Game Thread: 9/29 Sandy Waffle @ Here Comes 100

[Stokes1931]

Bum/Cueto/Shark/Moore/Stratton

I still have a hard time believing this team is as bad as their record shows tbh. Just add a bit to the offense (understatement of the year) and a lefty in the Pen.

Big question marks about Moore.

If Stratton is the #5, then Blach is the LHP in the bullpen we need. Assuming Smith comes back healthy.

Offense is a huge issue. Pre-ASB they averaged 3.933 runs per game (dead last)

Post-ASB has been WORSE (3.899 runs per game).

Giants need to score 25 runs in the last three games to average 4.0 runs per game, which in itself is pretty anemic.

 

[msgkings322]

Bum/Cueto/Shark/Moore/Stratton

I still have a hard time believing this team is as bad as their record shows tbh. Just add a bit to the offense (understatement of the year) and a lefty in the Pen.

That's because on paper they weren't supposed to be bad. At season's start we looked at the team and said ok we are only short a LF.

Then Smith goes down (no one remembers him), Bum gets hurt, all the LFs get hurt, Melancon is hurt/shitty, and guys you count on like Moore, Crawford, Cueto, Pence, and others just flat out blow

That's why the FO thinks we can compete next year. In theory Cueto, Moore, Crawford, etc are better than this, and if we stay reasonably healthy and see legit production from LF (Parker/Slater or a free agent, we need some HRs) we have a reasonable shot at a wild card.

 

[Stokes1931]

That's because on paper they weren't supposed to be bad. At season's start we looked at the team and said ok we are only short a LF.

Then Smith goes down (no one remembers him), Bum gets hurt, all the LFs get hurt, Melancon is hurt/shitty, and guys you count on like Moore, Crawford, Cueto, Pence, and others just flat out blow

That's why the FO thinks we can compete next year. In theory Cueto, Moore, Crawford, etc are better than this, and if we stay reasonably healthy and see legit production from LF (Parker/Slater or a free agent, we need some HRs) we have a reasonable shot at a wild card.

Baggs has been ranting all year about the OF defense, which is league worst in runs prevented. A CF who can cover ground would be great, put Span/Pence in one of the corner spots.

 

[calsnowskier]

Baggs has been ranting all year about the OF defense, which is league worst in runs prevented. A CF who can cover ground would be great, put Span/Pence in one of the corner spots.

If I had to put money on one add this off season, it would be a slick-fielding CFer.

Not that that is the only thing needed or that that would cure all our ills, though...

 

[SFGRTB]

If I had to put money on one add this off season, it would be a slick-fielding CFer.

Not that that is the only thing needed or that that would cure all our ills, though...

I agree. I really think if they shore up the defense in CF and RF, and have Span and Pence platoon LF, that will add a lot of wins.

Granted, I'll be pretty picky about the CFer we get. Absolutely no on Cain, not just because of his cost, but in 2 years we'll be in the exact same situation (aging CFer, killing the defense). I think Pillar is a great option, or Yelich.

 

[SFGRTB]

Big question marks about Moore.

If Stratton is the #5, then Blach is the LHP in the bullpen we need. Assuming Smith comes back healthy.

Offense is a huge issue. Pre-ASB they averaged 3.933 runs per game (dead last)

Post-ASB has been WORSE (3.899 runs per game).

Giants need to score 25 runs in the last three games to average 4.0 runs per game, which in itself is pretty anemic.

It's tough to hope for anything with Moore, the best I think we can hope is solid 4th starter. That's about as good as he's been since coming off the DL in 2015.

I disagree about Blach as the 2nd lefty, I'd rather get someone off the FA market. Blach's stuff isn't really suited for relief, I like him in the swing role/6th starter. Go for a vet.

 

[SFGRTB]

That's because on paper they weren't supposed to be bad. At season's start we looked at the team and said ok we are only short a LF.

Then Smith goes down (no one remembers him), Bum gets hurt, all the LFs get hurt, Melancon is hurt/shitty, and guys you count on like Moore, Crawford, Cueto, Pence, and others just flat out blow

That's why the FO thinks we can compete next year. In theory Cueto, Moore, Crawford, etc are better than this, and if we stay reasonably healthy and see legit production from LF (Parker/Slater or a free agent, we need some HRs) we have a reasonable shot at a wild card.

The Giants are flirting with that baseball purgatory, which is not the place you want to be, but yeah in theory everyone had a down year or was injured outside of Buster Posey. Just every bad break you could imagine.

 

[LHG]

The Giants are flirting with that baseball purgatory, which is not the place you want to be, but yeah in theory everyone had a down year or was injured outside of Buster Posey. Just every bad break you could imagine.

Yeah, and I think that there are so many "down years" that I'm concerned that its more than just down years. Could there be permanent regression on some of these guys? If so, the upgrades the Giants will do will probably not be enough and years of mediocrity, with little emphasis on the farm, could ensue.
And I'm in a different camp that you all on Will Smith. Yes, he would be an improvement over Osich/Okert but his numbers were never such that he would provide more than 1 WAR on the season. He's just not that good.

 

[LHG]

Who would you like to see play instead of those in the lineup?

