White Sox are getting grave, man

[sharksrog]

The White Sox are said to be signing Kendall Graveman for about 3$24. I'm glad the Giants didn't go that direction. I like Kendall OK, but I think that's a bit much -- even though it would be slightly lower than the 3/$27 predicted by MLBTR.

[sharksrog]

Baseball-Reference projects Graveman at a 3.51 ERA this upcoming season. They project Dominic Leone at 3.70 for about $6.5 million less for the season. I suspect that is why the Giants will likely have Leone this season and not have Graveman. I think Kendall is a potential closer, but I think 3/$24 is too much to pay him.

I'm beginning more and more to think that the way to build a pitching staff is with mid-level payments to starters who have upside in excess of what they're being paid and picking up inexpensive relievers with potential. Almost all relievers fluctuate considerably from season to season, so why overpay them? Graveman had a sparkling 1.77 ERA last season, but his career ERA is 4.15. Why overpay for him when the Giants already have Leone with an even lower ERA both last season and over his career, and they'll likely pay Leone less than 20% of what Graveman will be making? Not to mention that Graveman is guaranteed for three years, whereas the Giants will be guaranteeing only one season for Leone.

Now, if Dominic gets off to a good start again this season, I would have no problem with extending him, since he will likely be eligible for free agency a year from now. Heck, I wouldn't have a problem with giving him a two-year contract right now if it could be done cheaply.

I'm still predicting a down season in 2022, but almost everywhere I look, the Giants seem to be making solid contract decisions. When Farhan took over three seasons ago, the Giants had gone 167-229 (.422) over their past two and a half seasons. Since he has taken over, they have improved their winning percentage by over 100 points (213-171, .527) while cutting salary.

It would appear to me that Farhan is doing something right. I think Dominic Leone compared to Kendall Graveman or, earlier, Guillermo Mota, illustrates some of that right-doing.

[Islandboagie]

What we learned last season was that while it's adaquate for the regular season, the way Zaidi builds a pitching staff can't get you deep into the post season.

[klaiggeb]

BINGO! I don't know how many times we have to say it, but that is correct!

I think Kapler and Farhan really need to start reading this board!

[sharksrog]

The last thing Farhan and Kapler need to do is read this board. Each of them knows more than all of us combined.

If they were to read this, I suspect their first question would be, how do you know the way Farhan builds his bullpen won't go deep into the playoffs?

First of all, just because they didn't do so once doesn't mean they won't do so another time.

Second, it was a lack of scoring, not a lack of pitching, that was the Giants' biggest problem. How many runs did the Giants allow in their two wins? That would be zero, nada, zilch. The starters gave up no runs in 12.1 innings, and the relievers gave up no runs in 5.2 frames. The Giants won one of those games despite scoring only one run.

In their first two losses, neither the hitting nor the pitching was good, as the Giants scored only two runs per contest while allowing eight.

Which brought the series down to the final game. The pitching was fine, allowing only two runs. But the hitting lost it, scoring only one run.

I'm guessing you guys weren't watching?

[sharksrog]

You guys really DON'T know what you're talking about, do you?

First of all, we don't know HOW Farhan builds his pitching in a season where it is likely the Giants have a shot at winning it all. Despite the Giants' franchise record 107 wins last season, entering the season there was no reasonable expectation of winning it all. There was no reasonable expectation that the Giants would even make the playoffs in Farhan's first two seasons. Where is your logic?

This season it might be possible the Giants could enter the season with a good shot at winning a championship, but it likely would involve a lot of spending that might handcuff the Giants in 2023 and beyond, those being the Giants' BEST chances at winning it all. So it would be wrong to say we know how Farhan is going to build his pitching staff this off season. And even if we DID know for sure, we don't now how he'll approach the Giants' pitching in subsequent off seasons. Not to mention he still might make a pitching move or two that would change how we view the way he approaches pitching staffs.

What we DO know about Farhan is that he builds his team based on value. And we have a pretty good idea that is the best way to build a roster for strength and longevity.

What were the two things that kept the Giants from building a stronger dynasty last decade? First of all, they didn't build their roster strong enough to even make the playoffs in the years in between their three championships. Secondly, they weren't able to sustain their success, actually finishing the decade with a losing record.

