A disturbing trend?

by Uribe nee Gonzalez on May 27, 2007 6:28 PM PDT

This has been pointed out before, so I'm not claiming to be Marco Polo here, but I wanted to lay it out and have a discussion.

Peripheral stats for 4/5 of the Giants rotation will follow.

The Giants starting pitching is supposedly keeping there heads above water (if .500 is above water), yet the numbers below numbers do not look good now, or in the future if there is a trend. Particularly concerning are the stats of Lowry and Cain, who are homegrown products and the youngest in this small analysis. The peripherals on Zito and Morris were cited as reasons NOT to sign them, but alas, they have gotten worse as Giants. What has been worrisome for me has been all the BBs, which have hurt the team thus far, and seemingly will do more damage as the season goes by (the low ERAs seems to be an aberration). These numbers, in conjunction with the starting 5 ERA suggests to me that the defense is playing well and there has been a lot of luck.

So, my question is: is this an institutional problem? Do the Giants not preach "throwing strikes" as an organization? Does Rags not preach "throwing strikes"? It would seem to go in line with the rest of the organizational mentality that BBs are not such a big deal (at least for their hitters). Maybe there is too much emphasis on "avoiding" big hits? Or is this just 4 guys who aren't that good/struggling?

What do you guys think? Here are the stats:

SEASON TEAM K/BB BB/9 K/9

Matt Morris
1997    StLC    2.16    2.86    6.18
1998    StLC    1.88    3.33    6.26
2000    StLC    2    2.89    5.77
2001    StLC    3.43    2.25    7.7
2002    StLC    2.67    2.74    7.32
2003    StLC    3.08    2.04    6.27
2004    StLC    2.34    2.5    5.84
2005    StLC    3.16    1.73    5.47
2006    SFG    1.86    2.73    5.07
2007    SFG    1.39    3.03    4.21

Matt Cain
2005    SFG    1.58    3.69    5.83
2006    SFG    2.06    4.11    8.45
2007    SFG    1.48    4.64    6.89

Noah Lowry
2003    SFG    2.5    2.84    7.11
2004    SFG    2.57    2.74    7.04
2005    SFG    2.26    3.34    7.56
2006    SFG    1.5    3.16    4.74
2007    SFG    1.18    4.18    4.92

Barry Zito
2000    OAK    1.73    4.37    7.58
2001    OAK    2.56    3.36    8.61
2002    OAK    2.33    3.06    7.14
2003    OAK    1.66    3.42    5.67
2004    OAK    2.01    3.42    6.89
2005    OAK    1.92    3.51    6.74
2006    OAK    1.53    4.03    6.15
2007    SFG    1.07    4.4    4.7

And this isn't really fair for a variety of reasons, both in support and opposed to the above question, but here are Rags career numbers, as they are at least interesting to think about:

Dave Righetti
Career 1.88 3.79 7.13

Poll

Is "throwing strikes" an organization problem?

Yes, a new philosophy is needed. Dump Rags.

10 votes

Yes, a new philosophy is needed, but it's not Rags fault.

6 votes

No, these guys kinda suck.

6 votes

No, too small a sample size.

3 votes

The Enchanter will save us!

11 votes

36 votes | Poll has closed

This FanPost is reader-generated, and it does not necessarily reflect the views of McCovey Chronicles. If the author uses filler to achieve the minimum word requirement, a moderator may edit the FanPost for his or her own amusement.

0 recs | Comment 14 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Counterpoint

Morris has actually been pretty good so far, showing that peripherals aren't everything. But even if they were, did you see the 2-hit performance? He's clearly got some stuff left in the tank.
Zito has been on and off, and 2007's sample size is definitely too small to discern a real trend on him- he still should benefit from moving to the NL, but who knows what will happen. Still, he has had some good outings and at least one dominating performance so far, so it would be a mistake to look at peripherals alone.
Lowry is showing a lot better stuff than last year. We still don't really know his ceiling. I'm on the fence with him, and wouldn't mind if he were traded, but I think his value is somewhat decent.
Cain- do you really think he's not going to blossom? His pitching this year has been mostly unhittable. Sure, he doesn't throw enough strikes, but you get the feeling that his wild movement is what gives him success as well. He will gradually learn to harness that. In many ways, he looks like a better pitcher this year than last.
Lincecum.