Keep in mind that Slater and Mac are both hurt.

Calixte? OK, but he isn’t a future asset anyway.

Tomlinson? OK, but he would play in place of Sandoval, and if Sandoval is anywhere close to the bubble, I want to give him every chance to fail.

Jones? Sure, but he is CLEARLY out matched at this point in his career, so I don’t really care right now.

If we want that 1st pick, don't we want the Giants to run those guys out every night? Seems like a win-win to me. Start them and they look bad, it gets easier to lose. Start them and they look good, great we have a better idea of what they are capable of!

 

[SFGRTB]

Yeah, and I think that there are so many "down years" that I'm concerned that its more than just down years. Could there be permanent regression on some of these guys? If so, the upgrades the Giants will do will probably not be enough and years of mediocrity, with little emphasis on the farm, could ensue.
And I'm in a different camp that you all on Will Smith. Yes, he would be an improvement over Osich/Okert but his numbers were never such that he would provide more than 1 WAR on the season. He's just not that good.

Re, Smith:

Jeremy Affeldt's best WAR with the Giants was 0.9. In his 7 seasons went 0.6, 0.1, 0.1, 0.9, -0.5, 0.5, -0.8.

Plus, Smith is a huge strikeout guy, something we dearly lack in this Pen. He's pretty good.

 

[LHG]

Re, Smith:

Jeremy Affeldt's best WAR with the Giants was 0.9. In his 7 seasons went 0.6, 0.1, 0.1, 0.9, -0.5, 0.5, -0.8.

Plus, Smith is a huge strikeout guy, something we dearly lack in this Pen. He's pretty good.

Where did you get these numbers? Baseball Reference lists Affeldt's WAR for his Giant years as 2.6, 0.0, 0.8, 0.8, 0.1, 1.4, -0.8.

 

[SFGRTB]

Where did you get these numbers? Baseball Reference lists Affeldt's WAR for his Giant years as 2.6, 0.0, 0.8, 0.8, 0.1, 1.4, -0.8.

Oh, I usually use Fangraphs for most stats outside of the standard line on baseball reference.

 

[LHG]

Oh, I usually use Fangraphs for most stats outside of the standard line on baseball reference.

Wow, those are some wildly divergent numbers between the two. They only agree on his final season. Specifically, Fangraphs gives Affeldt a lot less WAR on this two best seasons. I find it hard to believe that Smith's 2015 season was better than Affeldt's first season with SF.

 

[SFGRTB]

Wow, those are some wildly divergent numbers between the two. They only agree on his final season. Specifically, Fangraphs gives Affeldt a lot less WAR on this two best seasons. I find it hard to believe that Smith's 2015 season was better than Affeldt's first season with SF.

Fangraphs like strikeouts, walks and homerun prevention and favors them with their run-prevention models, which feed into their WAR model. So the fact that Smith struckout almost double than Affeldt in almost the exact amount of innings works in his favor for Fangraphs' models.

BBref don't favor any one thing, so it tends to be ERA based. If you have a good ERA, you have a good WAR.

In my opinion, that's why I look more towards Fangraphs because they're trying to capture what the pitcher can control and how good they were at that. There's an element of luck involved in ERA, playing with a really good defense, or a string of bad outings, or relief pitchers behind you allowing runners to score.

Now, it's not perfect. Affeldt was dominant in 2009 there's no denying it. He dominated with a groundball heavy approach and a monster amount of double plays. He was 2nd in the league in groundball % and tied for 39th in MLB for GIDP's with 18 (!!). 39th doesn't sound like much, but that's including every pitcher in the league. He was by far the leading relief pitcher in GIDPs.

And there's nothing wrong with that, the Giants executed and Affeldt was able to put up monster numbers. It's reliant on other guys though, which makes it somewhat luck based. You can't master where a hitter hits a groundball. You can master a strikeout pitch though, and that's what I like about Fangraphs.

Affeldt's results were great in 2009, Baseball Reference is saying that it's all because of Affeldt, Fangraphs is saying it was a collective effort.

 

[SFGRTB]

I never realize how nearly perfect of an example Jeremy Affeldt is for this topic, BBref vs. Fangraphs. It's kinda cool.

 

[LHG]

Fangraphs like strikeouts, walks and homerun prevention and favors them with their run-prevention models, which feed into their WAR model. So the fact that Smith struckout almost double than Affeldt in almost the exact amount of innings works in his favor for Fangraphs' models.

BBref don't favor any one thing, so it tends to be ERA based. If you have a good ERA, you have a good WAR.

In my opinion, that's why I look more towards Fangraphs because they're trying to capture what the pitcher can control and how good they were at that. There's an element of luck involved in ERA, playing with a really good defense, or a string of bad outings, or relief pitchers behind you allowing runners to score.

Now, it's not perfect. Affeldt was dominant in 2009 there's no denying it. He dominated with a groundball heavy approach and a monster amount of double plays. He was 2nd in the league in groundball % and tied for 39th in MLB for GIDP's with 18 (!!). 39th doesn't sound like much, but that's including every pitcher in the league. He was by far the leading relief pitcher in GIDPs.

