Dwight Clark

Rest in the Lord now and forever, brother.

.500

If, like us, you learned to do basic math-- division, multiplication, and especially percentages, percentages percentages-- by obsessively studying and figuring baseball statistics during your time in the primary grades, we've got a very entertaining book for you to read.

It's called "College Mathematics Through Baseball," by Dr Fred Worth, Professor of Mathematics at Henderson State University in Arkadelphia, Arkansas.  Prof. Worth describes the tone of his book as being directed toward "math-phobic" liberal arts students who need a good and interesting reason to care about a subject they'd rather not take. We're with him all the way on this; it worked for us and it can work for you.

A real-world application of Prof. Worth's mathematical knowledge and good old horse sense surfaced when we referred to a term we hear all the time from sportswriters and sportscasters: "games above .500," as in, "Well, if the Giants can sweep this series they'll be six games over .500 going into the All-Star break."

Our legendarily contrarian nature has always taken issue with this, since invariably the speaker or writer is contrasting the team's wins versus their losses and assuming the difference between them is the "number of games" that team is "above (or below) .500." This is rather obviously (to us, anyway), not the case, as anyone who's followed a pennant race ought to know. The difference between a team's wins and its losses, compared to a constant such as a .500 record, is one-half game per win, not one game. Anyone who's ever followed a pennant race when the team leading the league has a day off knows perfectly well that if Our Boys win today, they gain only a half-game, not a full game, on the leaders, who are idle.

And a .500 record is always "idle." It's stationary, a constant. If the Giants had taken 3 of 4 from Colorado this past weekend, they'd be 25-23, one game above 24-24, which is .500. They'd be two games above 23-25.

What people mean when they say this, of course, is that if our team is at 23-25 and they win the next two games, they'll be at .500. That's absolutely true. So our fellows would be two wins below .500, not two games below .500.

This viewpoint was not met with, shall we say, unanimous approval and acclaim on the Giants' website comments page, where sundry snarky comments about "New Math" and other unmentionable topics were tossed around. So, in the face of such overwhelming opposition, we took the issue to Professor Worth and agreed to let him settle the subject. We used the example of a team with an 80-60 record, which is commonly held to be "20 games over .500."

With Solomonic sagacity and equanimity came Professor Worth's response:

"An 80-60 record is both 10 games above .500 and 20 games above it, depending on whether your reference is "games played" or "games won."  If it is the former, then you are right, 10 games going the other way would put you at .500.  But if it is the latter, the traditional term is correct."

And so we are good with that. We understand the common reference, and it's not going away any time soon, and there's no point in belaboring the subject. But it is nice to get even half a loaf every now and then.

The book is "College Mathematics Through Baseball," and we heartily endorse it here:
https://books.google.com/books?id=4cz-CgAAQBAJ&dq=college+mathematics+through+baseball

STOP 

SLIDING 

INTO 

FIRST 

BASE!

Happy Birthday, Bruce Bochy!

With the requisite apologies to W.S. Gilbert and A.S. Sullivan:

I am the very model of a modern baseball manager,

I've decades of experience, professional and amateur,

I played the game the way it should be played, and now impart my wit

To players, coaches, fans, and friends, and even that sportswriter twit

Who twists my every word to make it seem like I’m a dinosaur,

While never understanding once that, pal, I’ve heard it all before.

About the bunt, the squeeze, the steal, I’ll wax quite philosophical--

And never once admit that my discourse is less than topical.

For twenty years I’ve honed my craft against the best teams in the West;

The rings I’ve won would quite compare to any pirate’s treasure chest;

In short, if you’ve a need to give your team a big advantage, sir--

I am the very model of a modern baseball manager.

For evaluating pitchers I’m renowned among my brethren,

I’ll ‘splain for you the difference ‘tween the closers and the middlemen;

In lefty-righty matchups I’m aware of every stratagem,

And keep my secrets guarded as I would a precious diadem;

My later-inning instincts are unmatched across the universe,

The critic who claims otherwise I’d classify as most perverse;

I’ll prove my skill against the best from every isle and continent--

And slap that silly fanboy who suggests that I’m incontinent.

