|
Post by reedonly on Dec 11, 2021 15:46:15 GMT -5
Greinke appears to be a future Hall of Famer, but last season his strikeout rate fell by 30%, which is highly concerning. On the other hand, his fastball was one mph faster than in 2020 and aside from the swing-and-miss component, his pitches didn't seem to be that much less effective. His ace days appear to be over, and he's probably not even a #2 anymore, but he still looks like an innings-eater. Would he be worth his projected 1/$15 salary? Given that the Giants seem to have more talent than innings-eating ability, perhaps. But I wouldn't sign him at anywhere close to that price. His expected ERA last season was 4.45, up from 3.79 in 2020 and 3.48 in 2019. Zack seems to be going the wrong direction. Tyler Anderson could be appealing. He got batters to go outside the zone last season more than ever, and he got more swinging strikes than any season since 2017, but he seems to be just an average starter. The Giants could indeed use another southpaw starter. I was hoping for Andrew Heaney, but the Dodgers beat the Giants to him. Greinke is a smart pitcher but I'm on the fence as far as him being able to contribute. Going forward, he's probably going to be a back end starter but I don't think he will want to be paid like one.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 11, 2021 15:56:44 GMT -5
Matt, if you believe the Giants signed Anthony DeSclafani for a year too long, you don't believe they got a good value. If DeSclafani isn't going to be any good in year three, he would be much less of a value at 3/$36 than at say 2/$30. But if he were worth 2/$30 for two seasons and could add even one win that third season, he would easily be worth 3/$36. An added win these days is worth about $8 million. Anthony was worth three wins last season. All he needs to be worth over the next four to earn his contract is four and a half wins. That's only a win and a half per season.
Per Fan Graphs, Anthony has been worth over $20 in three of his seven seasons. If he's worth over $20 million even one of the next three seasons, he'll likely earn his contract.
|
|
|
Post by reedonly on Dec 11, 2021 16:12:40 GMT -5
Though I am glad we signed him, that's what I was thinking, too. He only had that one good season, other than that he was just a so-so pitcher. "One good season" describes Robbie Ray, also.
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Dec 11, 2021 17:37:48 GMT -5
Rog- As for the length of Anthony's contract, you've said you think it's too long, but you've failed to provide reasons for your opinions.
Boagie- That's horse shit. I've given you multiple reasons why.
Desclafani hasn't been consistent, even last year he wasn't consistent. I also said that we have some younger pitchers (Harrison, Bednar, and Mikulski) that could be held back because of 3 year contracts to inconsistent pitchers like Desclafani. Just because they don't jive with your nerd websites doesn't mean they're not viable concerns. Open your mind to other possibilities than what you've been brainwashed to believe by the sabermetric websites.
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Dec 11, 2021 17:45:38 GMT -5
Reed- "One good season" describes Robbie Ray, also.
Boagie- That's true, Ray has had a few decent seasons..nothing really to take notice of until last season, even then, it fell short of what we expect of a Cy Young type season. What makes Ray desirable is his strikeout rate, which is very high.
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Dec 11, 2021 18:13:03 GMT -5
Rog- Matt, if you believe the Giants signed Anthony DeSclafani for a year too long, you don't believe they got a good value. If DeSclafani isn't going to be any good in year three, he would be much less of a value at 3/$36 than at say 2/$30. But if he were worth 2/$30 for two seasons and could add even one win that third season, he would easily be worth 3/$36. An added win these days is worth about $8 million. Anthony was worth three wins last season. All he needs to be worth over the next four to earn his contract is four and a half wins. That's only a win and a half per season.
Boagie- None of this means shit to me.
Tell me how a pitcher that pitched 2 complete game shutouts is only worth 3 wins, explain that to me and I will agree that I was wrong in assessing Desclafani's contract. Explain how he was only worth one more win in the other 29 starts.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 11, 2021 19:16:22 GMT -5
Matt, you're right that Anthony wasn't consistent, but almost no pitchers are. Last season Logan Webb and Kevin Gausman were the Giants' top two starters, but they weren't consistent.
Think back to 2010 when Tim Lincecum was highly instrumental in the Giants' first World Series win in 56 years. I'm going from memory, but if you look it up, you'll find I'm darn close to the way it was. Tim had a wonderful April and got his career ERA below even that of Sandy Koufax (and maybe Whitey Ford too). That meant that at that moment, he has the lowest ERA of any starter who hadn't pitched in the dead ball era (an honor Clayton Kershaw holds now). But he struggled in May, bounced back in June and July, then struggled mightily in August.
September 1st he pulled it back together, beating Jimenez 2-1 when Darren Ford stole third base and scored on a bad throw. (He would have been out with a good toss.) He then pitched well through the World Series. A very good season, but one that was horribly inconsistent.
I mentioned at the time that Ryan Vogelsong was highly consistent from the middle of the 2011 season through mid-2012. He wasn't the best starter in the majors during that time, but he was almost certainly the most consistent.
