Apologies for the baseball content....
Among the irrationally optimistic, the conventional wisdom is that the Giants' starting pitching will keep the team in contention. Sure, there'll be a lot of nail-biting 1-0 games, but if you can keep the other team from scoring, etc.... Jerry Glanville leaving tickets for Elvis at every Falcons game was just a little less irrationally optimistic. Sometimes, I wish I had that kind of irrational optimism heading into the season. If I had credibility, I would sacrifice it gladly to live in a logic-free zone of fluffy clouds and Giants-can-contend optimism.
Unfortunately, I live in a scorched-earth reality that's just getting scorchier and realityier as the season gets closer. I wasn't getting crazy enough to think the starting rotation would lead to a playoff run, but I thought, hey, at least the Giants have one of the best rotations in baseball. Then I read this in the Sporting News. It seemed like a given that the Giants had one of the ten best rotations in baseball. What I forgot was that three other rotations in the top-ten are in the NL West, and those teams aren't likely to have a historically bad offense.
There's obviously room to quibble with the rankings -- maybe the Padres' back-end is too iffy to justify their second slot, the rankings of the Diamondbacks and Dodgers rely on injury-saddled vets, the Cub rotation might be overrated -- but the larger point remains. Every team in the NL West can pitch. Four of those teams can at least fake an offense. In order for the rotation to transcend the NL West morass of quality, Matt Cain and Tim Lincecum need to develop this season into the demi-gods we believe they eventually will. If they don't -- and I'm talking, like, 200 innings of sub-3.00 ERAs -- the Giants will likely have a good rotation, but one that only serves to drive us insane with close losses.
You knew this already. I suppose I needed to see the NL West rotations all lined up in order for it to register for me. My rankings:
- Diamondbacks - Even without Randy Johnson, it's a pretty sweet rotation. I'm a big believer in Micah Owings, but maybe that's because he would be a fine cleanup hitter on the Giants.
- Padres - Chris Young pooters out at the end of every season, but he's pretty danged good while it lasts. Jake Peavy is everything we hope Cain can be. Maddux will do his thing until he's 50, and Randy Wolf is a good and cheap gamble for a good and cheap team.
- Giants - I have to temper a lot of enthusiasm here, as I can't just assume that Cain and Lincecum are going to be beasts. I think they will. I hope they will. But I'm not going to rank them with Peavy and Young or Dan Haren and Brandon Webb just yet. Still, I'm stupid enough to be encouraged by Barry Zito's second-half, Noah Lowry's past K/BB success, and Kevin Correia's string of six good starts to finish the year.
- Dodgers - They have Brad Penny and Derek Lowe to match what we can reasonably expect from Caincecum, Hiroki Kuroda to match what we can reasonably expect from Zito, and Chad Billingsley to blow away whatever Noah Lowry can do. I rank them below the Giants out of pure hatred.
These are the top four rotations in the NL. It makes me homicidal with rage that they're all in the NL West.
- Rockies - What annoys me the most is that the Rockies have a good rotation too. They don't have a partner for Francis to match up with the other 1-2 punches in the division, but their offense will probably be good enough to make up the difference, the bastards.
0 recs |
113 comments
Comments
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
Apparently they're looking for another corner OF.
Maybe our prays are being answered...
Take em, take em all!
Oh yeah, our rotation IS better than the dodgers. Jason Schmidt has proven to be a great Giant even when hes on the dodgers. Keep up the good work Schmidtty..
by justinohan on Jan 17, 2008 10:46 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
No, the names I question on the Bums' staff are Kuroda and Ol' 15.6% K Rate Penny.
However, they're still better than the Giants. We have Cain, who should be better than Billingsley, and Lincecum, who can be better. However, we also have Replacement-Level Zito, Ol' 12.5% K Rate Lowry and Correia/Sanchez/Misch and pals mopping up at the end. That's a pretty steep drop after #1 & #2.