When motivating players, I have masterminded every trick;

And if this sport were football, you would call me “Mister Belichick;”

In short, if you’ve a need to give your team a big advantage, sir--

I am the very model of a modern baseball manager. 

Though I may rarely deal with those who speak of VORP and WARP and WAR,

And view with mild suspicion terms like O-P-S and D-E-R,

While I am disinclined to take advice from number-crunching geeks,

And favor seasoned vets all due to break out into hitting streaks,

Although my game demeanor may appear to be paralysis,  

I don't completely disregard statistical analysis:

I’ve made good use of replay when the boys in blue have missed a call--

And studied every page of that infernal nonsense Moneyball.

So, my sabermetric knowledge, though I'm plucky and adventury,

Has only been brought down to the beginning of the century;

But still, if you’ve a need to give your team a big advantage, sir--

I am the very model of a modern baseball manager.

The single truest statement in baseball is that if you get men on base, you will score runs. The Giants so far have seemed bent on testing the outer limits of that truth. They have scored six runs in five games, by a considerable margin the worst total in the league. The runs created method, simple version, expects the Giants to have scored 13 runs based on their OBP and SLG. In other words, even with the worst OBP (.244) and fourth-worst SLG (.319) in the NL, the Giants have underperformed their expectation by over 50%. 

The good news? This can't last, and it won't. 

But it's entertaining. For instance, the Giants have stranded 33 runners on base in 5 games; opponents, 23. The Giants are 2-for-31 with RISP. And-- get this-- neither of those hits drove in a run. Brandon Belt and Kelby Tomlinson are the guys who delivered, and in each case they advanced a runner from second to third. One did eventually score: Gregor Blanco, last night on a sacrifice fly. We stranded the other one, Hunter Pence, in the opener at LA.

Our collective opponents are a robust 9-for-28 with RISP. Yes, the Giants, pathetic offense and all, have advanced more men into scoring position than have their opponents so far. We just can't drive 'em in.

Again, this is a statistic that always trends toward the middle as time goes by. Don't give up the ship. Yet.

Pitching? The Giants have surrendered 20 runs; against those 6 runs scored. By rights they should be 0-5 according to the Pythagorean projection. Yet using the runs created method, their projected runs allowed is only 13. By runs created, the Giants should be around .500, exactly where they are.

The Giants pitchers have allowed the second-lowest OBP in the league-- a paltry .292. Their opponents' SLG is a pathetic .305, second only to the Cubs (who are also 2-3, sports fans). Between some critical errors in LA and opponents hitting .321 with RISP, the pitching stats are skewed the other way.  In general, our pitchers have done better than their runs allowed and 3.77 ERA would indicate.

For those of you who think we hit into too many double plays, the Giants have grounded into 6-- but opponents have hit into 7.

And if you like base stealing, take heart-- only Washington, Milwaukee, and Colorado have done better on the bases than our two intrepid speed demons, Brandon Belt and Buster Posey, who are a combined 2-for-2. 

All of the above may be taken with as many grains of salt as needed to fill a shaker that's labeled, "Small Sample Size."

We cheered the last-minute inclusion of Reyes Moronta onto this patchwork pitching staff because the guy just turned 25 years old and he throws 99 MPH apparently without much effort. But the oft-stated caveat was that he had better learn how to control that stuff, and so far the returns have been mixed. 

In three appearances, all in the last three games, Moronta has had one good outing and two bad.  

Against LA on Saturday he had mop-up duty in the eighth inning of a 5-0 game, and retired the three men he faced. Low pressure situation.

In the Sunday series finale, he came in for the first time with men on base. It was in the eighth, replacing Roberto Gomez, who had allowed four straight hits to open the frame and turned a 5-0 game into an 9-0 laugher. No real pressure, the game is all but lost, but something of a "let's see how he handles it" moment. Second and third, nobody out, the toughest defensive situation in baseball. Moronta needs a strikeout; he gets a ground ball to short, the runner on third scoring. He gets a popup for the second out, runner holding second. Then he gives up a RBI base hit. Both inherited runners thus score on his watch. Tough way to go on that first run allowed, since the first out of any inning is the most important one, and he did get that out, after all. 