I've mentioned here that it's far more important for a starting pitcher to be good than to be consistent. Take two pitchers who pitch six innings a game for six games and both post 3.00 ERA's. The guy who is deadly consistent and gives up two earned runs in each of the six games will fare well. His team will likely win three or four of the six games. But the guy who is completely inconsistent and gives up all 12 of his runs in one horrible outing will see his team likely win four or five of the six games.
They talk about pitchers who do their jobs by giving their team a chance to win, but what we really want is a pitcher whose team actually wins those games. And given equal ERA's, the INconsistent guy's team will usually win more games than the consistent guy's team. For all his inconsistency in 2010 and a mediocre for him 3.44 ERA (at that time easily the highest of his career since his rookie season), the Giants went 21-12 in his starts.
Being consistent is good. Being good is even better. Tim's 2010 season was perhaps the most inconsistent of his career, but it was still one of his better seasons. How many pitchers, even very good ones, do you know that are consistently consistent?
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 11, 2021 19:36:48 GMT -5
I can see how you're confused by Wins Above Replacement, Matt. But GM's have used the concept for a long time now.
Baseball is the most even of the sports, in part because of the long season. In part it's also because in a single game, luck can play a big part, as is the case in most low-scoring sports. It is believed that a team made up completely of replacement-level players -- players who can be picked up on waivers or from the minor leagues -- would win about 30% of its games, or about 48 or 49 per 162-game season. Very few teams win fewer than that. Even the hapless Mets, about whom Jimmy Breslin asked, "Can't anybody here play this game?" won 40 out 160 games.
So the idea is to pick up wins in excess of what a team of replacement players brings. If a team is hoping to win 90 games, for instance, it needs players who can add 42 Wins Above Replacment (WAR). A team can do that if its eight position players and five starting pitchers can average close to three Wins Above Replacement each and the bench players and relievers can pick up the slack.
If a team doesn't have a way of measuring its players' contributions, how does it know how much it can afford to pay each player?
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 11, 2021 19:43:16 GMT -5
As for young pitchers being held back by DeSclafani's contract, I think that is quite unlikely.
First of all, the only two starters the Giants have under team control in 2024 are Webb and Anthony. That leaves three spots open -- probably even four with injuries. You mentioned three young pitchers, and if all three come through and Webb and DeSclafani stay healthy and productive, the Giants would have their five-man rotation in 2024 without anyone being held back. As long as DeSclafani stays healthy, the Giants could trade him if they wind up with two pitchers. That's called an abundance of riches and is a "problem" teams would love to have.
The three pitchers you mentioned will have precious little minor league experience by 2024, but if they are ready, the Giants very likely won't have a hard time finding a place for them. Let's put it this way, Matt. If all three of those guys somehow magically became ready THIS year, the Giants would likely find a way to work them in. Injuries would open up opportunities, and if all four starters were healthy at the deadline and not all of them were needed, contending teams LOVE to trade for starting pitching at the deadline.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 11, 2021 20:02:49 GMT -5
The reasons you guys give aren't usually strong. You say, for instance, that De Sclafani has had only one good season. In reality, he's had three pretty good ones (2016, 2019 and last season). As Reeder said, that same tag could apply to Robbie Ray, who received more than three times as much money as Anthony did. In reality, Ray has enjoyed two good seasons -- 2017 and last season -- and they were better than Anthony's good seasons. But do you see how the Giants took far less risk in giving DeSclafani $36 million over three seasons than the Mariners did in paying Ray $115 million over five?
Ray's career 15 WAR in eight seasons per Baseball-Reference is also a little better than DeSclafani's 10 WAR in seven. Don't you agree though that it seems more likely that DeSclafani will earn his contract than that Ray will? Ray would need to pitch nearly twice as well each season as DeSclafani in order to out earn Anthony, and he'd have to keep it up for five seasons, whereas Anthony needs to do so for only three. It is far to note that Ray is nearly a year and a half younger than Anthony, although he also has about 200 more innings on his arm despite being younger.
Robbie was REALLY good last season. (He won the Cy Young Award.) But if Anthony has truly been inconsistent over his career, Ray has been erratic. The key with Robbie's continued success is likely his ability to keep the very significant control and command gains he made last season. Anthony too improved those, but not to the same degree. For what it's worth, Anthony has been the most consistent of the two.
Last season Robbie had a 2.84 ERA, which bested Anthony's 3.17. For their careers, Ray stands at an even 4.00, while Anthony is just behind at 4.06. Which one would I rather have? I'll go with Ray, since the potential reward is higher. But would I be willing to pay three times as much for him as for Anthony? At that ratio, I like Anthony's risk/reward ratio considerably better.
