|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 22, 2021 12:48:05 GMT -5
Good point about the length of spring training. If, on the other hand, the season is shortened, that could take some of the strain off his arm and limit innings worries.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 22, 2021 13:28:06 GMT -5
Circling back to the beginning of this post, I got my first 2022 fantasy book yesterday, and whom do I see as their #35 rated starting pitcher? None other than Anthony DeSclafani. That's a little higher than I had him rated. I had him around #40 and let the board talk me down to about #50. In reality, I think the gap between say #30 and #60 may not be huge, and one could make an argument for higher or lower in that range for many pitchers.
And of course fantasy isn't the same as real baseball. But for starting pitchers, it's darn close. Starting pitchers are rated on ERA, WHIP, wins and strikeouts. I think Anthony gets a little bump with regard to wins, since he'll likely get above-average run support. He's an average strikeout pitcher at best, so if anything, he might get a little knock down there. On balance I would say he's slightly more valuable in fantasy than real baseball, but only by a little. Which might reinforce that in real baseball, he's "only" the 40th to 50th starting pitcher.
That backs up our conclusion that ON A PLAYOFF TEAM, Anthony is probably only a #3, not a #2, but overall, he's a #2. What he most definitely isn't is a #4. Just no way to evaluate him that lowly. That would mean there are 90 or more starting pitchers ahead of him, and I can't come close to finding that many. He might be only a #4 on a playoff team, but that team would have to possess a very deep rotation. It would need to be deeper than the average playoff rotation.
I think at worst the Giants have a solid overall #2 in DeSclafani, a solid #3 overall in Wood (who might even be considered a #2) and a solid #4 in Cobb, who is a #4 at worst. As a #1, Logan Webb might be considered the shakiest in his rating, but most consider his solid combination of strikeouts and ground balls to offset the risk of his short tenure of success.
I want to comment again on one other point. Matt said he liked DeSclafani on a qualifying offer of 1/$18.4, but worried that three years might be too long. He threw out that Anthony might block one of the young pitchers in 2024. That seemed a frivolous argument at best, since the chance that more than three young Giants starters will be ready is negligible, and if that were somehow to be the case, the Giants could likely with injuries use six starters anyway and could trade DeSclafani if he truly were getting in the way.
Which leaves us to decide if the net 2/$17.6 final two years of DeSclafani's offer is risky. If DeSclafani is worth 1/$18.4, he's likely worth at LEAST $12 million for a second season. That means that if he's a decent game at 1/$5.6 for the final season, that third season isn't truly risky. The Dodgers just signed Andrew Heaney, whose career ERA is 4.72 and whose ERA soared to 7.32 last season, for 1/$8.5. That tells us Anthony is unlikely to be very risky at nearly $3 million less for that third season.
No contract is totally without risk. But if a player is worth $18.4 million for one season, he's highly likely to be worth $17.6 million for two more seasons. Look at it this way, Matt. You liked Anthony at 1/$18.4, and the Giants are getting Anthony for two MORE seasons not only not having to pay $18.4 million more per season, but not even $18.4 million more for TWO added seasons.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 22, 2021 19:36:55 GMT -5
If the Giants were able to add say Carlos Rodon, and Carlos were to stay healthy, their starting pitching would be really strong. As it is right now, it's probably above average one through four, although #5 right now would be wide open. At a minimum, the Giants will add depth to the rotation, and I suspect it's at least 50/50 that they'll add another substantial starter.
One thing to remember too is that starters are going perhaps an inning less or perhaps even more than an inning less than since we were kids, so the bullpen is becoming more and more important. To the extent that the Giants use an Opener, the ratio swings even more toward the bullpen. And solid relievers can often be picked up on the cheap.
|
|
|
Post by reedonly on Dec 23, 2021 9:49:29 GMT -5
Problem with relying more on the bullpen is that it seems to be one of Farhan's blind spots when he was with the Dodgers and again with the Giants. Last year, the Dodgers were able to use Treinen, Graterol and Kelly to bridge to the end (acquired after Farhan left) and Giants were relying too much on the likes of Leone. Logic says that if the starters are going one less inning, that means the bullpen goes one more inning. Developing Doval has helped a lot but they will need two more. Farhan needs to pay more attention to the bullpen if they want to have any hope of competing again, if only because we have starting pitchers who probably would rarely see batter more than twice and if they want to go with opener games. In addition to finding guys to make 162 starts, they need to find guys to bridge 500 middle innings. Also, Kapler used the bullpen so much that he admitted that they were gassed at the end. It may not matter what DeSclafani does or if they get Rodon wih they don't take care of business in the middle.