After the first two seasons of last decade, the Giants had a winning percentage for the decade of .539 for the two seasons. This decade they have a winning percentage of .613. It's true the Giants haven't advanced even past the first round of the playoffs, but they've made them as often and have posted a MUCH higher winning percentage in doing so.

There are two problems with saying that the way Farhan builds his pitching staff can't go deep in the playoffs.

First, we don't know how he builds his pitching staff. We have only three year's experience, and the Giants didn't go into a single one of those winters with anyone believing they had much of a chance of going deep into the playoffs, meaning he hasn't yet built the type of staff he is likely to try to build in that situation.

Second, we know the Giants' pitching staff was good enough last season to win a franchise record 107 wins, and we know that it didn't advance in the playoffs not because of bad pitching, but because of bad hitting.

Again, guys, we should stop and think what we said before you hit the send button. We've ALL made mistakes, but if we apply the fact, logic and common sense approach, we won't make nearly as many.

[sharksrog]

The way Farhan built his pitching staff was just ADEQUATE for the regular season? The Giants allowed their 5th-lowest number of runs in the nearly 50 seasons of the 162-game era, and their pitching staff was just adequate?

Remember that simple question: Does what I just said make common sense? Once again, it does not.

[sharksrog]

Then Boly says, "I don't know how many times we have to say it, but that is correct!" Actually, you don't have to say it's correct even one time for it to be correct. But for it to be correct, it needs to be accurate. The way Farhan built his pitching staff last season was FAR MORE than adequate for the regular season, and we don't yet know HOW he builds his pitching staffs when it is clear he has an excellent hitting team or whether the Giants could get deep into the postseason if he built it that way.

I mean, the statement was wrong, and then it was wrong again.

[sharksrog]

As for how Farhan DID build his pitching staff last season, it worked out pretty well, didn't it? Perhaps Gabe Kapler could have rested the bullpen in particular more in the final month, but despite a franchise record 107 wins, the Giants were in one HECK of a pennant race. They were able to win on the last day, and that did give them four days off before their first playoff game. One would have thought that would be enough, but the bullpen under performed in their losses. Still, in their two wins and in their oh-so-close loss of Game 5, the bullpen yielded only one run in 6.2 innings. Unfortunately, since the Giants just didn't hit in the series, that one run cost them Game 5 and the series.

But giving up only one run in their 6.2 most important innings wasn't really all that bad, was it? The bullpen pitched poorly only in two games the Giants weren't going to win anyway. In high-leverage innings, they were quite good.

[Islandboagie]

Rog- Second, it was a lack of scoring, not a lack of pitching, that was the Giants' biggest problem. How many runs did the Giants allow in their two wins? That would be zero, nada, zilch. The starters gave up no runs in 12.1 innings, and the relievers gave up no runs in 5.2 frames. The Giants won one of those games despite scoring only one run.

Boagie- You're correct, it was a lack of scoring, which is why most of our pitchers caved without a comfortable lead that they were used to pitching with during the regular season. It was the Giants and Dodgers, did we think it was going to be a slugfest? The Dodgers and Giants often play close, low scoring affairs. Which is why the Giants just barely won the season series over the Dodgers despite winning 107 games.

I might also remind you that Logan Webb, whom made up a good chunk of your stats, was drafted prior to Zaidi joining the Giants...and it was only injuries that allowed Webb to get his chance to stick this season.

Furthermore, don't tell me I don't know what I'm talking about, it's rude and arrogant and you don't even watch half the fricken games. For you to tell anyone else they don't know what they're talking about is downright laughable. Boly will tell you how different it is to pitch with a big lead or pitch in a close game, since you clearly don't understand. I don't blame you for not understanding, I blame you for pretending that you do.

As for Zaidi, I think maybe he COULD build a good pitching staff that could be successful in the post-season, but thus far he's basically built a pitching staff much like the Dodgers, they get the job done in the regular season, but choke in the post-season.

