2023 Rosterbation

[tzill]

The Giants have 3 potential 60-day IL candidates in Luke Jackson, Luis González, and Thomas Szapucki. Using the 60-day opens up a spot on the 40-man roster, where we know 2 spots will go to Bryce Johnson and Roberto Pérez. I could see them using that 3rd spot on a waiver claim for a player who is out of options as a way to just give an early-season tryout to a player. Some waived players might be an imperfect fit, but there's little risk in at least seeing what a player can do with a change of scenery.

 

[LHG]

We don't need all of them to return to/gain better form. If that were to happen, we'd have waaaaay too many good healthy pitchers. Very unlikely. We don't need 2021 Yaz, Late Night Lamonte, Renaissance Craw, All-Star Forto and Meetch, Next Level Tyro, All Star Joc, etc.

We need a lineup that doesn't have obvious holes and a staff that doesn't have 2 or 3 moundshatters. Oh, and no rampant mittfuckery.

So how many guys need to return to form, in your opinion, to win 90+ games?

 

[LHG]

The Giants have 3 potential 60-day IL candidates in Luke Jackson, Luis González, and Thomas Szapucki. Using the 60-day opens up a spot on the 40-man roster, where we know 2 spots will go to Bryce Johnson and Roberto Pérez. I could see them using that 3rd spot on a waiver claim for a player who is out of options as a way to just give an early-season tryout to a player. Some waived players might be an imperfect fit, but there's little risk in at least seeing what a player can do with a change of scenery.

That 3rd spot could also go to Wynns if Bart gets optioned. Or possibly Wilson if Cobb goes on the IL and the Giants stick with 12 pitchers early in the season.

 

[tzill]

So how many guys need to return to form, in your opinion, to win 90+ games?

Depends upon what you consider 'form.' If you mean not sucking, then we need 8-9 hitters who are not negatives at the plate. Something like 95 OPS+ or better.

For pitchers, we need 4-5 starters who are 120 ERA+ or better. We need no obvious disasters in the bullpen (cough...Brebbia...cough).

So for me, its not returning to form so much as it's not being terrible. Guys I think who should be just fine/might be really good

LWJ
Tyro
Craw
VR
Forto
Yaz
Meetch
Pedo
Davis
Flowers


Guys who might not be ok but could surprise:
Bart
Perez
Slater
Sabol

Pitchers/fine - really good

Webb
Cobb
Manaea
Strip
Wood
Both Rogers
Junis
Doval

Pitchers - iffy
Disco
Hjelle
Alexander
Brebbia

This is my point: very few obvious problems with this roster. At least on March 27. We shall see but I think it's going to be a good team. With decent health could win 90+

 

[LHG]

Depends upon what you consider 'form.' If you mean not sucking, then we need 8-9 hitters who are not negatives at the plate. Something like 95 OPS+ or better.

For pitchers, we need 4-5 starters who are 120 ERA+ or better. We need no obvious disasters in the bullpen (cough...Brebbia...cough).

So for me, its not returning to form so much as it's not being terrible. Guys I think who should be just fine/might be really good

LWJ
Tyro
Craw
VR
Forto
Yaz
Meetch
Pedo
Davis
Flowers


Guys who might not be ok but could surprise:
Bart
Perez
Slater
Sabol

Pitchers/fine - really good

Webb
Cobb
Manaea
Strip
Wood
Both Rogers
Junis
Doval

Pitchers - iffy
Disco
Hjelle
Alexander
Brebbia

This is my point: very few obvious problems with this roster. At least on March 27. We shall see but I think it's going to be a good team. With decent health could win 90+

Thank you. That is really helpful.
For hitters, you mentioned having 8-9 hitters with an OPS+ of 95 or better. Considering who you mentioned in your list that could be good, only 8 posted an OPS+ at 95 or better: Pederson (144), Villar (120), Davis (115), Haniger (114), Estrada (103), Flores (100) and Yastrzemski (96). It should be noted that Haniger and Villar's 2022 seasons are SSS (Haniger due to injury and Villar to being called up late in the season).
So from that first group you mentioned, you are counting on bouncebacks on Wade, Crawford and Conforto. However, I would add Haniger and Yastrzemski to that list. Haniger because of injury concerns. He needs to play more than 51 games for that OPS+ to really make a difference. Yastrzemski because he did a nose dive for a good portion of the 2022 season. He needs to do better to really fit into the 95 OPS+ group.