Winn + Roberts for KK? I like that for the Giants if no money changes hands.
by wcw on Jan 17, 2008 11:03 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
The Dodgers are one or two hamstring pulls or shoulder promblems away from having a middle of the rode rotation in the NL West. Lets just pray that it happens.
by justinohan on Jan 17, 2008 11:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
vr, Xei
by Xeifrank on Jan 17, 2008 11:53 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
However, if that's a trade offer you're making, we have this successful lefty starter named Lowry you might like...
(Cough.)
by wcw on Jan 17, 2008 12:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Schmidty
Who the F doesn't want to play baseball FOREVER!?? Let alone for another guaranteed 5 years.
While I adored Schmidty as a Giant and, of course, I loathe him now, I don't think he has the fire in him. I think he's essentially retired (in his head) and will ride out the rest of his contract using the DL as a vacation time slot.
by lrs77 on Jan 17, 2008 12:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by Natto on Jan 17, 2008 11:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by justinohan on Jan 17, 2008 11:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
I have a hard time believing the Padres are actually going to move Kouzmanoff, though. I read they were trying out their hot prospect Headley in the outfield because he's blocked at 3rd by Kouz.
by EliminateMe on Jan 17, 2008 11:39 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
Plus Brian Giles is an old fart.
Winn can play all OF positions well and is a solid bat. Plus hes not a 40 year old Gonzo. Hes got some good baseball left in him.
Winn would be great for a contender like the Padres. If he played in another linup he would of scored a 100 runs and hit 20 homers. He was a good giant for the most part but hes being wasted on this team.
Good fit to me.
by justinohan on Jan 17, 2008 11:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by EliminateMe on Jan 17, 2008 12:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
But I wouldn't care as long as we dump salary and old guys in the OF.
by justinohan on Jan 17, 2008 12:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
The reason I like this trade is to clear the OF and some salary. Winn I actually like in CF at his current salary, but since Sabean shot his was on Rowand, Winn's blocking Schierholtz. And Roberts in a platoon in CF I like all right, too, but in LF he's a real liability.
KK should put up a couple good seasons with the bat, and very cheap. You hide his defensive failings in front of Cain's and Lincecum's strikeouts, and trade him right as he starts to get expensive to someone who doesn't understand defense.
by wcw on Jan 17, 2008 1:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by justinohan on Jan 17, 2008 5:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by ANDY MELAMED on Jan 17, 2008 6:02 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by howtheyscored on Jan 17, 2008 12:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
If he hit on top of a team with a strong lineup.. Rockies, Red Sox, even the Astros, D-Rays or Cardinals he could of easily had a shot at 20 homers or at least scored a 100 runs.
The guys done it before. He hit .300. I'm sure he'll have a better year in the Padres lineup this year than he will with the Giants.
by justinohan on Jan 17, 2008 12:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
It wasn't the point of your comment anyway to nitpick the one tiny detail. That was my bad, and sorry for doing it. Your overall point is a fine one and I don't wish to argue with it.
by howtheyscored on Jan 17, 2008 1:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
EX: Rich Aurilia hit 37 HR's batting in front of Bond's in 2001. You can't tell me Richie didn't see more fastballs because he was hitting in front of Bonds. Also when Kent was struggleing in 02' , they put him in front of Bonds, and he took off. The point is hitting in fornt of the right guy, could make you see more fastballs.And if Your a good fastball hitter like Winn or Richie, that can lead to a few more HR's
by ramirez415 on Jan 17, 2008 1:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
Alright, I admit defeat... IF THIS DOESN'T WORK!!!