[reedonly]

Dec 27, 2021 22:05:43 GMT -5 Islandboagie said:

Rog- Second, it was a lack of scoring, not a lack of pitching, that was the Giants' biggest problem. How many runs did the Giants allow in their two wins? That would be zero, nada, zilch. The starters gave up no runs in 12.1 innings, and the relievers gave up no runs in 5.2 frames. The Giants won one of those games despite scoring only one run.

Boagie- You're correct, it was a lack of scoring, which is why most of our pitchers caved without a comfortable lead that they were used to pitching with during the regular season. It was the Giants and Dodgers, did we think it was going to be a slugfest? The Dodgers and Giants often play close, low scoring affairs. Which is why the Giants just barely won the season series over the Dodgers despite winning 107 games.

I might also remind you that Logan Webb, whom made up a good chunk of your stats, was drafted prior to Zaidi joining the Giants...and it was only injuries that allowed Webb to get his chance to stick this season.

Furthermore, don't tell me I don't know what I'm talking about, it's rude and arrogant and you don't even watch half the fricken games. For you to tell anyone else they don't know what they're talking about is downright laughable. Boly will tell you how different it is to pitch with a big lead or pitch in a close game, since you clearly don't understand. I don't blame you for not understanding, I blame you for pretending that you do.

As for Zaidi, I think maybe he COULD build a good pitching staff that could be successful in the post-season, but thus far he's basically built a pitching staff much like the Dodgers, they get the job done in the regular season, but choke in the post-season.

Actually there was a lack of pitching in game 5.  The Giants were forced to not use Litell (playoff ERA 10.13), Leone(playoff ERA 16.20), and Garcia (playoff ERA 6.75) because they were ineffective in previous games.  Also, McGee (6.75 playfff ERA) was recovering from injury.  Even if Wilmer Flores was able to tie it up, they might have lost it in extras, anyway.  I mention the playoff ERA because it reflects how fatigued the bullpen was at that time and Boagie is correct in stating that the bullpen was not playoff ready.  Even if they somehow got past the Dodgers, the Braves probably would have beaten the Giants in the NLCS anyway with so many key bullpen members ineffective.  As such, I feel the Scherzer-Flores argument probably doesn't matter and even if LaStella were available, we're talking a one week extension, at most.   What Boagie is correct about is that he focuses on the big picture of the fatigued bullpen, not the singular Flores at-bat.  

One thing that was preventable that led to the use of bullpen games was Alex Wood coming down with COVID in September.  And to his day, I'm not sure if he even bothered to get vaccinated. 

[sharksrog]

I agree with you, Matt, that I shouldn't have said you don't know what you're talking about. But with regard to whether Farhan can build a pitching staff that can win it all, you don't.

You agreed with me that it was primarily hitting, not pitching, that kept the Giants from beating the Dodgers. The Giants' hitting was so weak that the Giants were unable to win even a single game when the bullpen gave up even a single run. You confirmed that my point about the hitting was correct, meaning it would have been more appropriate to criticize Farhan's building of HITTING than his building of pitching.

But either way, you're basing your criticism on ONE postseason. That's not nearly enough to say that a guy CAN'T build a pitching staff that goes deep into the playoffs.

You "reminded" me that Logan Webb wasn't drafted by Farhan. How many times on this board have I stated that while the Giants' minor leaguers have greatly improved, most of the improvement has come from guys drafted from the old regime. I think you aren't paying close attention to what I'm saying. I've made that statement at least three times -- and probably more.

Finally, you say as your final point that Farhan supposedly can't build a pitching staff to go deep into the playoffs that he builds it like the Dodgers. To be honest, I don't think he's EVER built a pitching staff as good as the Dodgers' staff was last season -- but they suffered injury and suspension that brought them back to the pack. They have made the playoffs each of the past seven seasons, and here is how they've done:

2015 -- NLDS

2016 -- NLCS

2017 -- Lost World Series

2018 -- Lost World Series

2019 -- NLDS

2020 -- Won World Series

2021 -- NLCS


Was there a team that did better these past seven seasons? I don't think so.

Finally, you contradicted your statement that the way Farhan builds a pitching staff can't get you deep into the postseason when you later said that he COULD build a staff that does so. I realize you're saying that in your opinion he would have to change the way he builds a pitching staff in order to do so, but it that true?