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Dec 23, 2021 10:41:45 GMT -5
That's a very good point, Reed. Baseball has basically gone away from the long reliever, and I don't think that's a smart choice. We saw how valuable Mota was in 2010, and especially Petit was in 2012-2014, and even Timmy was in the 2012 post-season. I think it would definitely help the work load put on the rest of the bullpen to adopt the long reliever again, or in Timmy's case, the super reliever. Obviously finding a pitcher with the stuff and reputation of a Tim Lincecum would be difficult, but another Petit would be doable. Not only does it give the bullpen rest, but it also takes stress off the starters.
|
|
|
Post by reedonly on Dec 23, 2021 11:20:46 GMT -5
That's a very good point, Reed. Baseball has basically gone away from the long reliever, and I don't think that's a smart choice. We saw how valuable Mota was in 2010, and especially Petit was in 2012-2014, and even Timmy was in the 2012 post-season. I think it would definitely help the work load put on the rest of the bullpen to adopt the long reliever again, or in Timmy's case, the super reliever. Obviously finding a pitcher with the stuff and reputation of a Tim Lincecum would be difficult, but another Petit would be doable. Not only does it give the bullpen rest, but it also takes stress off the starters. The biggest weakness Farhan has is that he will take care of getting starters and back end of the bullpen but leave the middle of the pen almost as an afterthought. If a pitcher like Leone or Jackson is supposed to be the bridge, that just means they are there be default and they didn't really address the issue. Notice after Farhan left the Dodgers, the Dodgers made this a priority over starting pitching (Dodgers traded Maeda for Graterol). If they are not going to let starting pitchers for a third time through the lineup, they are not going to get away with it simply by using bullpen matchups. Also bullpen depth need to be addressed. McGee broke down last year because he was getting run out there every day and most of the rest were ineffective because of fatigue. If Castro develops, he could be an important piece of that bridge but I hear they might try to stretch his outings as a potential fifth starter. Finding a long man like Petit or Mota will help but they need to find their own Treinen, Kelly, or Graterol to run out there more regularly.
Joe Kelly himself is available but he suffered a biceps strain and Dodgers declined their option on him.
|
|
|
Post by reedonly on Dec 23, 2021 11:36:37 GMT -5
Good point about the length of spring training. If, on the other hand, the season is shortened, that could take some of the strain off his arm and limit innings worries. If you have to think about it like that, it's probably not worth the risk. You don't get into accidents by leaving your car in the garage. You don't get anywhere but you don't have to pay for collision.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 23, 2021 16:17:36 GMT -5
I don't think what we're talking here about is a long reliever. When I think of a long reliever, I think of a former starter who can come into a game and eat up innings when the starter is knocked out early. Depending on the game situation, I think of a guy who can go three to five innings as required. Wikipedia defines a long reliever as "a relief pitcher in baseball who enters the game if the starting pitcher leaves the game early.[1]
"Long relievers often enter in the first three innings of a game[2] when the starting pitcher cannot continue, whether due to ineffective pitching, lack of endurance, rain delays, injury, or ejection. The hope is that the long reliever will be able to get the game under control, and hopefully his team's offense will be able to help get the team back into the game. The hope is also that the long reliever will pitch long enough to save other relievers in the bullpen from having to pitch.
"Long relievers are usually players who used to be starters either in the major leagues or in the minors (and still can be a temporary starter if one of the normal starters is injured or otherwise unavailable)."
I think what we're talking about is a reliever who can pitch multiple innings if necessary but is usually used for two innings or less. You mentioned the value of Mota in 2020, Matt, but among his 56 appearances, Guillermo pitched two or more innings only three times (2.0 innings twice and 2.1 frames once). Only nine times did he enter a game before the 7th inning, and he entered before the sixth only once.
Guillermo averaged just under an inning per outing (54.0 innings in 56 games). I suspect you think of the underrated Tyler Rogers as mostly a right-handed specialist, yet last season Tyler was used for just over an inning per outing (81.0 innings in 80 games) even though he pitched nearly half again as many games as Mota did.