Last night Moronta relieves Ty Blach with one out in the fifth. It's 5-1, Seattle, men on first and second, still plenty of innings left. His job is to keep the score where it is. What happens? He walks the first batter he faces on four straight pitches to load the bases. And, instead of a harmless fly ball, the second out of the inning becomes a RBI sacrifice fly. The Mariners, now with a five-run lead, are confident enough to let their starting pitcher bat after Moronta pitches around the #8 hitter for his second walk. That one run allowed means the Giants' subsequent rally falls two runs short instead of one, with all the strategic differences that implies.

There is nothing more damaging a relief pitcher can do than come into a game with men on base and issue a walk. We've noted before that some pitchers are better when they start an inning fresh, while others are better coming in with men on base. Your heat-throwing types (think Hunter Strickland) tend to fit the first category; the finesse guys (think Javier Lopez) the second. Few can do both effectively. One part of a savvy manager's job is to determine which is which. For Moronta, his job is to throw enough strikes so he can stay in the bullpen long enough for Bruce Bochy and Curt Young to decide it's worth their while to evaluate where he stands instead of just sending him back to Triple-A. 

The San Francisco Giants Open the 2018 Season!

Johnny Cueto, R

Johnny, we hardly knew ye last year-- let's fix that

Ty Blach, L

Gets Opening Day start at Chavez Ravine 

Derek Holland, L

Circumstances give veteran last-minute chance

Chris Stratton, R

All of a sudden, a lot is riding on his success

Tony Watson, L

Might be the "sleeper" key to this bullpen

Hunter Strickland, R 

Numbers are there, but how's his confidence?

Josh Osich, L

Can't ignore great ST numbers after tepid early career 

Cory Gearrin, R

Another "jabroni" who looked great in Arizona

Sam Dyson, R

Last year's closer may be first man out the door 

Pierce Johnson, R

Struck out 9 in seven ST innings, so why not? 

Roberto Gomez, R

Makes team because 4 pitchers are on the DL
Reyes Moronta, R
"MiniCueto" has great stuff but must control it

Madison Bumgarner, L (DL)

Was looking every bit the ace 'til that wicked line drive

Jeff Samardzija, R (DL)

Let's hope three to four weeks is all he'll miss

Mark Melancon, R (DL)

Will the ten-day DL be enough for his recovery?
Will Smith, L (DL)
Hasn't pitched in a game in over a year 

Buster Posey, c

Giants' all-time greatest catcher wants a 4th ring  

Andrew McCutchen, rf

2013 league MVP may be the key to this season's success

Evan Longoria, 3b

Tampa's marquee player subject of SF's biggest trade in years

Brandon Crawford, ss

No one on this team has more to prove in 2018

Joe Panik, 2b

If early returns any indication, he's going to have a good year

Brandon Belt, 1b 

Keep him healthy, bat him second, and he'll be fine

Austin Jackson, cf

Opens season as starter, should eventually platoon

Hunter Pence, lf  

Expect he can do well if limited to 100 starts or so

Gregor Blanco, of

Giants welcome him back and hope he's got something left

Kelby Tomlinson, if

"Clark Kent" is team's "Swiss Army Knife" across infield

Pablo Sandoval, if

Former team MVP can play first, third, and, we hope, still hit

Nick Hundley, c

One of Giants' quiet pickups that has paid off handsomely

Gorkys Hernandez, of

Why was he kept instead of rookie Steven Duggar?

The Giants know they were caught with their pants down last year, and they were definitely embarrassed by that 98-loss debacle. They went in to 2017 thinking that if only they'd had a closer, they'd have beaten the Cubs in the NLDS and might be defending world champions for a fourth time. Signing Mark Melancon gave them the arrogance, or ignorance, take your pick, to think they could start the season with a committee of has-beens and never-wases in left field, and that they were immune to the aging process in center and right. The opening-day loss was the season in microcosm, as the team looked fine at the start and quickly got worse and worse until the bitter end. We need not recount all the individual failures and disappointments. Drastic action was taken as soon as the World Series ended.  

Those who've been calling for a complete rebuild in the wake of 2017 have, of course, been disappointed. The Giants' message regarding this edition of the team-- the one that began in 2007 and reached full glory early in this decade-- has never changed. Brian Sabean and the front office believe the core of this team is enough to contend for a fourth title before the decade is out, and that core-- Buster Posey, Madison Bumgarner, and Brandon Crawford, at a minimum-- is untouchable for at least two more seasons.