If I were evaluating Robbie's potential value over the next five seasons, I'd have a hard time feeling comfortable with $115 million, whereas I'm very comfortable with Anthony's value being $36 million or higher. That type of analysis is likely why Anthony is a Giant, and Robbie isn't.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 11, 2021 20:11:31 GMT -5
I like the signings of Cobb and Wood as well as that of DeSclafani, but given their relative health over the past three seasons, I'm probably less worried about Anthony's contract than the other two. I do take comfort that the other two have very nice upside IMO. The Giants are actually paying Wood a slightly higher Average Annual Value ($12.5 million vs. $12 million) to Wood, and over the past three seasons, Alex has made only a little more than half as many starts as Anthony. Cobb has made even fewer, although he may have the most upside of the trio.
To be honest, I like all three pitchers, and I'm elated the Giants got them for $34 million less than the Mariners paid for Ray alone and $29 million less than the Blue Jays paid for Gausman.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 11, 2021 20:48:05 GMT -5
I have a hard time picking at Ray's Cy Young season. He led the AL in ERA, ERA+, WHIP, starts, innings pitched and strikeouts. You guys know how much I love Tim Lincecum, but Ray's WHIP last season was slightly lower than Tim's ever was and well below any of Tim's WHIP's except for 2009.
We probably shouldn't overlook that DeSclafani's ERA last season was #13, his WHIP was #17, and his inning pitched were #31. That would probably define a #1's season and certainly was quite strong for a #2. Only eight major league pitchers last season equaled Anthony in ERA, WHIP and IP. Only nine equaled him in ERA and IP. It would be a stretch, but one could argue that last season Anthony was one of the top 10 starters in baseball. As I say, it would be a stretch. I don't believe he was quite THAT good. But when it came to throwing a top ERA over a high number of innings pitched, he wasn't far off that level.
If over his contract Anthony pitches at HALF the level he's pitched at in his last two full seasons, he will have earned the pact. I don't believe we can say that about Ray or Gausman. I don't think we can say it even about Scherzer, and at 37, his risk may be higher. In fact, speaking of inconsistent (and clutch), when the Dodgers were battling it out for first place in the NL West and a bye from the one-game playoff, Max gave up 10 earned runs over 10.1 innings in his last two starts. Anthony patched together a 2.25 ERA over his final six starts of the season.
I would MUCH rather have Max than Anthony, but he's also close to six years older and three and a half times as expensive.
Let's do a comparison of the Giants' strong signings one and two years ago of first Gausman and then DeSclafani. The Giants signed Gausman for 1/$9 million and Kevin has since signed for a total of 6/$129. They signed DeSclafani for 1/$6, and were able to re-sign him for 3/$36. Gausman commanded a 50% premium compared to DeSclafani in their original signings, yet Kevin parlayed that into three and a half times what Anthony is now being paid.
At the same price, I'd rather take a chance on Gausman. But not when his present contract is three times as much as Anthony's is.
The more we look at risk and value, the better Anthony compares with the other, more expensive pitchers.
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Dec 11, 2021 20:58:01 GMT -5
Rog- Matt, you're right that Anthony wasn't consistent, but almost no pitchers are. Last season Logan Webb and Kevin Gausman were the Giants' top two starters, but they weren't consistent.
Think back to 2010 when Tim Lincecum was highly instrumental in the Giants' first World Series win in 56 years. I'm going from memory, but if you look it up, you'll find I'm darn close to the way it was. Tim had a wonderful April and got his career ERA below even that of Sandy Koufax (and maybe Whitey Ford too). That meant that at that moment, he has the lowest ERA of any starter who hadn't pitched in the dead ball era (an honor Clayton Chokeshaw holds now). But he struggled in May, bounced back in June and July, then struggled mightily in August.
September 1st he pulled it back together, beating Jimenez 2-1 when Darren Ford stole third base and scored on a bad throw. (He would have been out with a good toss.) He then pitched well through the World Series. A very good season, but one that was horribly inconsistent.
Boagie- You're right, Tim was very inconsistent in 2010, he definitely had some ups and downs that season.
If Tim didn't dominate in the post season, if he were almost 32 years old (the age Tim retired from baseball), and not coming off two back to back Cy Young seasons, and 2010 was considered his best season, I probably wouldn't have wanted the Giants to sign him to a 3 year deal either.
by the way, Tim won 9 games in the first half of 2010, and 7 in the second.
Desclafani won 10 in the first half and only 3 the second.
one definitely appears to be more inconsistent than the other.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 12, 2021 8:54:01 GMT -5
In terms of starting pitcher wins between the first and second halves of their respective seasons, you strongly point out that Tim in 2010 was far more consistent than Anthony 11 years later. But wins are a team stat, not an individual one. And consistency is performed on an outing-by-outing basis, not simply from one half to the other.
Let's look at Tim's streaks in 2010:
8 games 1.76 7+ innings
4 games 8.22 5+ innings
4 games 2.17 7+ innings
2 games 7.20 5- innings
5 games 2.52 7+ innings
5 games 7.82 5+ innings
6 games 1.92 7- innings
Tim had a very good season in 2010, but he was wildly inconsistent.