(I didn't have anything, I just like quoting Star Fox 64 since I lost so many hours to that game without even unlocking stupid foot mode... I actually do admit defeat)
by howtheyscored on Jan 17, 2008 1:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by EliminateMe on Jan 17, 2008 2:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
2002
by victor frankenstein on Jan 17, 2008 7:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
And the headline will read:
Sabean's Bust Inspires Natto's Erection
by Goofus on Jan 17, 2008 12:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by EliminateMe on Jan 17, 2008 1:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by Goofus on Jan 17, 2008 2:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by ANDY MELAMED on Jan 17, 2008 5:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by ANDY MELAMED on Jan 17, 2008 6:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by Kitspool on Jan 17, 2008 10:57 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by Anticon23 on Jan 17, 2008 10:59 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The problems with the Braves is their back end
Derek Lowe ERA+ with the Dodgers: 114, 124, 118. With >200 IP in 2005, 2006 and 199 IP in 2007.
He's grossly underrated.
Glavine at this point is nothing more than an innings eater. He's there so the Braves don't have to give starts to crap like Buddy Carlyle or Kyle Davies, which they did last year.
by rfloh on Jan 17, 2008 11:26 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The problems with the Braves is their back end
by NearestNorwich on Jan 17, 2008 5:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
Reunion.com is probably blowing up Steve Avery's inbox...
by victor frankenstein on Jan 17, 2008 7:12 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
Apparently Schuerholz is taking more of a hands-off approach than I'd have thought. I haven't liked a single move Wren's made this offseason. (Well, from the Braves' perspective. I liked them giving up two pitchers for a broken-down Mark Kotsay plenty.) All of them smack of a desperation last-gasp effort at contention in 2008, followed by a teardown.
by PaulThomas on Jan 18, 2008 12:11 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
Hey! I know this script! I've seen this movie!
by howtheyscored on Jan 18, 2008 12:42 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by someguynamedg on Jan 17, 2008 11:01 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by wcw on Jan 17, 2008 11:05 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by someguynamedg on Jan 17, 2008 12:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by MarkO on Jan 17, 2008 11:05 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
Pitching for a team bereft of legit 3-4-5 hitters HAS to have an impact on those pitchers. And not a good impact. that is, it is impossible to evaluate the strength of your rotation without also considering the strength of your lineup. The Giants rotation will underperform because of the offense.
Balance. We don't have it.
by The Gene Hackman on Jan 17, 2008 11:31 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
2008 Cain Stats: 211 IP, 222 Ks, 2.95 ERA, 1.20 WHIP, 3 Ws, 17 Ls
by lrs77 on Jan 17, 2008 12:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by howtheyscored on Jan 17, 2008 12:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Counter-point
- Cain's in his 3rd year. He's not oozing veteran savvy, but he's stating to to perspire it.
- Giving Cain the nod would send the clear message that his performance last year did not go un-noticed, despite the W-L record.
- By many accounts, Zito's problems were the result of trying to live up to the ace-like contract. When he just said "f- it" and pitched, he did much better. Moving him to #2 or #3 would ease the pressure and let Barry be Barry.
by Goofus on Jan 17, 2008 2:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
not really true...
by kenshin1 on Jan 17, 2008 3:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by ANDY MELAMED on Jan 17, 2008 5:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
My thinking might be skewed because I'm a Giants fan, but here it is; after Cain and Lincecum, the other starters are all slotted below where they'd be slotted on most teams.
Zito - While not an "ace", and yes he's paid like one,the Zito who emerged at the end is a legit #2 starter. On this team, he's #3.
Lowry - He's our #4 starter, but any team most teams trading for him would expect him to be at least a #3, possible a #2.
Correia - I've gone on record (and rxmeister quoted me) as saying he'll be the premier #5 starter in the league next year. In an era where most teams struggle just to fill the roll with someone competent, Correia showed in those six starts both consistency and near-dominance that would project him much higher in a typical rotation.
so if Cain and Tim emerge as we expect, we've got two aces, a #2, and two #3s. Not a weak link in the bunch.
by Goofus on Jan 17, 2008 11:13 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
If other teams thought Lowry could be a number two starter Sabian would have gotten better offers for him. We all thought Lowry was going to be something special his rookie year, but it seems the league has cought up with him. Thinking he'll put up #2 starter numbers, or even #3 starter numbers, might be deluding yourself at this point.