Petit was much closer to a long reliever, even starting some games for the Giants, yet last season for the A's, Petit himself averaged just an inning per game (78.0 innings in 78 games). What you were talking about, Matt, wasn't a true long reliever. Not only that, Mota did indeed help a little in 2010, but he had a mediocre at best bullpen ERA of 4.33 while averaging just under an inning pitched. He wasn't even an average reliever. The rest of the bullpen had a sterling 2.35 ERA.
As for Farhan's bullpen last season, we might be underrating it a bit. The Giants finished 2nd in the NL in ERA at 3.25, and the relievers were even better than the starters, posting an ERA nearly half a run lower than the starters. Do I expect the Giants' reliever to regress? Absolutely. Still, isn't it a bit impressive that the Giants reached double digits in reliever who pitched 10 or more innings and had an ERA of 3.00 or lower?
I'm with you, Matt, in that relievers who can pitch multiple innings can help take strain off the bullpen in a manner that can have a positive impact similar to a starter who can pitch even half an inning longer than the average starter. But the trend has been to shorter relief appearances, since it has been clearly shown that even failed starters can often contribute by throwing harder for an inning or less.
Not surprisingly, Farhan has been pretty smart when it comes to relievers. He intentionally looks for relievers with options remaining so that after a reliever is heavily used, he can be sent down and replaced by a "fresh" reliever from the minors. The Giants used no fewer than 31 relief pitchers last season. And their relievers posted an ERA a tick below 3.00.
Kapler was right that he overused the relievers down the stretch. It was an excruciating stretch run with home field advantage against the Dodgers at stake. He'll learn from that and keep them fresher in the future for the postseason.
One final point: It's much cheaper to improve a bullpen than to improve a rotation. Let's make that the penultimate point by adding another: It's much cheaper to "overfill" a rotation with pitchers who are cheaper because they've had health issues in the past than it is to fill it with aces with a long, successful history. They're certainly not done, but for needing at least three free agent starters, the Giants have done a great job of building a four-man rotation for 2022, three of them free agents, for less than $35 million for the 2022 season.
For the amount of money they're paying to either their rotation or their bullpen, the Giants have accumulated a lot of pitching. As they say though, you can (almost) never have too much pitching, so they'll continue to try to add every day of the season or off season. Even without the ability due to the lockdown to add major league pitching, they're still adding minor league depth.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 23, 2021 16:18:21 GMT -5
The good Dodgers' relievers last season averaged only about an inning per outing. It's just that they were loaded with good relievers.
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Dec 23, 2021 20:41:26 GMT -5
Rog- I don't think what we're talking here about is a long reliever. When I think of a long reliever, I think of a former starter who can come into a game and eat up innings when the starter is knocked out early.
Boagie- That's what I'm talking about. That's what Petit and Mota were.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 24, 2021 15:36:28 GMT -5
Petit might be considered a long reliever. He's made 59 starts in his career, and with the Giants he did have a fair number of multiple innings appearances. But Mota never made a start in the big leagues and in fact made only three minor league starts after his first season in the minors.
To me, a long reliever is a guy who goes at least three innings on a lot of occasions. Even in 2015, when Yusmeiro pitched 76 innings in 42 outings despite only one start, he went three or more innings of relief only five times. But I would say he was at least close to a long reliever. Mota in 2010 wasn't. Mota was a guy who could go beyond one inning, but while he did provide a bit of value during the season, he really wasn't very good.
Perhaps it's that the definition of a long reliever has changed. But I would call a guy like Mota a middle reliever, not a long reliever. If a pitcher doesn't average say two or more innings an outing, he probably doesn't pitch LONG enough to be a long reliever. To me, a long reliever is the guy one would use for spot starts, since he is already pitching three or more innings on many occasions.
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Dec 24, 2021 17:56:13 GMT -5
Mota may have not gone many innings in a row, but he did a lot of mop up work. I guess you could say he was the least affective reliever so he was used in those situations, where the game was out of reach. But the point is we don't have someone specifically in that role anymore, one day someone will be used in a mop up role, then the next time they might be used in a close game. I think it's nice to have that one pitcher eat up all those low pressure innings to keep the other relievers well rested and focused on their role.