And Anthony in 2021:
9 games 2.03 6- innings
1 game 33.75 3- innings
8 games 1.40 6- innings
7 games 6.51 4- innings
6 games 2.25 5+ innings
If we compare the two, we see that Anthony had longer streaks. With the exception of his one 10-run start against the Dodgers and a very poor 7-game streak in late July and August, he was very consistent. Neither pitcher was what I would call especially consistent, although aside from that one horrible outing, Anthony approached it. The two had similar ERA's, but Tim easily pitched more innings, a sign both of the times and of his better endurance. Regarding wins and losses, the Giants went 21-12 in Tim's 33 starts and 21-10 in Anthony's 31 starts.
Because he pitched more innings, I would say Tim had the better season. Anthony had the more consistent one.
You mentioned that Tim won 9 games the first half and 7 the second, and that Anthony won 10 in the first half and only 3 in the second. Given that wins are team events, it might have been more pertinent to mention how the Giants went. In Tim's starts in the 2010 season, they went 12-6 in the first and 9-6 in the second. In Anthony's 2021 starts, they went 13-5 and 8-5. BOTH were pretty consistent in that regard, but again, we're comparing HALVES of seasons, not true streaks.
And Tim was clearly the streakier of the two.
Stats don't tell the whole story, but they tell a lot of it. Stats don't lie, but they are often misinterpreted. In this case, I don't believe you chose the more pertinent stats, Matt. Tim's 2010 season was better than Anthony's 2021 season (both were good), but Anthony's was easily the more consistent of the two. In a preview of the problems he would consistently begin to show two years later, Tim's 2010 season was wildly inconsistent.
I remember because I was living and dying with each one of those starts. Aside from a slump he hit in June of his rookie season -- one in which I told his dad I would pay his way down to SF to help get him out of the slump, although his dad said Tim wanted to work it out himself, which he did after four straight poor outings beginning when he lost a big lead against the Phillies in the rain on June 3rd -- Tim was pretty consistent, until he hit a rough spot in May of 2010 and seemed to somehow almost fall apart in August of that season. Incredibly, the Giants lost all five of Tim's starts that August, but they bounced back to win five of his six starts in September/October and four of his five starts in the postseason.
I believe it was after that 2010 season that the Giants wanted to sign Tim for 5/$100 million. Although he wound up making almost that much over the rest of his career, as it turned out, he would have been better off taking that pact. But given how well he had pitched to that point in his career, he made the smart decision to reject it. Had his career continued on its course at that time and had he pitched until say now, he might have made $300 million or more. I once told his dad he might make half a billion in his career, and if he hadn't flamed out and had enjoyed a long career, that might have been possible. Tim got off to much the better start to his career, but the guy drafted immediately after him, Max Scherzer, will go over $350 million in earnings with the contract he recently signed.
Max has already made $221 million, and Fan Graphs says he has been worth just under -- get this -- half a billion. They say Tim was worth $175 million, almost all of it through 2011.
They calculate Mike Trout has been worth almost $600 million in his 11-year career. He cleared the half billion mark early in his ninth season. If he stays healthy, he could become the first player to be worth a billion, although Babe Ruth certainly would have been had he played today the way he played nearly a century earlier. Willie Mays and Barry Bonds would have been billion dollar babies.
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Dec 12, 2021 14:21:43 GMT -5
You can compare Desclafani with whoever you'd like...but when I said Desclafani was inconsistent, I was correct. Going 10-3 in the first half and only 3-4 in the second half demonstrates that. Having a 2.68 era in the first half and a 4.03 in the second, WHIP being 0.997 in the first, and 1.260 in the second..those numbers all demonstrate that.
That IS inconsistent.
Desclafani was a completely different pitcher in the second half of the season, so much that he was held off until the fourth game of the NLDS.
But like many times before you want to use the smoke and mirror argument. Your demented goal in life is to find a way for someone to be wrong, even when they aren't.
Tim Lincecum started 2010 as the ace, and ended the season as the ace. Tim was never demoted, they never lost faith in him, and when the post-season came he was our #1, and he took that all the way to November 1st. I get the comparison you're attempting to make, but trying to compare Tim Lincecum and Anthony Desclafani is a weak argument, and shows that (as Randy would say) you really don't get it.
That being said, I hope Desclafani pitches more like he did during the first half than he did the second over these next 3 seasons. But what he did in the first half was elite, so I have to wonder..how often are we going to see that elite level from him again? Logic tells me that was rather uncharacteristic, because it's uncharacteristic from anyone that isn't an ace pitcher, even for an ace that's considered a good streak. Based on his career numbers I think we're more likely to see the second half Desclafani most of the time, and without that elite level to balance out the bad, Desclafani's 3 seasons will be mediocre at best. Again, I think that's fine for a bottom of the rotation guy, but let's not kid ourselves and believe we're getting a #2 at a bargain price.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 12, 2021 16:12:56 GMT -5
Come on, Matt. I never once said Anthony WASN'T inconsistent. My exact words were "Matt, you're right that Anthony wasn't consistent. But almost no pitchers are." I think you had your mind made up to argue and didn't read very closely what I wrote.