The Giants will have a very good rotation, but Zito and Lowry have too many unanswered question to call this a solid rotation.
by Threepwood on Jan 17, 2008 2:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
The contract is what it is. Worrying about it now will just give you heartburn.
As for Zito's results last year, I wouldn't be optimistic if he hadn't improved so much as the season progressed. His ERA was around 3.40 in the last two months of the season and his WHIP was 1.28, much more in line with his career line. During that time, his K/BB was 50/35.
by Goofus on Jan 17, 2008 2:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
I don't think that's a huge worry. Zito's contract is up after 6 seasons, whereas Lincecum hits free agency after 6 seasons & so Zito's contract shouldn't have any impact on the prospect of re-signing Lincecum when he hits free agency. When Cain is up for free agency, Zito's deal will only have 2 years left on it & so i don't think it'll be as big an issue as it seems today.
The problem is more a case of wishing we could spend those dollars elsewhere (namely on the offense) whilst we have Cain & Lincecum in their cheaper years.
by GiantFan on Jan 22, 2008 3:13 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by Roger on Jan 22, 2008 10:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
I was just commenting that neither pitcher should be too expensive that there's an issue with affording them, until after they hit there free agency years, irrespective of when they sign their contract. Zito's contract may be a benchmark, although he reached free agency, but there's also lots of other benchmark contracts to use.
by GiantFan on Jan 23, 2008 3:54 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by yankeefan57 on Jan 18, 2008 8:30 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
But I certainly like the 1-2 punch of our lineup, I think Cain's September is a sign of very good things to come. And if Correia can do what he just did at the end of the year, we could have a very strong #3 starter from a very unlikely place.
by JRPhillips on Jan 17, 2008 11:18 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
5th place
vr, Xei
by Xeifrank on Jan 17, 2008 11:36 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: 5th place
Succumb to the Enchanted t-shirt! Adopted dad of Minor Izzy
by hairball on Jan 17, 2008 11:51 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: 5th place
by daveinexile on Jan 17, 2008 12:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: 5th place
by marklar on Jan 17, 2008 4:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: 5th place
vr, Xei
by Xeifrank on Jan 17, 2008 4:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: 5th place
by marklar on Jan 17, 2008 4:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: 5th place
vr, Xei
by Xeifrank on Jan 17, 2008 5:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: 5th place
To be honest, I don't think too many people in Colorado really believed they would make the playoffs either. At least not if they were being truthful with themselves.
by marklar on Jan 17, 2008 6:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: 5th place
by zenbitz on Jan 18, 2008 7:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Rockies
Cook: 116 ERA+
Francis: 114 ERA+
Jimenez: 112ERA+
Morales: 140 ERA+ (only 8 starts)
Cain: 122 ERA+
Lowry: 113 ERA+
Lincecum: 111 ERA+
Zito: 98 ERA+
Hate to say it, but the Rox aren't as far behind as it seems. Sure, they won't win any CYs or post any sub 3.00 ERAs, but for their park, they might be as good as any other NL West team.
by chefasaurus on Jan 17, 2008 11:36 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: The Rockies
by NearestNorwich on Jan 17, 2008 5:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
Don't believe me? watch Bull Durham, and don't shake me off, meat.
by The Wind Cries Omar on Jan 17, 2008 3:23 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by marklar on Jan 17, 2008 3:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
But it is just a trend. There are a few pitchers who defy it. I wouldn't coount either Gardner or Rueter as such because neither had particularly long careers
Greg maddux is NOT an example of a low strikout pitcher. He used to strike a ton of people out, and he's always maintained a specacular K/BB rate. Dude is 11th in career strikeouts.
Glavine's a better example, but even he had above average strikeout stuff in his youth.
