Giants 1-2 Punch Getting Some Respect
On ESPN, there's currently a poll asking which NL team has the best 1-2 punch. Timmeh and Matt are tops with HALF the votes across America. The Bums are last with Billingsley + Kershaw.
over 2 years ago
sharpness609
25 comments
0 recs |
Comments
I read this as being a reply from Vermont.
Duane Kuiper: Hall Of Fame broadcaster.
by Johnny Disaster on Aug 20, 2009 8:18 AM PDT up reply actions
I don't know
But looking over those rotations, the Cards’ in particular, I’m beginning to question that whole “The Giants starters will give them the edge in a short series” argument.
VAE PVTO DEVS FIO
We also have defense, though. Factors that seem to be significant in the playoffs? Good closer, good pitchers that strike people out, good defense. Check, check, and check.
by Missing Barry on Aug 20, 2009 6:46 AM PDT up reply actions
You forgot the ability to score at least one run.
Duane Kuiper: Hall Of Fame broadcaster.
by Johnny Disaster on Aug 20, 2009 8:19 AM PDT up reply actions
On the other hand, for this year at least we’ll be trying to get in as Wild Card, which typically means playing it down the last day of the season — which of course leaves no opportunity for setting up your starters. Were we to make the playoffs we could easily go into a short series and not even be able to get Lincecum on the field before Games 3 or 4. That would be a serious crimp.
And yeah, I agree with Bhaakon, as much as I love our Caincecum, I’d pretty much assume our lineup going up against the Cards or Phils front two (or even Marlins) would instantly result in a series of 1 to -3 losses.
My Bucardo is better than yours.
A hot August weekday, before a small crowd, when the only thing at stake is the tissue-thin difference between a thing done well and a thing done ill. Insofar as the clutch hitter is not a sportswriter's myth, it is a vulgarity, like a writer who writes only for money.
I think it’s a really interesting discussion on what impact our lineup would have on our playoff success. The studies of playoff success have concluded that over the time frame they looked at, it didn’t appear offense was a signfiicant factor. There are a number of reasons this might be true, but let’s face it, the Giants offense, if we make it, isn’t your typical playoff offense. Even if offense isn’t a significant factor, maybe we’re such an outlier that in our case it is. But then again, maybe it’s all about pitching and defense and all we need is a team that doesn’t have one of those to be favored. I dunno, it’s a hard, but interesting, discussion topic.
by Missing Barry on Aug 20, 2009 8:41 AM PDT up reply actions
I think the fact that this discussion can even reasonably take place is pretty remarkable.
The season is a success no matter the outcome.
by Lars The Wanderer on Aug 20, 2009 8:47 AM PDT up reply actions
At least the famous BP study on that, however, came with the significant caveat that when comparing playoff teams you’re typically looking at the league’s top offenses to begin with, and consequently offense isn’t as much of a comparative advantage. Really studying playoffs is a dicey business to begin with because the sample size problems, and trying to look for patterns among disparate groups is really a pretty noisy procedure.
But, on the anecdotal side, I did notice that for the second time in his 3 career starts Bobby Parnell couldn’t get out of the 3rd inning last night.
My Bucardo is better than yours.
A hot August weekday, before a small crowd, when the only thing at stake is the tissue-thin difference between a thing done well and a thing done ill. Insofar as the clutch hitter is not a sportswriter's myth, it is a vulgarity, like a writer who writes only for money.
Yeah, playoffs as a whole are fundamentally different than the regular season. The gap in talent is much more equal, the talent level is higher, plus the most comparable data we have only goes back to the beginning of the wild card and just isn’t that big of a sample. There are lots of issues with studying it, and even when we come to conclusive results, the data doesn’t answer the question “why?” Offense might not matter because teams generally are top offensive teams to begin with (which could explain why strikeouts become more significant). But then again, maybe it’s because in 4-7 games the variance in offensive production is simply so great that offense really just doesn’t matter. Unfortunately, answering those questions is a very different beast and evidence for or against a point is shaky at best. It’s a fun conversation to have, though, in my opinion…
by Missing Barry on Aug 20, 2009 1:28 PM PDT up reply actions
Why do you mention defense, incidentally? I wouldn’t say our defense is notably outstanding. The left side of our infield is certainly a little below average. When Garko starts the infield en masse is probably a bit below average. Looks like UZR has Sandoval, Uribe, Garko, and Velez all at negative production, Rowand at essentially nill, and strangely, Bengie Molina has no defensive evaluation at all.
Our two best defenders are Winn and Ishikawa, one of whom is trying hard to hit his way out of the lineup and the other a bench player. This isn’t to say we’re bad defensively, on the whole we’ve seemed pretty solid, but I can’t see saying it’s a particular team strength that can make the crucial difference in playoff matchups.
My Bucardo is better than yours.
A hot August weekday, before a small crowd, when the only thing at stake is the tissue-thin difference between a thing done well and a thing done ill. Insofar as the clutch hitter is not a sportswriter's myth, it is a vulgarity, like a writer who writes only for money.
Well by UZR we’re the best team in the league so i’d say we’re a pretty good defensive team. And it’s not really suprising given that we haven’t had any bad fielders this year (our worst is Burriss on -3.6) we’ve had lots of players putting up solid performances (we’ve had 8 players put up a more positive performance than the negative Burriss put up) and we’ve had some great performances (Winn, Ishikawa, other outfielders)
Proud parent of Waldis Joaquin!
Cool. I didn’t realize!
My Bucardo is better than yours.
A hot August weekday, before a small crowd, when the only thing at stake is the tissue-thin difference between a thing done well and a thing done ill. Insofar as the clutch hitter is not a sportswriter's myth, it is a vulgarity, like a writer who writes only for money.
So if their team UZR is so good, why are so many of the individual players’ UZRs so meh?
My Bucardo is better than yours.
A hot August weekday, before a small crowd, when the only thing at stake is the tissue-thin difference between a thing done well and a thing done ill. Insofar as the clutch hitter is not a sportswriter's myth, it is a vulgarity, like a writer who writes only for money.
Well the team UZR is simply the addition of each individuals UZR, so that really means our individuals UZR isn’t so meh. By the way, sample size for UZR at the team level is good – right now we’re on top follow closely by the Rays and Mariners (both thought of as very good defensive teams). All 3 of our teams are low 50’s. The #4 team is the Pirates in at 32.8. Maybe we aren’t the best, but by UZR we’re in a tier clearly above 27 teams in baseball. Basically we have some outstanding defenders by UZR this year (which isn’t a big enough sample size, but that’s not particularly important since the team totals is a big enough sample size), and only 2 players worse than -2 (Sandoval and Burris, and just barely). This stuff is all on fangraphs.
by Missing Barry on Aug 20, 2009 1:35 PM PDT up reply actions
molina
Some places don’t attempt to show catchers defense (fangraphs)
VOTE SANDOVAL
Adopted Giant: Henry Sosa
Ohio and PA went with Lee/Hamels and our boys finished 2nd. Just about every area that picked the SF boys picked the Phillies players. Those people that went with the Phillies probably liked Hamels over Wainwright. I would say Wainwright is pretty much unknown around the country.
It Is Their Ignorance That Keeps Them From Recognizing The Truth



