I believe the Giants' pitching staff was good enough LAST year to win it all, although their lack of hitting -- not their pitching -- prevented that. The Giants' ERA in their loss to the Dodgers was 3.48, not that much lower than the Braves' 3.06 when they beat the Astros and much LOWER than the Braves' 4.67 ERA when they beat the Dodgers. The Giants pitched much better against the Dodgers than the Braves did -- yet the Braves prevailed, not because of their poor pitching, but because of their hitting from unlikely sources such as Rosario. The Braves showed that it's not about being the best team; it's about being the hottest team at the right time.

As for the Giants' staff, their top four starters had ERA's of 2.81, 3.03, 3.17 and 3.89. Nothing wrong with that. They had 10 relievers with ERA's between 1.51 and 3.00. Nothing wrong with that either.

They simply stopped hitting. The Giants outpitched the Braves against the Dodgers by more than a run per game. But the Braves hit the HECK out of the ball.

Now, was the bullpen fatigued? I'm not sure (although it's hard not to believe Gabe Kapler when he said it was). Certainly they were used hard the last month of the season. But that had little to do with how Farhan built the bullpen. Despite the supposed overuse of the bullpen, it posted its 2nd- and 3rd- best ERA's in September and August -- 2.42 and 2.46, which is FABULOUS relieving down the stretch. If anything, the blame should fall on Gabe, not Farhan. If the bullpen was indeed overused, it was Gabe, not Farhan, who did so. But it's hard to blame Gabe either. The Dodgers' 106-win season force him to go all out even in the final day of the season in order to hold home-field advantage (and avoid a one-game play in) in the playoffs.

Finally, if the bullpen WAS overused down the stretch, wasn't four days off enough for it to recover? Certainly their 2.46 and 2.42 ERA's in August and September didn't indicate they were tired. It's quite possible that some of the bullpen's bad days simply came at the worst possible time.

One might criticize the Giants' bullpen when it was forming back in April and May and posted its worst ERA's of the season at 4.23 and 3.83. But from June through the end of the season, the bullpen posted a spectacular 2.59 ERA. My guess is that based on ERA, the Giants' bullpen was the best in baseball those final four months. And that was even though after never having used the bullpen as many as 100 innings in a month, Gabe used them for 121 innings in August and 137 in Septembe/October.

I think the bullpen pitched over their heads, but after May, they were really, really good. Which bullpens were better?

[sharksrog]

The Giants were forced to not use only McGee in Game 5 with the Dodgers. Can't pitch an injured pitcher. They may have CHOSEN not to use the other guys, but just because a pitcher is ineffective in a game doesn't mean you won't use him again. The Giants used the same guys -- Rogers, Doval and Gausman -- they likely would have used no matter who had been available. Maybe McGee would have gotten a shot had he been healthy. But in that game, Rogers, Doval and Gausman were the Giants' version of Trienen, Jansen and Scherzer. To the extent that it existed, bullpen fatigue didn't affect the relievers the Giants used in their two wins or in Game 5.

As I have stated, it likely wouldn't have changed the game's outcome if La Stella had been available to pinch hit for Flores, but it WOULD have given the Giants a better chance to win. Although the Giants DID lose because of the run Doval gave up, that was the only run the bullpen surrendered in their two wins or in Game 5. The problem was the hitting. La Stella MIGHT have changed that. It's unlikely that he would have -- Scherzer is darn good no matter whom he faces -- but wouldn't you have much rather had La Stella up than the 0-for-17 Flores?

A GM's job is to put together the best roster he can. Farhan did an incredible job of that. The manager's job is to motivate his players and put them in the best position to succeed. Gabe did an excellent job of that this season -- like Farhan, he was voted the best -- but I think it is clear that while the outcome would likely have been the same, the Giants would have had a slightly better chance of winning had La Stella been available.

Matt is second-guessing with regard to the bullpen. I think an objective analysis would conclude that given what he had going into the offseason a year ago, Farhan did a GREAT job of building a bullpen. If one were to second-guess, it would be whether Gabe overused the pen down the stretch. My personal belief is that he did a pretty good job. If the Giants had locked up the NL West earlier, it would have been a different story. But Gabe needed the bullpen heavily down the stretch, and with four days off between the end of the season and the beginning of the playoffs, the bullpen should have had plenty of time to rest. Plus, once the playoffs start, there is plenty of rest for the pitchers.