Tommy John is really the best counter example to this trend.
by oldjacket on Jan 17, 2008 6:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
The same is true of hitting: if all you do is try to hit homeruns, you ground out and strike out a lot. Don't believe me, check out Pedro Feliz and even Rickey Henderson in the years he tried to yank everything. THIS IS WHY CARNEY LANSFORD IS THE GIANTS' NEW HITTING COACH. He hit the ball the other way and didn't try to pull everything. If you don't believe either of these posts its because you haven't played baseball, you just read stats on the internet and get ready for next year's fantasy season.
by The Wind Cries Omar on Jan 17, 2008 3:27 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
Sorry, just sticking up for the "Never played baseball as long as you don't count very rare recreational play or standing in right field for a month or two in fourth grade as playing, or less" ones of us around here. Which would be me.
by howtheyscored on Jan 17, 2008 3:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
Not only have I played baseball, I posess above average writing ability and high level acuity, allowing me to make subjective inferences after simple observation without the aid of statistics.
That said, pitchers who walk a lot of guys usually have trouble.
by The Wind Cries Omar on Jan 17, 2008 4:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by Natto on Jan 17, 2008 4:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by The Wind Cries Omar on Jan 17, 2008 4:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Conceptualize This
by Moggeee on Jan 18, 2008 2:09 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
If you're like this in person, I'm pretty certain you've had plenty of time to hone all three skills at the expense of developing any inter-personal skills.
by Goofus on Jan 17, 2008 5:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
how could i come up with this shit if i couldn't talk well? All i did was respond to the arguments made against me. And if you read the other posts i made, i can talk with anyone, even justinohan, who makes great points and should be commended for his commitment to the home nine.
GO GIANTS
by The Wind Cries Omar on Jan 17, 2008 5:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
I mean, come on, we both know that sentence as written was lame, and vaguely inflammatory to boot. We also both know that it wasn't necessary to anything you were trying to get across.
Sorry for bringing it up against you, but it's like the third or fourth time in the last month or so here where I've seen the first line of defense for an opinion be "Try playing baseball" and it just seems like the weirdest, least productive kind of thing I'm not used to seeing out here.
by howtheyscored on Jan 17, 2008 7:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
But this shouldn't be about me. I want to make a deep apology to my man howtheyscored and anyone else I my have offended. The least exciting off season in recent history is wearing on me, and I tried to stir up the pot a bit. I was more successful than I could have hoped. My responses were very sarcastic and not a one was made without some deep chuckles.
That said, I agree that the last sentence in my real opinion was useless and caused quite a bit of trouble. Lotsa people that don't play sports know a ton about em, like John Clayton and Dickie V (BABY). My point was that just like the backlash we all saw this afternoon, citing arcane stats gets pretty out of hand. I mean come on, a baseball simulator? I could tell you how i did with the Giants on All-Star Baseball 2000 for N64, but that wouldn't add much either.
So sorry to all. If you're a Giants fan then it's cool. Just know that I was kidding and trying to get a rise out of folks. All I'm saying is that you can tell more about how a player plays than what his stats might tell you.
by The Wind Cries Omar on Jan 17, 2008 8:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by howtheyscored on Jan 17, 2008 8:56 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by justinohan on Jan 17, 2008 8:00 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
Then again, I don't possess "high level acuity." Jerk.
by Dan from NM on Jan 17, 2008 5:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by The Wind Cries Omar on Jan 17, 2008 5:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by The Wind Cries Omar on Jan 17, 2008 5:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by Natto on Jan 17, 2008 7:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by howtheyscored on Jan 17, 2008 7:43 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
Anyway i just wanted to say that I agree with everything you said. I don't play baseball though... just a little basketball, hope that counts for something. Hey, what does endogeneity mean? sorry.
by khasson on Jan 17, 2008 5:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by sakbaum on Jan 18, 2008 8:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
Stoned Slacker used to umpire my games. Can he vouch that I used to be okay? Would he count as an independent arbiter, or would we have to go to Stoned Slacker, Sr., who also umped my games, but would be more impartial?