You say that Anthony was a completely different pitcher in the second half than in the first half, but in reality, he was a completely different pitcher in the secone half of July and in August, then recovered strongly in September/October, when he put up a 2.25 ERA down the stretch. You say we don't know when we'll see the first-half DeSclafani again, but we essentially saw him in the season's final month.
If you want to compare DeSclafani's season to another pitcher, I would compare it to Kevin Gausman's season. Kevin got off to an even better start than Anthony, but he too fell off in the second half. The difference was that Kevin didn't recover nearly as much in the final month of the season. Kevin made two more starts than Anthony and pitched 24 more innings, but overall their seasons were similar. Their ERA's were within 0.36 of each other, and their WHIPS were within .05. You seem to like using won-loss record, and the Giants won 21 games with each pitcher, Gausman starting twice more than DeSclafani and losing two more times.
The difference in their contracts? Two years and $74 million.
You said Anthony had only the one good season, but in reality that comes close to describing both Gausman and Robbie Ray, as Reeder mentioned. Prior to last season, Kevin never had an ERA lower than 3.57. Anthony actually put up a 3.28 in 2016 -- and he did so in a hitters' park, giving him an ERA+ of 130, or one point higher than last season. (An ERA+ of 100 is average, meaning Anthony was 29% better than the average pitcher last season and 30% better in 2016. Kevin's 145 ERA+ last season was clearly better than Anthony's, but his previous best was 119, also in 2016.
I'm not saying I wouldn't rather have Kevin than Anthony, but their difference in value isn't truly $74 million, is it? I think we will see that Farhan made the right choice.
If we compare the two pitchers, Kevin was clearly better last season, but it Anthony was also quite good. If we compare careers, Kevin has been 5% better than the average pitcher, while Anthony has been 4% better. Ray has been 10% better than average. Entering last season, all three were even closer together.
You're simply not giving DeSclafani enough credit, Matt. Or you're giving Gausman and Ray too much. Possibly a little of each. Personally I like Ray the best, and I see the difference between him and Kevin as being greater than the difference between Kevin and Anthony. Ray was quite consistent last season, although neither Gausman nor DeSclafani weren't. Both were good, but not as consistent.
Which signing of the three will likely be the best value? I think Anthony has the best chance, followed by Robbie, then by Kevin. Anthony easily has the best chance, since he cost only a third as much as either of the others.
Let's put it this way, Matt. Boly agrees with you on Anthony. Farhan agrees with me. Is Farhan or Boly more likely to be right? Not am I or you more likely to be right. Is Farhan or Boly more likely?
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 12, 2021 16:41:38 GMT -5
We're talking about Anthony over the next three seasons. Despite the shortened 2020 COVID season, Fan Graphs says Anthony has been worth $44 million the past three. That's slightly more than the $41 million Robbie has been worth, although it's clearly behind Kevin's $64 million.
But the Giants are getting for $36 million a pitcher who has been worth three million more than the pitcher the Blue Jays just signed for $115 million. How are you not seeing the value and instead questioning the third year to Anthony? If Anthony were getting five years, I could see the question. But he's getting two years FEWER than either Kevin or Robbie, pitchers he's come close to equaling over his career and didn't pitch much worse than last season.
Robbie is risky because of the five-year term, his not being much more than average prior to last season, and his being basically a two-pitch pitcher. Kevin for the same reasons, plus his poor second half. Anthony's risk factors are similar to Kevin's, but he has four plus pitches and his contract is for a third as much.
Robbie and Kevin each have a better pitch than Anthony, but Robbie had only two plus pitches last season. Kevin didn't use his slider much, but it was slightly positive as a third plus pitch. Anthony had four plus pitches (four-seamer, two-seamer, slider and change up). Anthony also has a curve, but he didn't use it much last season, which was probably good, since it was slightly negative.
Perhaps in comparing these pitchers we could say that Kevin and particularly Robbie have better stuff, but Anthony may be the best PITCHER of the three. And it's not like Anthony is a soft thrower. His 94 mph fastball is nothing to sneeze at.