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Dec 25, 2021 0:50:42 GMT -5
Boagie, I agree with you
There is definitely a place on every roster for someone like Mota.
They're the guys that eat up innings, yes, sometimes when the game is out of reach, but they save more important arms.
And they are worth their weight in gold for their ability to go multiple innings.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 25, 2021 15:40:27 GMT -5
When one thinks about it, on today's pitching staffs there really isn't room for a guy like Mota, who never went more than 2.1 innings in 2010 and went 2.0 or more only three times. He didn't pitch long enough to truly mop up, and he didn't absorb enough innings to truly protect other arms. He threw only 54 innings in 56 games.
Today's pitchers usually have to pitch only an inning or a little more, but they need to be able to do so fairly often if it is required. Mota might not have been good enough to pitch in the Giants' bullpen last season, one in which 10 pitchers pitched 10 or more innings or relief with an ERA of 3.00 or lower.
The key to bullpen management IMO is to have guys with options who can be called up and down as needed. If they get used heavily, then can be sent down for 10 days and "rested."
There is rarely a long reliever these days, and Mota, despite what you guys say, wasn't one himself.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 26, 2021 15:58:42 GMT -5
I think the best way to handle situations where one needs a relief pitcher to pitch significantly more than one inning is simply to give the assignment to one of the relievers who haven't pitched in a while. Pitchers shouldn't be overused, but they also need to keep from getting rusty.
I would pitch relievers as close to every other day as is feasible, but of course that isn't always the case. Sometimes pitching staffs get overworked, and other times they become underworked. If a staff devotes one of its precious relief spots to a lesser reliever who is relegated to long relief/mop up duty, the chance of a staff becoming overworked is greater, since that makes one more pitcher to assign regular work to. Often times when a reliever is needed for longer duty, one or more of the relievers "needs" work and fits readily into longer innings.
I believe feeling the need for a long reliever ignores the way the game is going. It has long been known that pitchers usually pitch best when they can limit themselves to just one inning. So the idea is to get as much quantity and quality as is feasible to go one inning at a time. Naturally if one or more of the relievers can go longer than an inning, that is an advantage. But "resting up" a pitcher so he can go three or more innings seems counterproductive, both in terms of one fewer reliever sometimes being available and in terms of getting less from a pitcher when he is forced to stretch out.
Once in a great while when a pitcher is knocked out early, it will come when the rotation has extra days off anyway, and it may be convenient to bring in one of the rested starters to pitch multiple innings. But I think the most likely solution will be to pitch the guy who perhaps already has too much rest and needs some work.
Going back to Mota, it was nice to have him available to pitch lower leverage innings, but wouldn't it have been even more useful to have a better pitcher available instead of Mota, one who could pitch low-leverage, medium-leverage OR high-leverage frames? I say build the best possible staff and let the low-leverage innings take care of themselves. Heck, if they are truly low enough in leverage, fill them with a position player.
I agree with those who believe the Giants should strengthen their bullpen this offseason. I firmly believe the bullpen is likely to regress. But fill it with the best relievers the Giants can acquire, not a lesser guy who can be directed toward eating up low-leverage innings. Continue to have relievers with options who can move up or down. Think of the bullpen not just of eight relievers behind the five starters, but perhaps a dozen relievers between the major league roster and Sacramento.
IMO the Giants don't have a place on their roster for a guy like Mota. If you disagree, which playoff teams had the Giants at a disadvantage because they had a long reliever available, and the Giants didn't? Having a bulk reliever available to pitch the majority of the innings after an Opener can be advantageous, but that's much different than a long reliever.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 26, 2021 16:05:27 GMT -5
Here's an idea that incorporates the concept of a long reliever. Build a six-man rotation and use the sixth starter as a spot starter. It almost always fits nicely to use five starters, and sometimes a sixth is a nice luxury to provide extra rest for a weary or injured rotation. But when all six starters are healthy and rested, use one of them as needed out of the bullpen. That might be anything from getting the last out of an inning by taking advantage of the pitcher's pitching hand, or it might be filling in to pitch long innings after relieving a starter who just doesn't have it that day.
It might be by being the bulk innings guy in an Opener game. What we're looking for is a pitcher who is good enough to be used in key short spurts but also can go long innings as needed as a starter, an Opener, a bulk innings guy or a long reliever.