How can I prove my legitimacy? The fate of the blog depends on it, as it's obvious that I'm killing its reputation with all of my crazy-thick stat posts. My proprietary stat McCqEV+ hasn't even been introduced yet, but I think I'm gonna junk it.
by Grant on Jan 17, 2008 8:07 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
I certainly don't think you need to have played baseball to realize that Pfz's hitting technique sucks.
In fact, I was watching a diamondbacks-giants game last year while my Mom's friend from South Africa was visiting. After roughly his first five innings of EVER watching baseball, we both watched Pedro flail at one in the dirt. He turned and asked me "How come he's the only one on either team that tries to hit the ball on the bounce?"
by oldjacket on Jan 18, 2008 6:51 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by howtheyscored on Jan 18, 2008 12:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by The Wind Cries Omar on Jan 17, 2008 3:53 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by The Wind Cries Omar on Jan 17, 2008 3:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
"Wrong wrong wrong. Wait, he's accusing me of never playing baseball...I didn't play baseball! Never mind! This changes my opinion entirely!"
by groug on Jan 17, 2008 3:57 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
I be bringin street game to the geeks, mayn.
by The Wind Cries Omar on Jan 17, 2008 4:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by justinohan on Jan 17, 2008 4:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
Most people around here have played baseball; and regardless, you don't need to play to understand the game. I have played for 11 years now, will be the opening day starter for my Varsity team this year and I still don't know half as much about baseball as some of the folks on this site (Kenshin, Baron, jponry, Howie, thehavenot, dan). It is a game most easily analyzed and quantified. Frankly, that's what makes it so great.
What I do know about pitching is that you can get away with pitching to contact at lower levels, but to give yourself the best probability of success (100% out percentage) K's are the way to go.
by SloIsLonelyForTheOrange on Jan 17, 2008 5:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
Arizona doesn't excite me beyond the first two. Doug Davis? I'll take Noah over 2 baserunners per inning. Randy Johnson? "IF" is such an expensive, foolhearty word. He isn't who he was. Even if healthy, he can't be. Stop fearing him. Micah Owings? The erection one gets seeing him hit better than anyone in the Giants lineup doesn't make him more than a #4 pitcher at best. He was never consistent last year. You don't become consistent during an offseason, it happens over time.
And I have to watch San Diego 162 times a year, as its part of my job. Peavy is Peavy (though in a big game, take the other guy). Young is phenomenal in PETCO Park for sure. On the road? Good numbers against brutal lineups at least open the discussion as to whether he is overrated (if he can ever last a full season without getting injured). Maddux (likened to have Josh Towers stuff but without the 2-cent brain) would be a #6 starter on most AL staffs. He was either very good (read: they hit em where they were) or awful (read: he wasn't facing the Giants, Pirates, Astros, etc.). And while Randy Wolf is a good gamble, he was last year for the Dodgers too, and we saw how that turned out.
Sometimes, these pitchers really are what we thought they were. So while it gets your rocks off to rip our own Giants to protect ourselves from the disappointment of not meeting expectations, it's also silly to pump up the opponents based on fear that they will crush us.
I'll take the Giants starters in 08, thanks.
by mlb22 on Jan 17, 2008 4:13 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
However, San Diego has a phenomenal rotation, no questions, and Arizona has two better ones up front and matches fir the rest of our rotation.
Also, did anyone else get the chills when he said consistent in two consecutive sentences?
I'll take the Giants starters in '09 '10 maybe, but '08? I'll take AZ and SD over ours.
by SloIsLonelyForTheOrange on Jan 17, 2008 5:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
While I love our rotation, most of the guys in it are not going to reach their potential for 2-3 years. I look forward to watching them develop but there are still going to be unfortunate moments we will have to live through.
*I tried to say it twice too, but I'm just not that good.
by marklar on Jan 17, 2008 6:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
I'll buy that Arizona's top 2 are better than ours, but I won't buy that their back 3 come even close to ours.