I like our rotation.

Succumb to Tiny Tim! Adopted dad of Minor Izzy

by hairball on May 27, 2007 8:46 PM PDT 0 recs

Re: Counterpoint

Lowry, I am starting to believe, shouldn't be traded. Today, he pitched quite well I thought and was lifted a tad too early. It turned out well for chulk, but I think we should hang on to Lowry for another couple of months unless we get a great offer.

In Soviet Russia, save blows Benitez!

by SloIsLonelyForTheOrange on May 27, 2007 8:49 PM PDT up 0 recs

Re: A disturbing trend?

I believe it's part of their philosophy, and I don't like it. Walks are not okay. Nibbling is not okay. It's just leading to higher pitch counts and more opportunities for other teams to score. Linc is showing good control, but I figure it's only a matter of time before Rags messes with him.

Either that, or these guys, all of them, have really bad control.

The bright side: Brian Sabean should be out of a job in a few months.

by Punch Rockgroin on May 27, 2007 10:20 PM PDT 0 recs

Re: A disturbing trend?

From what I have seen, the problem for the Giants starting five has been not putting hitters away. The pitchers do a good job of getting ahead in the count, but can't seem to seal the deal.

Today, Lowry was consistently getting to 1-2 and then, before you knew it, it was 3-2. I notice that when the Giants hitters get ahead, their pithes after that are either way out of the strike zone or in the strike zone too much.

by Bib12 on May 27, 2007 11:06 PM PDT 0 recs

Re: A disturbing trend?

I think the Giants starters lack of peripherals will eventually catch up to them. I have been predicting for a while that both Morris and Lowry would fade, and indeed neither was particularly good this weekend. Zito already HAS faded, although we can hope he bounces back. I thought Barry was very good the first three innings of his last start and rather lucky the rest of the way.

Matt Cain is beginning to strike out a few more batters, but he needs to cut down on his walks -- especially if he begins to give up more hits and homers, as appears very likely.

Tim Lincecum is doing just fine. The key for him is to keep throwing strikes -- and to throw more of them on the first pitch. Tim did a MUCH better job of that in his last outing, starting 21 of the 29 hitters he faced off with strikes. Tim started 14 batters off with fastballs, 14 with curves and one with a change. He had very nice control of all but the change, and even there he threw it across frequently enough to be effective with the pitch. Probably not a great offering to use on his first pitch at this point of his career, however.

Personally I'm fine with his throwing mostly fastballs -- or whatever he's getting over best -- on the first pitch. Yes, batters will hit the first-pitch fastball on occasion -- and once in a while they will even hit it out (although Tim has yet to give up a first-pitch homer this season in either the majors or minors). But if they put it into play, it will cut down on his pitch count, and if they take it for a strike or swing and miss or foul it, he will be ahead in the count. Tim is VERY tough once he is ahead in the count.

by sharksrog on May 27, 2007 11:28 PM PDT up 0 recs

Re: A disturbing trend?

Great, but no one's arguing the high walks and low strikeout totals aren't going to catch up with our starters. That's true for any pitcher. Rather the argument is whether or not it's a result of coaching/philosophy or if our pitching staff just sucks.

The bright side: Brian Sabean should be out of a job in a few months.

by Punch Rockgroin on May 28, 2007 1:25 AM PDT up 0 recs

Hooverize 'Em

In a vacuum of other possibilities, I go with suckage.

by Moggeee on May 28, 2007 1:57 AM PDT up 0 recs

Re: A disturbing trend?

I would guess that to some extent it may be due to poor staff philosophy. I believe that only three Giants pitchers this year have a strike percentage of 63% or better -- Brad Hennessey (63.6%), Vinny Chulk (63.4%) and Tim Lincecum (63.0%).

On the other hand, only Lincecum and Matt Cain have overpowering stuff -- and Matt has pretty poor control.

If I were Dave Righetti, I would emphasize more strongly getting ahead of hitters. I was very pleased that in his last start Tim started off 21 of the 29 hitters he faced with strikes.

by sharksrog on May 28, 2007 3:56 PM PDT up 0 recs

Re: A disturbing trend?