The Giants had four days off, then played two days, then had a day off, they played another two days, then had a day off, then played Game 5. One could almost argue that the bullpen had too MUCH rest, not that I'm making that argument. But even after the All-Star game, I don't think they had a stretch with four days off, two games in two days, another day off, two more games in two days, another day off and then Game 5.

With regard to not starting La Stella against the Opener, I was first-guessing, having emailed Matt prior to the game that Gabe shouldn't overreact to the Opener. I have conceded that Gabe may have known something I didn't (regarding La Stella's health, for instance). But based on what we know, while it likely wouldn't have changed the outcomes, not starting La Stella would have made sense and given the Giants a slightly better chance to win.

Hey, if that was the only "mistake" Gabe made, I forgive him. I think he did a marvelous job. But I think all the evidence we have here on this board points to his having been able to give the Giants a slightly better chance to win had he not started La Stella.

That is my point. The biggest problem the Giants had was that they stopped hitting. If La Stella had been able to hit for Flores, the result wouldn't have been likely to change. But if La Stella had been available to hit, I think it's clear the Giants' chances would have been slightly better. And that is the job of a manager -- to give his team the best chance to win.

[sharksrog]

Good point about Wood and COVID. I think teams should be able not to pay players for games they miss due to COVID tests if the player isn't vaccinated. If a non-vaccinated player received a false positive, I would probably excuse that.

But people who don't get vaccinated -- except for medical or religious reasons -- aren't using the brain God gave them. About 30% of this country frequently doesn't.

[reedonly]

Rog:2015 -- NLDS

2016 -- NLCS

2017 -- Lost World Series

2018 -- Lost World Series

2019 -- NLDS

2020 -- Won World Series

2021 -- NLCS


Was there a team that did better these past seven seasons? I don't think so.

reedonly: the dodgers themselves might view that as failure because they had highest payroll all those years.

[reedonly]

Dec 28, 2021 18:15:36 GMT -5 sharksrog said:

Good point about Wood and COVID. I think teams should be able not to pay players for games they miss due to COVID tests if the player isn't vaccinated. If a non-vaccinated player received a false positive, I would probably excuse that.

But people who don't get vaccinated -- except for medical or religious reasons -- aren't using the brain God gave them. About 30% of this country frequently doesn't.

Wood not only tested positive, he was symptomatic and had to spend time building himself back up again.  I'm not about to make it a political thing but I'm pretty sure he did not learn his lesson.  In 2021, he was out for about a month when the bullpen could have used some innings off.  

[klaiggeb]

Reed, glad you didn't take the political bait.

I almost did.

I don't read anything Roger posts, but for some reason, my eyes saw his shot at people not getting the shot.

It's everyone's personal choice, and I am really fed up with everyone being pro or con shot being everyone else's judge and jury.

[reedonly]

Dec 29, 2021 11:11:38 GMT -5 klaiggeb said:

Reed, glad you didn't take the political bait.

I almost did.

I don't read anything Roger posts, but for some reason, my eyes saw his shot at people not getting the shot.

It's everyone's personal choice, and I am really fed up with everyone being pro or con shot being everyone else's judge and jury.

Its not about politics but as far as Wood was concerned, the Giants were in the middle of a heated pennant race and when he went down, it really taxed the bullpen.  Presumably, he now has to get vaccinated because of San Francisco's stringent rules.  I don't care if he gets it or not but I do care that he missed time when he was needed. 

[sharksrog]

You make a good point about payroll, Reeder. Sports aren't fair in that regard. We here in the Bay Area are spoiled. The Giants have usually been among the top spenders, yet we decry that they don't spend more. When the 49ers were at their best, they were outspending teams by a LOT, and the same with the Warriors now. Until the past couple of years, the Sharks had actually been the most consistent franchise in the Bay Area, and they too were among the big spenders.