Instead of a long reliever who is clearly the worst guy on the staff, look for a guy who can start, open, pitch long relief or help out in short bursts. Instead of a "long man," have a guy who is one of the most valuable members of the staff.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 26, 2021 16:27:01 GMT -5
Tell us again what was wrong with relying on Dominic Leone and his 1.51 ERA last season? Dominic pitched as early as the third inning and as late as the 12th. He was used four times as an Opener, and he also had 15 holds and two saves. Pretty darn versatile and pretty darn effective. In fact, Baseball-Reference shows Domninic's 1.8 WAR as being the 2nd-highest among Giants relievers, behind only Tyler Rogers' 2.4 WAR.
Certainly we expect Dominic to regress this season, but his career ERA is 3.64, and Baseball-Reference projects him at 3.70 in 2022. He is projected by MLB Trade Rumors for a $1.5 million salary in this his final season before free agency. Sounds like a pretty sound bet to me.
As a side note, Dominic pitched two or more innings the exact number of times last season that Guillermo Mota did in 2010 (three). He pitched in virtually the same number of games as Mota and virtually the same number of innings. The difference was that he did so with an ERA+ of 272 compared to Guillermo's 91. In other words, Dominic's results were three times better than Guillermo's. And whereas Baseball-Reference felt that Guillermo actually pitched a bit WORSE than a replacement pitcher in 2010, they felt that Dominic was one of the more valuable relievers this past season.
Baseball-Reference had Dominic last season as being more valuable than Sergio Romo, Santiago Casilla, Jeremy Affeldt, Javier Lopez or Ramon Ramirez was to the Giants in 2010. Fan Graphs pegged him as being only half as valuable as Baseball-Reference did, but still worth $7 million on the season.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 26, 2021 16:38:02 GMT -5
Matt says we saw how valuable Nota was in 2010, but Baseball-Reference didn't have him at even the value of a replacement pitcher. I myself thought he had some value that season but that it was clearly overrated. Guillermo pitched only twice in the 2010 postseason, although he pitched well.
Guillermo did his best pitching for the Giants in 2011, when he posted a 3.81 ERA while pitching between 2.0 and 4.2 innings in 18 of his 52 appearances. Perhaps that is what you were thinking of, Matt. In his two World Championship seasons of 2010 and 2012, he pitched both shorter and less effective outings.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 26, 2021 16:39:46 GMT -5
Isn't it pretty clear that a pitcher like Dominic Leone in 2021 was far more valuable than a pitcher like Guillermo Mota in 2010? Focus on quality, and the innings will likely work out.
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Dec 27, 2021 10:28:54 GMT -5
I may have blended the two seasons...now that I've looked at the 2010 stats it's evident he didn't pitch many multiple inning outings, but he was used in somewhat the same fashion. He was used in games we were trailing, or with a significant lead. I think Leone would be great in the same role, but I too think Leone is likely better than Mota was, so perhaps he'd be wasted there. Leone was used in some of those same situations last season, but if we had someone like Mota (in 2011 if that clarifies it for you) that would save Leone from having to pitch in those less stressful games and likely cut down his total innings. As we know, our bullpen appeared to be running on fumes at the end, the only one who probably wasn't gassed was Doval, and he was our best reliever down the stretch. With some of that workload picked up by a long reliever I think the rest of our bullpen could be more rested and consistent throughout an entire season and into October.
Some here might not like Bruce Bochy, or think he's overrated (which I find to be a borderline retarded opinion) but it's impossible to overlook that his overwhelming strength was his ability to put together a great bullpen. In San Diego he assembled a bullpen that was second to none, then he took the Giants and completely revamped their bullpen which was one of the deciding factors that won us three Championships. That run of Championships ended just 7 years ago, to completely ignore that blueprint when it's so fresh in our minds now is a failure to use the resources available to us.
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Dec 27, 2021 11:50:13 GMT -5
Bochy was flat out exasperating at times, but I agree with you; He was outstanding as a manager!
I truly, truly believer NO ONE else could have guided those teams to WS championships, especially the one in 2010.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 27, 2021 16:43:54 GMT -5
While to an extent it's a shared responsibility, shouldn't Brian Sabean get most of the credit for PUTTING TOGETHER the bullpen, whereas Bruce should get most of the credit for using it?