IMO you're simply not giving Anthony enough credit, Matt. You say he's a bottom-of-the rotation guy, but recently he's pitched more like a #2. And his 4.06 career ERA isn't far from #2 territory. Nor his 104 career OPS+. Name me 60 starters you can show are better than Anthony, and I'll agree with you that he's no more than a #2. I don't think you can do so.
|
|
|
Post by reedonly on Dec 12, 2021 16:49:29 GMT -5
You can compare Desclafani with whoever you'd like...but when I said Desclafani was inconsistent, I was correct. Going 10-3 in the first half and only 3-4 in the second half demonstrates that. Having a 2.68 era in the first half and a 4.03 in the second, WHIP being 0.997 in the first, and 1.260 in the second..those numbers all demonstrate that. That IS inconsistent. Desclafani was a completely different pitcher in the second half of the season, so much that he was held off until the fourth game of the NLDS. But like many times before you want to use the smoke and mirror argument. Your demented goal in life is to find a way for someone to be wrong, even when they aren't. Tim Lincecum started 2010 as the ace, and ended the season as the ace. Tim was never demoted, they never lost faith in him, and when the post-season came he was our #1, and he took that all the way to November 1st. I get the comparison you're attempting to make, but trying to compare Tim Lincecum and Anthony Desclafani is a weak argument, and shows that (as Randy would say) you really don't get it. That being said, I hope Desclafani pitches more like he did during the first half than he did the second over these next 3 seasons. But what he did in the first half was elite, so I have to wonder..how often are we going to see that elite level from him again? Logic tells me that was rather uncharacteristic, because it's uncharacteristic from anyone that isn't an ace pitcher, even for an ace that's considered a good streak. Based on his career numbers I think we're more likely to see the second half Desclafani most of the time, and without that elite level to balance out the bad, Desclafani's 3 seasons will be mediocre at best. Again, I think that's fine for a bottom of the rotation guy, but let's not kid ourselves and believe we're getting a #2 at a bargain price. There is no evidence of DeSclafani using sticky stuff but when a pitcher is uncharacteristically good in the first half of 2021 and then a big dropoff in the second half this should be in the back of your mind to at least give more weight to the second half. Evaluating pitchers in 2021 is a little trickier because of the foreign substance crackdown and you would think that the second half stats are more improtant. If Dave Flemming can point fingers at the Dodgers using the sticky, its only fair to suspect Giants players, as well. Just like with Kevin Gausman, one would have to be careful about treating the 2021 stat line as a single body of work and more so than in other seasons, pre-crackdown and post-crackdown breakdowns takes on greater importance if there is a big difference in the split.
|
|
|
Post by reedonly on Dec 12, 2021 17:03:24 GMT -5
Rog- As for the length of Anthony's contract, you've said you think it's too long, but you've failed to provide reasons for your opinions. Boagie- That's horse shit. I've given you multiple reasons why. Desclafani hasn't been consistent, even last year he wasn't consistent. I also said that we have some younger pitchers (Harrison, Bednar, and Mikulski) that could be held back because of 3 year contracts to inconsistent pitchers like Desclafani. Just because they don't jive with your nerd websites doesn't mean they're not viable concerns. Open your mind to other possibilities than what you've been brainwashed to believe by the sabermetric websites. Actually, I think DeSclafani's contact does not hold back our younger pitchers. They don't currently have whole lot of starter prospects at upper levels currently. I would absolutely be delighted if Harrison, Bednar, and Mikulski step up but I think we're talking 2024 at the earliest and odds are probably not all three of them. I think one of the reasons why they drafted so many pitchers last June was because the cupboard was barren.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 12, 2021 17:11:39 GMT -5
By the way, Anthony ISN'T an elite pitcher, although as you say he came close in last season's first half. But over his career he's been a good pitcher; in 2019 he was very good; and last season he was very, very good. It seems pretty likely that over the next seasons he'll be good, and he might even be very good.
With all three pitchers the Giants signed this winter, it's not a question of whether they can pitch well; it's more if they can stay healthy enough to do so. In Anthony's case, he's made 62 starts over the past two full seasons. And posted a 3.53 ERA. How many pitcher do you think pitched as many innings and posted as low an ERA? 10? 15? 20? I'm going to make the over/under a dozen. Will you take the under or the over?
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 12, 2021 17:14:36 GMT -5
Let me ask you this, Matt. You say you don't think DeSclafani is a #2 starter. With a 3.53 ERA over 334 innings in the past two seasons, what do you think it would take to be a #2 starter? Personally I think he has easily met both the innings criterion and the ERA test. I think he's actually been close to a #1 over that time.
Now, he didn't pitch much over the COVID season of 2020, but in the past two full seasons, he's been darn good. And that's not good enough to be a #2? There have been 60 starters over that time who have been better than he?
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 12, 2021 17:54:00 GMT -5
Beyond the Box Score speaks highly of Anthony DeSclafani and describes him as a mid-rotation starter. I think they're selling him a little short, but they do say there isn't a team that couldn't use his 150 innings. They do mention that in 28 of his 31 starts, he allowed three or fewer runs. Perhaps I haven't give him enough credit for consistency. That certainly SOUNDS consistent.
The Giants exceeded expectations for a variety of reasons, but Anthony DeSclafani’s year is perhaps the most emblematic of their success. Coming off an abysmal 2020, DeSclafani signed a one-year deal for just $6 million. He then went on to have an excellent campaign. He posted career-best marks in strikeout rate (22.5), ERA (3.17), FIP (3.62), and rWAR (4.1). In 28 out of his 31 starts, he allowed three or fewer runs. Suffice it to say, he proved he’s worth much more than one year, $6 million.