Adding Evan Longoria, Andrew McCutchen, and to a lesser extent, Austin Jackson, signals the team's determination to address last year's main weakness, which was the offense in general  and specifically the outfield. Longoria, a legitimate star player, was considered worth the potential seen in Christian Arroyo, and over the long term Tampa may indeed win that trade, WAR for WAR. But if Longoria helps the Giants win now, the trade will have been worth it from our perspective. McCutchen, a truly great player, was the best available to fit the Giants' specific need, and cost less in trade than did Longoria. Jackson was a good value for a team determined to keep its payroll under the luxury-tax threshold.

We hate talking about money, but money is a key to the Giants' immediate plans. By avoiding the luxury-tax penalty this year, the Giants' payroll threshold is reset to a newer, higher level, which will enable them to go after 2019 free agents with a great deal more aggressiveness than they showed his year-- and the 2019 free-agent market is expected to be rife with outstanding players and pitchers. 

Seeing Bumgarner and Jeff Samardzija on the DL to start the season forcibly and unpleasantly reminds us how thin the starting rotation remains. Overall the team's pitching was right about league-average last year, which is not good for the Giants, but it was not the disaster that the offense was. They jettisoned their worst pitcher, then spent the rest of their time addressing their biggest weakness with an eye on the budget, knowing that a year from now, they will not be so constrained, and will have a much better market from which to choose.

So the plan is, and has been, to put together a 2018 team that will rebound sharply from last year, but will likely remain a piece or two short of real contention. Before "Bum" and "Shark" went on the DL this past week, we had mentally pencilled in a 81-win expectation for the 2018 Giants-- a significant recovery, sure, but not enough to threaten the Dodgers. With a few breaks, maybe an outside chance to contend for the second wild-card, though little hope for post-season advancement if things went really well.  Even with the sudden injuries, that's not an outlandish expectation. The Giants will improve, and they will look better on the field and at the plate.

And that improvement will be enough to grease the wheels for 2019. It would signal to the baseball world that the Giants are back, that they know what they're doing, and that San Francisco is, once again, a place to go if you want to win. With that attitude and some major moves in the offseason market, the Giants would expect to contend for the world championship in 2019.  After that, succeed or fail, perhaps the rebuild begins. Keep in mind the Giants also made sweeping changes to their minor-league system this past winter, including hiring David Bell, once a Giant, to oversee player development as he has done with the Cardinals' excellent organization for several years.

We've never met anyone in the Giants front office and we have nothing resembling insider knowledge, especially as we sit 2500 miles from AT&T Park typing this. But we absolutely believe the Giants' plan is, and has been, to make 2018 a consolidation-of-gains year, and 2019 the year they go after the big prize one more time in earnest. After that, who knows?

Roster Notes

Gorkys Hernandez and Gregor Blanco? Well, as they say on social media, "SMH."   We tell ourselves, "This, too, shall pass," and the only reason we're not fuming is because we think the team realizes it too. 

All three starting outfielders are over thirty. Jackson and Pence are not equipped to play a full season above replacement level. At his age and with his injury history, Pence should be limited to about 100 starts, and Jackson has always done better in a platoon role. We believe this will become obvious by the end of May, and as a result, there will be plenty of opportunities to start in the outfield. Neither Blanco nor Hernandez should be considered capable of taking a regular starting role at this point in their careers. Therefore,  we should see Duggar soon, as well as opportunities for Austin Slater, too, and perhaps-- perhaps-- Mac Williamson.  

Duggar, we hope, will be in the lineup just about every day by July or August.  Remember, Matt Williams started 1989 at AAA while Earnest Riles opened the season at 3B. That wasn't meant to last, and neither is this.

We're glad to see Tomlinson on the roster, and Sandoval earned his spot. The Giants kept the most versatile guys, who cover the entire infield between them, and both have Giants pedigree. 

Of course 12 pitchers is too many, but it looks as though they kept the right ones, at least based on spring numbers. And when Shark, Bum, and Will Smith return to action, let's hope performance alone-- not status, seniority, or sentiment-- dictates who gets the proverbial axe. This bullpen has potential, but just about everyone in it is replaceable.    