I think Bruce was good at using his bullpen, but it's much easier to be "good" at using a bullpen when you have a good one than when you don't. Let's not forget either that in 2012 he was heavily criticized here for going to a closer by committee. And that he likely didn't do a great job of handing his bullpen in the ninth inning of Game 4 of the 2016 NLDS.
I think Bruce was good at handling a bullpen, and I think he was good at putting his players in positions to succeed, but I think by far his greatest strength as a manager was in how he handled and motivated his players.
As for his being overrated, he quite possibly is. Despite having some good teams, he didn't post even a .500 career winning percentage, although he came about as close as one could. Bruce will almost certainly make the Hall of Fame as a manager, and only two of the 22 managers already in the Hall had winning percentages below .500. One of those, Connie Mack, made it in part because he managed for an unprecedented 53 seasons. That's 20 more seasons than any other Hall of Fame manager.
One point I wish to make: In his first seasons with the Giants, he underwent a lot of criticism here. I wasn't among those who criticized him at that point. I thought he was a good manager when he was hired, and I thought he continued to be a good manager in those early seasons. He simply didn't have a lot of talent. Many here finally began to recognize him as a good manager when the Giants began winning, but I thought he was pretty much the same manager then as he was when they were losing.
|
|
|
Post by reedonly on Dec 28, 2021 11:26:00 GMT -5
Tell us again what was wrong with relying on Dominic Leone and his 1.51 ERA last season? Dominic pitched as early as the third inning and as late as the 12th. He was used four times as an Opener, and he also had 15 holds and two saves. Pretty darn versatile and pretty darn effective. In fact, Baseball-Reference shows Domninic's 1.8 WAR as being the 2nd-highest among Giants relievers, behind only Tyler Rogers' 2.4 WAR. Certainly we expect Dominic to regress this season, but his career ERA is 3.64, and Baseball-Reference projects him at 3.70 in 2022. He is projected by MLB Trade Rumors for a $1.5 million salary in this his final season before free agency. Sounds like a pretty sound bet to me. As a side note, Dominic pitched two or more innings the exact number of times last season that Guillermo Mota did in 2010 (three). He pitched in virtually the same number of games as Mota and virtually the same number of innings. The difference was that he did so with an ERA+ of 272 compared to Guillermo's 91. In other words, Dominic's results were three times better than Guillermo's. And whereas Baseball-Reference felt that Guillermo actually pitched a bit WORSE than a replacement pitcher in 2010, they felt that Dominic was one of the more valuable relievers this past season. Baseball-Reference had Dominic last season as being more valuable than Sergio Romo, Santiago Casilla, Jeremy Affeldt, Javier Lopez or Ramon Ramirez was to the Giants in 2010. Fan Graphs pegged him as being only half as valuable as Baseball-Reference did, but still worth $7 million on the season. Leone's BABIP was .250 for 2021 so this infers that he was a bit lucky. The projection of 3.70 ERA is probably a good estimate. Even though he posted good numbers throughout the season, I suspect the Giants will let him go in free agency.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 28, 2021 19:36:38 GMT -5
A .250 BABIP likely implies -- you did the inferring, Reeder -- that a pitcher was lucky, but not always. I agree with you that in Leone's case it likely did, but for instance Liam Hendriks had a .252 BABIP, and he probably deserved it. Batters hit only .174 against Hendriks last season, but Statcast says they deserved to hit only .167, which would have meant an even lower BABIP.
We won't know for another year whether the Giants will let Leone go in free agency. I think that will depend on how well he pitches this season and what he asks for. I would be surprised if the Giants don't sign him this off season in his third year of arbitration. He made $570,000 last season, and Spotrac estimates he'll make only $750,000 this year. That's pretty darn reasonable. MLBTR is probably the best at estimating, and they're projecting $1.5 million in arbitration. To me, that sounds eminently doable. Fan Graphs felt Dominic was worth $7 million last season. I don't think he'll be nearly as good in 2022, but I would be surprised if he weren't worth at least $1.5 million as long as he's healthy.