It was reasonable to expect an improvement from DeSclafani. 2020 was an aberration and he was moving from a bandbox to Oracle Park, where dingers go to die. However, Oracle has played much more neutral since the fences were brought in before the 2020 season. Baseball Reference’s one-year park factors actually had it slightly favoring hitters in 2021.
The Giants also have a robust analytics department and coaching staff, but DeSclafani isn’t a radically different pitcher from his days in Cincinnati. The biggest change is that DeSclafani’s slider became his primary pitch, and it doesn’t take a crack team of scientists working around the clock to suggest that a hurler should throw his best pitch more. The point is that Farhan’s Secret Stuff was just water and that the power was within DeSclafani all along. Maybe he’s not a true number two starter, but he’s not going to turn into a pumpkin if signs elsewhere.
Of course, the Giants would like to keep him around even though they didn’t extend him the qualifying offer. With Kevin Gausman and Alex Wood joining Disco in free agency, Logan Webb is looking around an empty clubhouse like it’s the series finale of a ‘90s sitcom. The Giants already met with DeSclafani’s agents at the GM meetings last week, and it sounds like it will require a multi-year deal to keep the righty in orange and black.
The starting pitching market is moving quickly, though. Eduardo Rodríguez signed a five-year deal with the Tigers. Noah Syndergaard signed a one-year deal with the Angels. Justin Verlander re-signed with the Astros. José Berríos even signed a seven-year extension. There’s going to be competition for DeSclafani especially since he won’t cost a draft pick to sign.
The Mets are in desperate need of starting pitching. Carlos Carrasco had his worst year as a big leaguer, and Taijuan Walker imploded after making the All-Star team. Billy Eppler’s biggest challenge with the Mets is proving he can build a competent rotation, and he never really came close to accomplishing that with the Angels.
The Cubs make sense as a landing spot as well. They’re not likely to shoot for the top arms on the market, but they could use more rotation depth. Kyle Hendricks had a career-worst year in 2021, and Alec Mills and Justin Steele don’t have quite the upside DeSclafani brings.
Of course, there isn’t a team in baseball that couldn’t use 150 solid innings from a middle rotation arm, so DeSclafani won’t have a shortage of suitors. Disco Tony does not need to advertise.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 12, 2021 17:56:30 GMT -5
From Alex Pavlovic:
or all of the secrecy at Oracle Park and the occasional gamesmanship with the lineup, the Giants will sometimes flip all their cards over for the baseball world to see. F
Farhan Zaidi and Scott Harris said repeatedly during and after a 107-win season that they intended to keep the gang together, and so far they're checking off every box. Brandon Crawford was re-signed during the season, Brandon Belt accepted the qualifying offer, and on Monday, the Giants announced a three-year deal with Anthony DeSclafani and reportedly are getting close to bringing Alex Wood back, too.
Zaidi telegraphed all of this after he signed Crawford to an extension and again after the Giants lost in the NLDS, and the strategy didn't all have to do with the 107 wins. The Giants felt they found a special mix in the clubhouse, one that truly was greater than the individual parts, and it was hard for anyone to argue after watching what unfolded over six months.
"The way this group gets along off the field as well as the way they were able to bring out the best in each other on the field, it just kind of adds a level of motivation to retain as many of these guys as you can," Zaidi said last month, "Which you would have after a season like this anyway."
This won't be a total rerun of 2021, of course. Buster Posey's retirement guaranteed that no matter what Zaidi and Harris do before February, the clubhouse and lineup will be dramatically different. In re-signing DeSclafani, the Giants also DFA'd Alex Dickerson, who was going to get non-tendered next week anyway.
There will be changes, but when it comes to their rotation, the Giants are poised to surround Logan Webb with as many familiar faces as possible.
"I think for us to kind of keep a lot of the same fabric of the roster was really important," Zaidi said Monday afternoon. "There's still ways we can improve and upgrade but I think there's sort of proof in concept with the group of players that was here last year and that's going to continue to be a theme of ours this offseason. We can't be overly narrow-minded, we need to make sure we're exploring the entire market both in trades and free agency for ways to improve, but again, our free agents have expressed interest in coming back, which is a great sign.
"A lot of them had really good seasons and we think they can continue to help us going forward."
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 12, 2021 17:58:57 GMT -5
Now, Farhan isn't going to talk down his signings, but his calling Anthony a "really comfortable and secure pitcher" is nice praise. "He obviously had a really nice year for us," Giants president of baseball operations Farhan Zaidi told reporters Monday. "You know, beyond his individual stats, we were 21-10 in games that he started. So the team had a lot of success when he took the ball, which obviously is of the ultimate importance. "His interest was in doing a multiyear deal, and we actually think we're going to get a sort of really comfortable and secure pitcher in Anthony now that he's on a multiyear deal. So it just seemed like was the best fit for both parties."