I kinda think the Giants organization preaches the same thing as every other team does. Nobody would tell their pitchers to just throw strikes, and nobody would tell their pitchers not to throw strikes. The idea for a pitcher is NOT to throw the ball down the middle of the plate, it's to work the corners. Therefore, it comes down to the pitcher. If he has good control and can constantly hit those corners, he's going to be successful. If he doesn't, he's going to walk alot of people. If he has good stuff, he can get away with throwing a few pitches down the middle, and if he doesn't, he can't. So basically, it comes down to the individual pitcher, not the coaches. If the Giant pitchers walk too many hitters as a tendency, it's not because of the coaching, it's probably because they're not very good.

Armando Benitez countdown to 300 saves: 289 Armando says: "It's Kevin Frandsen's fault I gave up RBI hits to Kaz Matsui and Matt Holliday"

by rxmeister on May 28, 2007 8:21 AM PDT 0 recs

Re: A disturbing trend?

This may well be true.

Barry Zito: Mike Hampton with a guitar

by JakeS on May 28, 2007 10:15 AM PDT up 0 recs

Re: A disturbing trend?

Yet the Giants actually HAVE had good pitching this season despite an inability to throw strikes. I think the original poster here hit on a very good point that the Giants could benefit from.

If the Giants pitchers are good WITHOUT throwing many strikes, just think how good they might be if they threw MORE strikes early in the count. That would have the ripple effect of causing batters, on guard because they are behind in the count, to also swing at more pitches later in the count.

by sharksrog on May 28, 2007 3:59 PM PDT up 0 recs

Re: A disturbing trend?

I really don't know how anyone could say that it's organzational without a statement from the organization, or an insider.

I guess you could argue that Morris' and Zito's BB rate went up... but Zito there isn't enough data and Morris meh. Besides I doubt vets like them are going to change their general approach to hitters.

Ironically - it would be a great organizational pitching philosophy ... if they got to pitch to the Giants hitters.

by zenbitz on May 28, 2007 5:14 PM PDT 0 recs

Re: A disturbing trend?

The bottom line is that an organization has the ability -- and the responsibility -- to forge its direction. Forging its destiny is a bit tougher.

But if the Giants truly want to emphasize throwing strikes, they can emphasize it all the way through the organization, and they can also trade for and sign as free agents pitchers who DO throw them.

So if the trend last long enough (and as I recall, the Giants have indeed been high in walks given up in recent years), I think one CAN assume that a team's philosophy isn't strongly against not throwing strikes.

In 2002, the Giants had the 3rd-lowest walk total in the National League. Since then they have been gradually declining.

In 2003 they had the 9th-MOST walks. In 2004 they were 7th-worst. In 2005 they were a mirror image of 2002, finishing third-WORST in walks. Last season they were tied for 4th-worst, and this year they are tied for 3rd-worst.

It would appear to me that since the 2002 season, throwing strikes hasn't been a high priority for the Giants organization.

Either that, or they aren't good enough as an organization to focus properly on accomplishing their priorities.

Priorities talk, but results walk (no pun intended).

by sharksrog on May 28, 2007 9:02 PM PDT up 0 recs

Re: A disturbing trend?

I agree with you. It's not that throwing strikes isn't absent from their strategy, just that the idea that giving up an 0-2 hit is worse than giving up a walk seems to be prevalent. Because of that we get all the nibbling and terrible 2 strike pitches that wouldn't tempt a little league player to chase. We hear Kruk talk about it all the time on the broadcast. He always approves of 'waste pitches'. While not a bad idea, the execution is lacking a lot of the time.

That this problem can be attributed to the majority of the pitching staff tells me that the coaching could be a lot better. Yeah, they've got to execute and make their pitches, but if what they're teaching them now ain't working, it might be time to try something else.

The point is our staff could be better and, deceptive ERAs aside, that they aren't is disappointing.

The bright side: Brian Sabean should be out of a job in a few months.

by Punch Rockgroin on May 28, 2007 10:23 PM PDT up 0 recs