In his 8-year career, Dominic has been valued at $16 million by Fan Graphs. He's had some lousy seasons, but he was really good in 2014, 2017 and last season. It's possible the Giants will let him go, but if nothing else, why not re-sign him and trade him? Remember, a year ago they got prospect pitcher Carson Ragsdale for Sam Coonrod, who was coming off a 9.82 ERA. Even though Leone has outpitched what Coonrod had done a year ago, Sam did have higher trade value because he was under team control for another six seasons, while Dominic will be under team control for only one season, unless the Giants offer and sign him to a longer contract.
Fan Graphs shows Leone's BABIP at .243. They say he deserved a .212 batting average against, compared to an actual batting average allowed of .195. Had batters hit .212 against him, their BABIP would have been .274, or 21 points higher than it actually was. So in terms of batting average, Dominic got a little better than he deserved, but not all that much. Where he benefited more was with regard to power. He limited batters to just a .268 SLG, and Statcast says that should have been .339.
Dominic was a little lucky with regard to hit, a bit luckier with regard to power, and it looks to me like he benefited more than anything else from the sequencing of the hits and walks he gave up. Sure enough, he limited batters to just a .390 OPS with RISP. That compared with his .526 with the bases empty and .575 with runners on. With RISP, Dominic gave up only seven hits -- all singles.
I don't think Dominic will ever have another season like last one, but I think the Giants did extremely well when they were able to sign him. I was a little surprised, but Baseball-Reference projects him to have a better season in 2022 than Corey Knebel, and almost as good a season as Blake Treinen.
|
|
|
Post by reedonly on Dec 29, 2021 11:43:15 GMT -5
A .250 BABIP likely implies -- you did the inferring, Reeder -- that a pitcher was lucky, but not always. I agree with you that in Leone's case it likely did, but for instance Liam Hendriks had a .252 BABIP, and he probably deserved it. Batters hit only .174 against Hendriks last season, but Statcast says they deserved to hit only .167, which would have meant an even lower BABIP. We won't know for another year whether the Giants will let Leone go in free agency. I think that will depend on how well he pitches this season and what he asks for. I would be surprised if the Giants don't sign him this off season in his third year of arbitration. He made $570,000 last season, and Spotrac estimates he'll make only $750,000 this year. That's pretty darn reasonable. MLBTR is probably the best at estimating, and they're projecting $1.5 million in arbitration. To me, that sounds eminently doable. Fan Graphs felt Dominic was worth $7 million last season. I don't think he'll be nearly as good in 2022, but I would be surprised if he weren't worth at least $1.5 million as long as he's healthy. In his 8-year career, Dominic has been valued at $16 million by Fan Graphs. He's had some lousy seasons, but he was really good in 2014, 2017 and last season. It's possible the Giants will let him go, but if nothing else, why not re-sign him and trade him? Remember, a year ago they got prospect pitcher Carson Ragsdale for Sam Coonrod, who was coming off a 9.82 ERA. Even though Leone has outpitched what Coonrod had done a year ago, Sam did have higher trade value because he was under team control for another six seasons, while Dominic will be under team control for only one season, unless the Giants offer and sign him to a longer contract. Fan Graphs shows Leone's BABIP at .243. They say he deserved a .212 batting average against, compared to an actual batting average allowed of .195. Had batters hit .212 against him, their BABIP would have been .274, or 21 points higher than it actually was. So in terms of batting average, Dominic got a little better than he deserved, but not all that much. Where he benefited more was with regard to power. He limited batters to just a .268 SLG, and Statcast says that should have been .339. Dominic was a little lucky with regard to hit, a bit luckier with regard to power, and it looks to me like he benefited more than anything else from the sequencing of the hits and walks he gave up. Sure enough, he limited batters to just a .390 OPS with RISP. That compared with his .526 with the bases empty and .575 with runners on. With RISP, Dominic gave up only seven hits -- all singles. I don't think Dominic will ever have another season like last one, but I think the Giants did extremely well when they were able to sign him. I was a little surprised, but Baseball-Reference projects him to have a better season in 2022 than Corey Knebel, and almost as good a season as Blake Treinen. Maybe they need to do a little load management to optimize Leone. The 3.70 ERA estimate seems spot on.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 29, 2021 14:36:47 GMT -5
I personally think the load on relievers should be more closely managed. My personal opinion is that relievers should pitch as close to every other day as practical. And pitchers should almost NEVER pitch three out of four days, let alone three in a row.