February Fandom

General comments, notes, responses, and outbursts from the first week of spring training, some culled from the Giants website, others just random explosions of dedicated irrelevancy...

February 27, 2018

NRI infielder Miguel Gomez is hitting .571 in the first week of spring training, and Bruce Bochy says, "The bat plays."

Miguel Gomez just turned 25; he is at the age where major-leaguers are separated from "AAAA" players. He has hit .300 or better at every level of minor-league ball up to AA.  (He's never played at AAA.) Since, like most guys off the island, he refuses to take a walk, he'll need to hit at least .300 to keep a job. At 5-9, 200, speed is not his game, but his defense is good-- like Tomlinson, he has played both second and third, with a few games in the outfield. We can't see him ahead of KT even if he hits .600 this spring, but if he hits like this and defense is a priority, he could nudge ahead of Sandoval. Most likely, though, we see Bochy keeping Tomlinson for defense and versatility, and Sandoval for his bat. We'd love to see the Giants keep three backup infielders, but we'll need backup outfielders more. Wish Gomez well and hope he keeps hitting. 

The Continuing Story of Jarrett Parker

“Parker has the potential, maybe he can get it together and do well.  I know his injury last year was a serious one.  If he has he(a)led up he should do better.”

Parker has no potential at all. He is a finished product. What you've seen is what you're going to get. For heaven's sake, he is older than Madison Bumgarner and has 382 career major-league at-bats. We like him-- he'll take a walk, he has power, and we hope he can stay in MLB long enough to get into the pension plan-- but he is and always will be a 5th OF and PH at best.

“Sometimes the lack of talent just can't be overcome by any amount of effort.  Parker just doesn't have it. Maybe he'll catch on with an AL team where they can afford those poor stats as long as he hits 30+ HRs.”

Actually, his defense is pretty good. But your first sentence tells the story. He's had the better part of a decade to prove it wrong. No team will make him a regular at his age. He may not hit 30 career home runs (he has 15 now) even if he hangs on for 2-3 more years as a backup. At his very best, he could be another Dusty Rhodes.


We made that last comment without even looking up Dusty Rhodes’ career. The sum total of what we knew about him was that he was a backup outfielder and pinch-hitter who is famous for one brief shining moment: the 1954 World Series. “Backup outfielder and pinch hitter” is how we’ve repeatedly typecast our man Parker, so we turned to the oracle, otherwise known as baseball-reference.com, and lo and behold, here’s Dusty Rhodes with a career trajectory not slightly, but almost exactly, in line with what we’ve projected as a best-possible-scenario for Parker.

Rhodes was 25 in his rookie season, three years younger than Parker a year ago. He played six seasons, all of them with the Giants, and never exceeded 276 plate appearances in any season, averaging less than 200 per. In 1316 career plate appearances he hit 54 home runs and drew 131 walks, decent power and walk numbers, raising his .253 average to a .328 OBP and .445 SLG. That sound like anyone we know?

His power dropped off dramatically after the 1954 Series: he hit 36 homers in 500 ABs his first three years, only 18 in 700 afterward. He averaged about 2 PA’s per game throughout his career, indicating he pinch-hit a lot, probably most of the time. Keep in mind a .253 career average is quite good for a pinch-hitter, and walks in the late innings of close games are rally-builders. By far his best year was ’54 when he hit .341 with a 1.105 OPS, 15 homers, 18 walks, and only 25 strikeouts in 164 ABs; good gracious, he finished 26th in the MVP voting!  Add to that his “Bobby Thomson/Travis Ishikawa” moments in the World Series and there you have it.

Jarrett Parker, meet Dusty Rhodes. You could do a whole lot worse.
 

February 24, 2018

Ben Weinrib ( @benweinrib ) posted a fine article about the late great Bobby Bonds.

Bobby Bonds is also the first 40-40 man, in fact if not on record. In his 39-homer, 43-stolen-base season of 1973, he hit two additional home runs in a game on May 23 that was rained out. It’ll never count, but it did happen.

