don't care about the hard hit percentages...i care about the hard hits that hurt, and the ones that resulted in a loss.

I don't care if he walks 5 batters or no batters, sometimes a walk is a strategic move to NOT LET THE OTHER TEAM BEAT YOU. If your walks are THAT low, you're either a contact pitcher, or you're not very good.

Please understand, Rog...I'm a fan of the Giants, not a fan of Jeff Samardjiza's obscure stats.

Jeff Samardjiza wasn't bad because of the defense, he was BAD because he allowed guys to square up pitches when it counted the most. He gave in to hitters when he shouldn't have.

It's hard for me to explain to you how the game of baseball should be played, Rog.

The best examples are Ryan Vogelsong's game day demeanor, Jonathan Sanchez rubbing out the "SD" on Petco's pitcher's mound and Brian Wilson's beard.

Vogelsong made that day his.

Jonathan Sanchez made that mound his.

Brian Wilson created a character that was "born to save games" <his words. Brian was just nutty enough to make the batter nervous. It helped him deal with the pressure.

Samardjiza has none of this. He doesn't walk to the mound with an attitude. He doesn't have an ego. Neither does Melancon. This worries me.

[rog]

I don't care about the hard hit percentages...i care about the hard hits that hurt, and the ones that resulted in a loss.


Rog -- I understand, Boagie. When those hard hits (or even bloopers -- maybe especially bloopers) kill the Giants, we remember them a long, long time. But the fewer hard-hit balls a pitcher gives up, the less likely he is to give up the key hit.

Jeff did have mixed results at best in clutch situations. His only good one was late and close, where he limited opponents to a .676 OPS. But he was lousy in the other key opportunities.

Those things tend to be cylical though, and over his career Jeff has done better. He hasn't pitched well with runners on or in scoring position though. If I were he and the Giants, I'd be working on his mechanics from the stretch. Anything you see, Boly?

You make a good point, Boagie. I think you might also benefit from looking at the broader picture. I remember for instance, when we crucified Sergio Romo for two or three key late hits he yielded, including a walkoff or two. When we looked at the broader picture then though, as we were urged to do, we saw that Sergio simply was unlucky with his timing, that overall he had pitched and was pitching well. He went on to pitch nicely from that time on -- just as he had pitched well prior to the bad stretch.

When we focus on heartbreak, we often lose sight of the overall.



Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4342/jeffy?page=2#ixzz5AMBY2oyG

[rog]

If your walks are THAT low, you're either a contact pitcher, or you're not very good.


Rog -- Name me one pitcher, Boagie, with as low a walk rate as Jeff had last season who wasn't a good pitcher. Just one. I can't come close to thinking of any.

Jeff's ability to avoid walks last season was special. One reason was that he threw 65% first pitch strikes, compared to his 62% career average. In other words, he was better at getting ahead. Overall, he threw 67% strikes, which is excellent. That was the same percentage as Madison Bumgarner, who also had an outstanding walk rate.

You're right, Boagie, that sometimes it makes sense to pitch carefully to a hitter; occasionally it even makes sense to pitch around hitters. But allowing few walks is rarely a bad thing.


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4342/jeffy?page=2#ixzz5AMEeVZH0

[rog]

Please understand, Rog...I'm a fan of the Giants, not a fan of Jeff Samardjiza's obscure stats.


Rog -- A low walk rate is hardly obscure. Hard-hit rate is hardly obscure. K/BB is hardly obscure. Innings pitched are hardly obscure. Strike percentage -- both first pitch and overall -- is hardly obscure.

You say you're a fan of the Giants, not a fan of Jeff Samardzija's obscure stats. The stats aren't obscure, and you should be a fan of the former and a student of the latter. When the latter are as good as Jeff's, you should be a fan, since it bodes well for the future.

Incidentally, are being a fan of the Giants and being a fan of Jeff's stats mutually exclusive? You act as if they are.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4342/jeffy?page=2#ixzz5AMHzxoWa

[rog]

When actually, they're slightly related.

[rog]

I'm going to go a step further. If you're a fan of the Giants, you SHOULD be studying their players, and you're being myopic about Jeff IMO. Not that he was great last season. But he was clearly better than his ERA indicated, and he had some peripherals that were downright excellent. Again, that often bodes well for the future.

[rog]

It's hard for me to explain to you how the game of baseball should be played, Rog.


Rog -- Oh, come on, Boagie. It shouldn't be hard at all. Give it a quick try.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4342/jeffy?page=2#ixzz5AMJQuQ42

[rog]

Samardjiza has none of this. He doesn't walk to the mound with an attitude. He doesn't have an ego. Neither does Melancon. This worries me.


Rog -- I'm worried about Melancon too. But it is because he has had a serious arm injury, not because he doesn't have attitude. Somehow he posted the lowest ERA of any reliever from 2013 through 2016 despite not having attitude.

Sure, we'd all like to see pitchers go out to the mound like the Mad Hungarian. But isn't it ultimately results we're most concerned about?


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4342/jeffy?page=2#ixzz5AMK1lgxg

[sfgdood]

Sorry Boagie, but I can't say that I know ANYONE that would reach as much as to say a low walk rate is a negative. I mean obviously a lot of Jeff's pitches were a little too hitable but keeping the walks low keeps the pitch count low which helps a pitcher rack up the innings. I think you overplayed your hand this time.