One of the things I knew even before I played fantasy baseball but have come to appreciate even more now that I do so is that when pitchers pitch many days in a row, they become vulnerable to allowing runs. I have to believe it can lead to more arm injuries and perhaps even a shortened career as well.
In fantasy, pitchers are usually scored on wins, saves, ERA, WHIP and strikeouts, which means that most relievers on a fantasy team are closers (for saves). If a reliever has pitched too much, I'll sit him until gets more rested. Yes, I might miss out on a save, but the risk of his hurting my ERA and WHIP is too great. Likewise, if a closer hasn't pitched in a long time, I will often rest him. That can also lead to his allowing more walks, hits and runs than usual, especially if he comes into the game in a non-save situation simply to get him work.
Similarly to how I believe that baseball have a salary floor as well as a salary cap, I would go out of my way to get my top relievers work as close to every other day as possible. Over the course of a season, it's likely that pitchers will of necessity get a couple of days' rest on occasion, but I would go out of my way to not allow a third day of rest, unless of course a pitcher is so tired that he NEEDS extra rest or if he has pitched a bunch of innings.
As for Leone, 20 times he pitched back-to-back, which I think is too much. Fifteen times he pitched on one days' rest, which I think is optimal. Twelve times he pitched on two days' rest, which isn't bad. Seven times he pitched on three days' rest, and twice he pitched on four.
Leone was with the Giants for four months, and he pitched 53.2 innings over 57 appearances. Especially with the 20 back-to-backs, it appears to me, Reeder, that you are right that his work load should be monitored more closely. Then again, for most of the season he wasn't considered one of the Giants' best relievers, and a team needs to prioritize its load management of the top guys.
In addition, I'm talking general rules, and each pitcher is different. I would base a pitcher's workload on his personal results and his own feedback. I would try to learn which pitchers are honest about how they're feeling and which ones want to pitch almost no matter what.
I believe one of the Giants' very best strengths is its massive coaching staff. With a younger and less experienced staff, clearly the Giants emphasize communication as well as development.
|
|
|
Post by sharksrog on Dec 29, 2021 14:41:05 GMT -5
By the way, I mistyped. Dominic's expected BABIP was 31 points higher than his actual, not 21 points as I typed. That was a difference of only three hits though, so while he benefited from a bit of luck in not giving up hits, mostly he benefited from being able to avoid giving up hits in key situations. He was really good in high-leverage situations, a skill he might not be able to repeat. Over his career, he's been good in medium-leverage spots, average in low-level chances and very poor in high-leverage spots. Did he suddenly learn how to be really good in high-leverage situations last season, or did he mostly benefit from lucky timing?
|
|
|
Post by arivride211 on Dec 26, 2022 10:40:05 GMT -5
Matt, I'm confused. (Not that it takes much to confuse me!) You have said that you saw making a Qualifying Offer to Anthony DeSclafani as a win/win situation. Then you said you had no idea why the Giants re-signed him. Don't those two statements conflict? If you thought Anthony was worth $18.4 million for 2022 alone, don't you think he is easily worth $17.6 million for the two seasons after that? Rarely if ever do we see a contract that goes $18.4 million, $8.8 million, $8.8 million over three seasons. As for why the Giants re-signed Anthony, I think it was to have a solid #2 starter behind Logan Webb. Whats the best way to get to a game.....drive, rideshare, taxi or ? And why? Are you looking for transportation at a great price? Arivride.com is now Live in the SF Bay Area and DMV! Arivride.com offers convenient rideshare at a push of a button. Let us get you to your sports venue. We beat the competition. #tourist #airport #football #basketball #California #bayarea #sanfrancisco #sfo #taxi #needaride #rideshare #uber #lyft #transportation #49ers #RaiderNation #warriors #sfGiants #oaklandathletics #SJSharks #mmj #need #sanjose #limo #baseball #basketball #football #hockey #NBA #NHL #NFL #MLB #washingtoncommanders #baltimoreravens #ravens #commanders ##baltimore #washingtondc #nfl #nflravens #nflcommanders #maryland #fedexfield #ronrivera #football
|
|
|
Post by Islandboagie on Dec 26, 2022 20:22:34 GMT -5
Boy, that quote didn't age well for Rog.
|
|
|
Post by reedonly on Dec 26, 2022 21:05:26 GMT -5
Which one? There were so many.
|
|