And Bobby is also, by a comfortable margin, the greatest right fielder in SF history.  We were surprised to find this out because we would have guessed Jack Clark was right about even. But Bobby has him 38-31 in WAR, and has significantly more "Black Ink" achievements (ASG invites, MVP votes, etc.) than does Jack.  (See the “Greatest Players in SF Giants History” page over to the right of this column.)

ECoastJint, touching on a subject dear to many Giants fans, posted a trivia quiz:

1.  Who was the last SFG player to 20 or more HRs in a season and in what year?

Brandon Crawford, with 21 in 2015.

2.  Since 2008, which years did not one SFG hit 20 or more HRs?

2008, 2016, 2017.

3.  Since 2008, which SFG player hit the most HRs, how many and in what year?

Hunter Pence, with 27 in 2013.

4.  Since 2008, how many different SFG players hit 20 or more HRs in a season?

Seven: Bengie Molina, Pablo Sandoval (twice), Juan Uribe, Aubrey Huff, Buster Posey (twice), Pence (twice), and Crawford.

That’s a total of ten 20-plus-homer seasons in ten years.

February 23, 2018

Christ Haft, regarding the Giants’ signing of veteran left-handed reliever Tony Watson: 
“Any manager would covet the flexibility afforded by having three lefties in the bullpen.” 

The way Bochy manages the bullpen, three lefties would be a terrible waste. At least one, and maybe all three, would never get enough work to stay sharp.

It's also time for our annual prayer that Bochy will forget about carrying 13 pitchers, for heaven's sake. That's our one concession to the guys who moan about how "old" this team is-- we need a deep bench. At a minimum the Giants should field 11 position players plus the two catchers.


February 22, 2018

Chris Shaw 

“The current day Harper and Trout players are where they are because they were given a chance at a young age. Same for the old days of Mays, Clemente etc.  Shaw is not a very young 19 or 20 year old, he is 24, and hopefully ready to contribute NOW. But we will never know unless he is given that chance.” 

One thing that has changed between now and then is, today most players go to college. Mays, Clemente, and those guys in that era did not, they were in the organization at 19 or 20.  24 is still just 2 or 3 years out of amateur ball.  Even with a good college program accelerating development, it takes 2  or 3 years in pro ball for most.   25 is about the age where you expect potential to turn into production for most young players, in years past it might have been 23.

So that would point to Shaw expecting to be MLB-ready in 2019. We've seen him hit. He has a terrific swing and a certain "swag" at the plate. He's the real deal, and could make the club this year.

Harper and Trout are exceptions, to say the least, once in a decade players.  We can't be comparing Shaw to those guys. If he can put up production similar to what, say, Hunter Pence did in his prime, we should be thrilled.


February 21, 2018

Giants sign Tony Watson and DFA Joan Gregorio after his PED suspension.

This is how we got Affeldt and Lopez. The Holland and Watson signings are quite similar to those (though Lopez came in trade, not as FA). When it comes to role-players in the bullpen, it is irrelevant whether they are homegrown youngsters or veterans picked up on the cheap. They tend to have short shelf lives. It's all about what they can do now. The only LHP in the Giants bullpen who's shown anything is Smith, and he's still rehabbing his arm. Of course these guys now have to deliver. That's what set Affeldt and Lopez apart from the crowd.   But we like these moves just fine for now. 

“Wasn't that what the huge list of invitees to last year's mess of a ST supposed to be, a search for  "diamonds in the rough"? how'd THAT turn out?”
“I'm with you there. Trying to stay positive and see this thing as a beauty, rather than just lipstick on the same 2017 pig.”

Come on! There’s no comparison. A year ago the Giants were coming off a playoff season and they thought they'd fixed their one problem-- the closer. They also may have figured Pagan would eventually sign and they could call off the three-ring circus in LF. They were wrong about it all.

Now they are coming off a 98-loss season that embarrassed them. Whether the guys they've signed get the job done or not, the FO have acted with purpose. There are 16 fewer NRIs this year than last.

And neither Watson nor Holland can be compared to the likes of Chris Marrero, Jimmy Rollins, or Mike Morse. They're not searching for “diamonds in the rough.” They are signing proven role players to fill a specific need. Good heavens, Watson pitched in the World Series four months ago!

We’re not saying they're the next Affeldt and Lopez. They probably aren't. But that's the path the Giants are following here.