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 12, 2021 18:01:27 GMT -5
Bleacher Report says of the DeSclafani signing "A $12 million AAV for that tier of the market is pretty reasonable." Aside from Matt and Boly, we don't see anyone talking down the signing.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 12, 2021 18:05:31 GMT -5
From The McCovey Chronicles:
"There was some thought that the Giants might extend the Qualifying Offer to DeSclafani. Re-signing him for three years, for not even twice the Qualifying Offer cost, shows that it was a smart move for the Giants to hold out."
See, Matt, if one thinks it would have been a good deal for the Giants if they had offered an $18.4 million Qualifying Offer to Anthony, it's hard not to feel they got an even better deal at 3/$36.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 12, 2021 18:24:59 GMT -5
Before re-signing DeSclafani, Farhan gave his reason for not giving Anthony a Qualifying Offer: “We just felt in this case, he was a guy who probably earned and would thrive with the security of a multiyear deal, so that’s what we’re talking about with him.” I think the key words were that Farhan felt he "would thrive with the security of a multiyear deal." Clearly Farhan wasn't overly worried about committing for three seasons. No guarantee he'll be right, of course, but how has Farhan's judgment looked so far? Possibly as good even as Boly's?
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Dec 12, 2021 18:34:02 GMT -5
Rog- Let's put it this way, Matt. Boly agrees with you on Anthony. Farhan agrees with me. Is Farhan or Boly more likely to be right? Not am I or you more likely to be right. Is Farhan or Boly more likely?
Boagie- I think Farhan probably had to add that extra year to sign Desclafani. That's just a guess, but since coming to the Giants he's stuck with 1 and 2 year deals.
Zaidi never said "ok, we have the frontline starters we need to compete next year" nor did he suggest Desclafani was anything more than back end rotation starter. 12 million a year would suggest he's not that enamored with Desclafani as a frontline guy. Show me where he said Anthony was a frontline starter, a number 2, or that he wanted to give Desclafani 3 years. my issue wasn't with what Zaidi said, it was your comments I disagreed with.
I think Zaidi had to be aggressive in signing his pitchers fast because the price was high for starting pitchers and they were flying off the shelves. I think he felt the pressure of having to fill 4 vacancies in the rotation and wanted to lock up at least 3 as soon as possible.
Again, more smoke and mirrors from you. You try to put me up against the GM saying he disagrees with me and agrees with you, when that's never actually been stated. Not to mention, I actually think Desclafani at $12 million a season is a good deal, it's only the 3 years that I question.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 12, 2021 18:34:05 GMT -5
Here is what MLB Trade Rumors said when they ranked Anthony their #22 Free Agent, just ahead of Justin Verlander. The way MLBTR ranks Free Agents is by the total value of their expected contract. They saw Anthony to sign for 3/$42, or two million higher than the 2/$40 they predicted for Justin.
DeSclafani had put together some solid 3-WAR type seasons for the Reds in 2015 and 2019, but he scuffled in 2020 with a right teres major strain that limited him to seven starts. The Giants jumped in with a one-year, $6MM contract and a rotation job. The result was a 3.17 ERA that ranked 11th in the NL among those with at least 150 innings.
In five of the past seven seasons, DeSclafani has started at least 20 games — the exceptions being the shortened 2020 season and 2017, when he missed the season due to a ligament issue in his right elbow (but notably avoided surgery). In four of his five mostly healthy seasons, “Disco” has pitched to a 4.05 ERA or better.
DeSclafani’s skills and history suggest he’s more of a 4.00 ERA type pitcher than the 3.17 level he showed in 2021, but that would still be plenty valuable for clubs seeking mid-rotation innings at a reasonable price. We discussed whether a four-year deal was possible and agreed it’s not out of the question, but we see a three-year deal as the likelier outcome.
Intriguing that MLBTR thought it was possible that the 34-year-old Anthony might received as long as a four-year contract, although they believed three was more likely (and they were proven right).
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 12, 2021 18:41:00 GMT -5
Fan Graphs said:
It’s really not that complicated sometimes. When Anthony DeSclafani is healthy, he’s a pretty good starting pitcher, as we saw in 2021. We also saw that in 2015, his first full season in the big leagues, and in ‘19, which was almost a mirror image of this season other than the home runs, which were mostly driven by playing in Great American Ball Park.
Fan Graphs saw three good seasons from Anthony, not one. His 2+ WAR in each of those seasons tends to back that up. How about an over/under of 70 starts from Anthony over the next three seasons? If he makes 70 starts, he needs only to be worth half a million per start to earn his contract. The past three seasons, including 2020 where he was limited to just seven starts by injury and the COVID-shortened season, he has made 69 starts, being worth, according to Fan Graphs, a little over $600,000 per start.
Want to take the over or under on 70 starts? The over or under on $44 million of value? Even if I took the under on starts, I might take the over on value.
|
|