[rog]

Vogelsong made that day his.

Jonathan Sanchez made that mound his.

Brian Wilson created a character that was "born to save games" <his words. Brian was just nutty enough to make the batter nervous. It helped him deal with the pressure.


Rog -- I would take Brian Wilson's career over Jeff's, but I'd take Jeff's career over either Ryan's or Jonathan's. You may have liked Jonathan's demeanor, but his career fell off the charts quicker even than Tim Lincecum's. One has to admire Ryan, but one also has to realize how long it took him to become successful.

Incidentally, no one seems to react when I point out that for a period of close to a year, one could make a strong argument for Ryan's being the most consistent starter in the game. Not the best (although he certainly was good), but the most consistent.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4342/jeffy?page=2#ixzz5AMKngXy0

[rog]

If nothing else, Boagie, having a low walk rate kept the number of runners on base down when the homers were given up. Not that Jeff didn't put enough on as it was, but with a higher walk rate, he would have given up even more runs via the home run.

Incidentally, he gave up 48 runs on his 30 homers. He and the Giants should be focusing on his mechanics out of the stretch.

[rog]

You're not seeing the forest for the trees, Boagie. Your complaining about a low walk rate states that fact strongly. Keep an open mind and realize that while you are making some good points, you're also ignoring information you should be learning.

You and Boly should be pointing to the change in mechanics from the stretch that is causing Jeff not to pitch nearly as well with runners on. Batters have a .271 average against Jeff with runners on, while he limits them to just .237 with the bases empty. Last season they hit .287 with runners on compared to the same .237 with the bases empty.

What does Jeff need to change with runners on, guys?

[rog]

Jeff needs to figure out what is causing him to pitch so much worse with runners on, and he needs to figure out what causes his command lapses. If he can improve in those two areas, he could become a top-flight pitcher.

Last season he made great strides in his control. Perhaps this season or next he'll make improvements in the two key areas mentioned above.

[rog]

This is a fine Fan Graphs article addressing some of the Jeff Samardzija topics we have been talking about:

www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/pitcher-spotlight-jeff-samardzijas-home-run-problem/


What are your thoughts on this?

[rog]

good pitchers still find ways to win


Rog -- Perhaps then you could give us your discertation on why Matt Cain was a sub-.500 pitcher. And maybe just a short essay on why Madison Bumgarner's won-loss percentage was 67 points below Jeff's this past season. Then perhaps a quick outline of why Madison's and Johnny Cueto's combined winning percentage was just below Jeff's.

On this topic, Boagie, you seem to be straining for relevant facts. "Good pitchers still find ways to win" is just a platitude.

"If your walks are THAT low, you're either a contact pitcher, or you're not very good" is simply a falsehood.

"I don't care about the hard hit percentages...i care about the hard hits that hurt, and the ones that resulted in a loss," goes against the philosophy of Warren Spahn, who knew a thing or two about pitching.

"I'm a fan of the Giants, not a fan of Jeff Samardjiza's obscure stats," ignores the fact that Giants success and Jeff's "obscure" stats can be interrelated.

"It's hard for me to explain to you how the game of baseball should be played," ignores the idea that the better one knows a topic, the easier it is explain it. It also ignores the idea that the more the explainee knows about the subject, the easier it is to explain it.

You make some good points here, Boagie, and you're certainly not all wrong. But you really seem to be reaching.

Take a look at the Fan Graphs article on Jeff, and let us know what you think. The one thing I can say about the article is that agree with its conclusions or not, the article went far deeper into Jeff Samardzija's home run problems than the thoughts of all us here combined.

This is the type of stuff we all should be reading -- assuming we want to expand our knowledge and understanding of the game. Even if we don't care about that, well perhaps we will still find this type of reading intriguing and enjoyable. Or perhaps not. But there is little question that whether we desire to or not, we can learn from this type of analysis.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4342/jeffy?page=2#ixzz5AMflktiq

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4342/jeffy?page=2#ixzz5AMfOoEXh



Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4342/jeffy?page=2#ixzz5AMf5KWL7

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/4342/jeffy?page=2#ixzz5AMeb75Us

[rog]

That Jeff could keep his walk rate so low while posting a high strikeout rate is all the more impressive. Usually higher strikeout rates are accompanied by higher walk rates, since the more strikes a pitcher throws, the more balls he is likely to throw as well.

For instance, most high walk hitters also strike out a lot. And many hitters who strike out a lot have high walk rates. The more pitches a pitcher throws to a batter, the more likely he is to either strike him out or walk him.

In order to get a grasp on how impressive Jeff's 6.4/1 K/BB ratio last season was, please note that no pitcher in the history of the major leagues has ever come within 1.2 of that ratio over his career.

Please note too that the live ball era career leaders in this category are Chris Sale, Corey Kluber, Stephen Strasburg, Curt Schilling, Madison Bumgarner, Clayton Kershaw, Pedro Martinez, Mariano Rivera, Dan Haren and Max Scherzer. With the exception of Haren, these guys might all make the Hall of Fame. And even Haren was a three-time All-Star and twice finished in the top seven in the Cy Young voting. Haren also had a lower career ERA than recent Hall of Famer Jack Morris.

A high K/BB ratio is almost always a very good thing.