[Diff between ARI 1-2 and SF 1-2] <<
[Diff between SF 3-5 and ARI 3-5]
Disagreeing with me is cool but I don't see what you're basing your argument on, other than just saying SD and ARI are better.
And please don't use W-L record. I think all us Giants fans can agree that SF will lose that battle.
by mlb22 on Jan 17, 2008 6:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
Arizona:
Brandon Webb/Dan Haren: better than Lincecum/Cain for now.
Micah Owings, in his first season pitched 150 innings 109 ERA+ with a 1.28 WHIP. K/BB ratio is 2:1 in his first year pitching. that is very very good. He should get better.
He's about average at worst I believe and should turn in about the same or better than Zito, unless he turns his career around.
Doug Davis and Noah Lowry are a wash. They're pretty much the same pitcher.
As for the fifth, I think we have another wash. Correia/Hennessy/Sanchez/whoever versus RJ/Billy Buckner/Dustin Nippert. I think this is kind of an unpredictable position but, ultimately I think both teams have about the same chance for success.
As for SD, Maddux, Wolf and Prior are a riskier but better bet than Zito, Lowry, COrreia/sanchez/Hennessey
by SloIsLonelyForTheOrange on Jan 17, 2008 6:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
While each feature similar numbers, here's one that sticks out to me, despite Noah's increase in walks last year:
Lowry's WHIP last two years:
1.39 & 1.55
Davis? 1.52 & 1.59
If Lowry's closer to the 1.55 than the 1.39 and 2007 wasn't an abberation, then yeah, they're a lot closer. Davis (speaking of declining K rates) is what he is. And I'd rather have Noah not missingbats at the Phone Booth than Davis underhanding em at the Bank.
On the Pads starters that you mentioned:
Prior may not pitch til June, and Wolf MAY not be ready for opening day. Between the two, there could be a lot of Stauffer/Germano/other crap starts. But I think we can both agree its impossible to compare 5th starters, because really, there if a 5th starter were good enough to make every start, he wouldn't be a fifth starter.
All this said, I'm still comfortable with the orange and black.
by mlb22 on Jan 17, 2008 7:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
Still, I do feel like this the year when the same disease that got Rueter at the end of his career claims Davis. Just a hunch.
by oldjacket on Jan 17, 2008 8:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
2.) Giants. I'm feeling optimistic and drunk.
3.) D-Backs. Doug Davis?
3.) Dodgers. I'm depressed.
5.) Rockies. Blah blah.
by Dan from NM on Jan 17, 2008 6:52 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
The Answers, My Friend, are Blowin' in the Breeze
The Wind Cries WTF??
by Moggeee on Jan 18, 2008 2:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
Subjective Staff Rankings for 2008
#1's: 1.Peavy 2.Webb 3.Francis 4.Penny 5.Zito
#2's: 1.Haren 2.Cain 3.Young 4.Lowe 5.Cook
#3's: 1.Billinglsey 2.Lincecum 3.Jimenez 4.Maddux
5.Davis
#4's: 1.Owings 2.Morales 3.Wolf 4.Lowry 5.Kuroda
#5's: 1.Correia 2.Johnson 3. Loaiza 4.Prior
5.Hirsh
You may now take issue with these rankings.
by oldjacket on Jan 17, 2008 9:03 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by W8ingForATitle on Jan 18, 2008 11:12 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
They had pretty similar seasons, last year and at this point Billingsley has better control.
Over the whole career I would prefer Timmy, but this next year I expect Billinglsey to outperform him.
Jimenez is no slouch either!
by oldjacket on Jan 18, 2008 8:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by Goofus on Jan 18, 2008 12:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by oldjacket on Jan 18, 2008 12:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by NearestNorwich on Jan 18, 2008 7:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
by oldjacket on Jan 18, 2008 8:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Re: Apologies for the baseball content....
Pedro Feliz in '08.
by GaryEdmundCarter on Jan 18, 2008 11:27 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

by 

