With their exceptionally high payroll, the Dodgers SHOULD be among the top teams every season. And they have been. But as I have pointed out, the best teams don't always win tournaments, which is what the playoffs are. The Giants DID win the tournament three times in five years, yet they probably weren't the best team in any of those seasons. If they had been a true dynasty, wouldn't they have been good enough in the intervening years to at least make the playoffs? In 2013, they didn't even reach .500.

I'm not an A's fan, but I surely feel sorry for those who are. Compared to them, we Giants fans are frontrunners.

[sharksrog]

IMO, getting the shot is everyone's personal choice, but those who don't get it (especially since they're the most likely not to wear masks) should be required to isolate. Otherwise, their freedom not to get the vaccine can trample the right of others not to get the virus from them.

Getting vaccinated and wearing masks definitely ISN'T political, but Donald Trump and others have made it that way. Trump thought wearing a mask made him look "weak," and eventually his horrid performance in containing the virus made even admitting its existence intolerable to him.

This should go to the political board, but almost no one posts there anyway.

Getting the shot or not IS a personal choice, but the unvaccinated should clearly face more stringent regulations than the vaccinated. We ARE talking LIVES -- and potential long term effect that could almost be worse than death. Like with climate control, we're talking a WORLDWIDE issue. We're all in this together -- except that many refuse to admit they're in it at all.

So, back to the political board.

[sharksrog]

So what we're saying here is that the way Farhan builds a bullpen allows a team to have its most successful season in franchise history, but not to go deep into the playoffs? Isn't that a bit contradictory?

[reedonly]

Dec 29, 2021 14:15:39 GMT -5 sharksrog said:

So what we're saying here is that the way Farhan builds a bullpen allows a team to have its most successful season in franchise history, but not to go deep into the playoffs? Isn't that a bit contradictory?

I don't think that is necessarily a contradiction.  

[sharksrog]

I agree, Reeder, that it isn't necessarily contradictory, but barring a cogent explanation, it is.

One way we could check is to see how good the Giants' pitching was against .500+ teams. Their ERA was 3.57. The World Champion Atlanta Braves' ERA against .500+ teams was 3.99. Advantage Giants. I already pointed out that in the playoffs, the Giants' ERA against the Dodgers was more than a run better than the Braves'. It would appear that the Giants' pitching WAS good enough to win it all, let alone advance deep into the playoffs.

Their hitting was probably good enough too. Their OPS against .500+ teams was .730, just above the .727 posted by the Braves. But the Braves hit in the postseason, whereas the Giants didn't. I mentioned that it might be helpful to look for batters who hit well against power pitchers, which is what teams face more of in the playoffs. But the Giants put up a .709 OPS against power pitchers, while the Braves struggled clearly more with just a .660 OPS.

One thing to watch for here: You seem pretty decent at factually and logically defending your conclusions. Mark is outstanding at it. But there are other posters who post like they know what they're talking about, but they have a hard time backing up their opinions with facts, analysis and logic.

You are correct that it is possible that a team can be highly successful in the regular season, yet not perform well in the playoffs. In fact, it happens a lot. But do we have evidence that that isn't more dependent on the roll of the dice -- getting hot at the right time or having opponents make mistakes -- than it is an indication that for instance a pitching can't be built right by a particular general manager?

The same posters who often are unable to back up their opinions with facts, analysis and logic are often the same ones who say they trust in Farhan, but indicate with their posts that they don't truly believe. Anyone who says that Farhan doesn't build a bullpen in a manner that allows a team to be successful in the postseason simply doesn't have enough evidence to back it up. If nothing else, Farhan's sample size isn't big enough. He's been IN the postseason only once.

Plus, the facts don't back it up even in that one season. First of all, the Giants performed poorly in the postseason not because they didn't pitch, but because they didn't hit. Against their one common postseason opponent, the Dodgers, the Giants significantly outpitched the Braves. In addition, the Giants had four good starters and as many as 10 good relievers -- with ERA's between 1.51 and 3.00 -- available for the postseason.

You are right, Reeder, that the statement wasn't NECESSARILY a contradiction. But we've seen precious little evidence otherwise. There are posters here who in baseball and apparently in their lives are long on opinions and short on evidence.