And there's nothing wrong with that, the Giants executed and Affeldt was able to put up monster numbers. It's reliant on other guys though, which makes it somewhat luck based. You can't master where a hitter hits a groundball. You can master a strikeout pitch though, and that's what I like about Fangraphs.

Affeldt's results were great in 2009, Baseball Reference is saying that it's all because of Affeldt, Fangraphs is saying it was a collective effort.

While things such as Ks, walks and home run rates should be looked at, if that is all Fangraphs looks at (or highly favors) that seems a little out of whack, just like highly leaning on ERA. There's got to be a better model to measure WAR than just one or the other. Yeah, there should be factors that take into account inherited runners, on both sides of the relief pitcher's appearance. Ground balls and GIDPs can be great for a guy coming in with IRs. Maybe Affeldt wasn't a 2.6 WAR that first year but 0.6 seems way too low as well.

 

[SFGRTB]

While things such as Ks, walks and home run rates should be looked at, if that is all Fangraphs looks at (or highly favors) that seems a little out of whack, just like highly leaning on ERA. There's got to be a better model to measure WAR than just one or the other. Yeah, there should be factors that take into account inherited runners, on both sides of the relief pitcher's appearance. Ground balls and GIDPs can be great for a guy coming in with IRs. Maybe Affeldt wasn't a 2.6 WAR that first year but 0.6 seems way too low as well.

I guess it's more of a philosophical difference, but why should someone's WAR be so reliant on his teammates? Batter WAR is reliant on their individual performance, why not pitchers?

For me, all you need to do is look at Affeldt's 2009 and 2010 season's. Affeldt's K/9, BB/9 and HR/9 were nearly identical. The difference? In 2009, all of his groundballs were finding defenders and he was excellent. 2010, all of his groundballs were finding holes and he struggled.

Strikeouts, walks and homer prevention (to and extent) though tend to remain rather consistent.

 

[LHG]

I guess it's more of a philosophical difference, but why should someone's WAR be so reliant on his teammates? Batter WAR is reliant on their individual performance, why not pitchers?

For me, all you need to do is look at Affeldt's 2009 and 2010 season's. Affeldt's K/9, BB/9 and HR/9 were nearly identical. The difference? In 2009, all of his groundballs were finding defenders and he was excellent. 2010, all of his groundballs were finding holes and he struggled.

Strikeouts, walks and homer prevention (to and extent) though tend to remain rather consistent.

But what about the pitcher who has a lower K rate and higher walk rate but he tends to give up more groundballs versus the pitcher with a higher K rate and lower walk rate but tends to give up a lot of flyballs. Pitcher A may put more runners on base with walks but gives up fewer hard hits than player B. How does WAR treat that? Plus, I think pitchers' performances are more dependent on the rest of the team than any position player. A hitter may have to rely on the guys in front of him to get on base but most of the measurable offensive and defensive categories are individual reliant. A pitcher, however, has to rely a lot on his defense making plays. While going the way of Fangraphs tries hard to remove the dependence on others, I think that it comes short of being accurate. How many hits does a pitcher give up that a better defense could have robbed (or vice versa?) How many walks could have been prevented by a catcher with better framing?

 

[SFGRTB]

But what about the pitcher who has a lower K rate and higher walk rate but he tends to give up more groundballs versus the pitcher with a higher K rate and lower walk rate but tends to give up a lot of flyballs. Pitcher A may put more runners on base with walks but gives up fewer hard hits than player B. How does WAR treat that? Plus, I think pitchers' performances are more dependent on the rest of the team than any position player. A hitter may have to rely on the guys in front of him to get on base but most of the measurable offensive and defensive categories are individual reliant. A pitcher, however, has to rely a lot on his defense making plays. While going the way of Fangraphs tries hard to remove the dependence on others, I think that it comes short of being accurate. How many hits does a pitcher give up that a better defense could have robbed (or vice versa?) How many walks could have been prevented by a catcher with better framing?

Well in essence, isn't that kinda the point of WAR? How much better player A is better than player B? Player B is probably favored in this case for Fangraphs, but what about player C who can do all of those things well?

It's just tough rely on groundball/pitch to contact pitchers long term because there are just so many factors involved, like where the defense is playing. I tend to lean your direction more for starting pitchers, but for relievers I think it's pretty fair to isolate the pitcher as much as possible since they are in there for short bursts. Which is also why I'm a big believer in relief Aces.

 

[calsnowskier]

I guess it's more of a philosophical difference, but why should someone's WAR be so reliant on his teammates? Batter WAR is reliant on their individual performance, why not pitchers?

For me, all you need to do is look at Affeldt's 2009 and 2010 season's. Affeldt's K/9, BB/9 and HR/9 were nearly identical. The difference? In 2009, all of his groundballs were finding defenders and he was excellent. 2010, all of his groundballs were finding holes and he struggled.

Strikeouts, walks and homer prevention (to and extent) though tend to remain rather consistent.

But that’s FIP. If you want that number, that’s fine, but it is a different number.

Personally, I don’t really look at WAR for pitchers. I like K, K/9, WHIP, IP, BB/9... GO/FO is good too, but that gets a bit too micro.