For the 2nd group, I'm surprised you put Slater into that category. His OPS+ last year was 119. I know that there is an injury concern right now but it doesn't seem very serious and he could get a good amount of playing time. But yes, the other 3 should not be counted on.

As for the 1st pitching group, Manaea wasn't very good last year. Neither was Wood or Taylor Rogers. That is 3 more rebound candidates right there. There is also the assumption that Stripling figured things out last year and will continue to do well moving forward. Based on his 2022 season, I'd put Junis in your "iffy" category but there is an assumption that he'll do better than his 2nd half of 2022 numbers suggested. That really is another 4 players in this group that are being counted on to do better (arguably 5 with Stripling).

For the 2nd pitching group, I think Brebbia is being undervalued. Sure, he faded toward the end of 2022 but he was also overused. I think he could be better in 2023 with more limited usage. This bullpen, currently constructed, may help with that. I don't have much faith in DeSclafani making meaningful contributions, Hjelle is still too much of an unknown (uninspiring 2022 but nice spring training) and Alexander is coming back from injuries. Sure, let's leave these 3 at the end of the pitching staff for contributions.

So, by my subjective analysis, I think you are counting on 9 to 10 players bouncing back from injuries and/or ineffectiveness to make meaningful contributions. However, you are also not counting too much on 2 players to repeat their 2022 seasons, so let's just say about 8 players are supposed to be much better and/or healthier than they were in 2022. I don't think, in my opinion, that depending on that many players to be better and/or healthier means that this team profiles as a 90+ win team.

 

[Mays-Fan]

So how many guys need to return to form, in your opinion, to win 90+ games?

Last year, our SPs totaled 782.2 IP with an ERA of 3.68.

If we can hold that, with our improved BP and offense, and no Pedo (and no Ruf) in the field, 90+ wins is attainable.

 

[calsnowskier]

Last year, our SPs totaled 782.2 IP with an ERA of 3.68.

If we can hold that, with our improved BP and offense, and no Pedo (and no Ruf) in the field, 90+ wins is attainable.

Last years rotation was primarily…

Webb
Rodon
Cobb
Wood
Junis
Disco

This year, the anticipated rotation is…

Webb
Cobb
Strippling
Manaea
Wood
Disco

That means we lost Rodon (and Junis is “demoted” to the pen) and gained Strippling and Manaea (and hopefully have a healthy Disco).

Assuming roughly the same from Webb, Cobb and Wood, will Strippling, Manaea and a full season of Disco be enough to offset the loss of Rodon (near CY level production)?

I think it is safe to expect similar (if not better) production from Webb. Cobb is getting long in the tooth, so realistically, I think it is unfair to expect him to be the same beast. Wood and Disco have looked OK in the spring, so let’s look at the two of them being a net improvement from last year.

That leaves Strippling and Manaea vs Rodon. And I think it is unfair to expect the two of them to produce at a comparable level to whet Rodon gave us last year. However, factoring in Ross and Harrison (and Winn?), with spot starts by Junis, and an improved bully to reduce the stress on the rotation, maybe there can be a general improvement to all starters that results in an overall bump from last year.

Or maybe the rotation is slightly downgraded from last year, but the bully is greatly improved that the overall effectiveness of the pitching staff as a whole is improved enough to not be overly concerned with the slight downgrade in the rotation.

 

[Mays-Fan]

Last years rotation was primarily…

Webb
Rodon
Cobb
Wood
Junis
Disco

This year, the anticipated rotation is…

Webb
Cobb
Strippling
Manaea
Wood
Disco

That means we lost Rodon (and Junis is “demoted” to the pen) and gained Strippling and Manaea (and hopefully have a healthy Disco).

Assuming roughly the same from Webb, Cobb and Wood, will Strippling, Manaea and a full season of Disco be enough to offset the loss of Rodon (near CY level production)?

I think it is safe to expect similar (if not better) production from Webb. Cobb is getting long in the tooth, so realistically, I think it is unfair to expect him to be the same beast. Wood and Disco have looked OK in the spring, so let’s look at the two of them being a net improvement from last year.

That leaves Strippling and Manaea vs Rodon. And I think it is unfair to expect the two of them to produce at a comparable level to whet Rodon gave us last year. However, factoring in Ross and Harrison (and Winn?), with spot starts by Junis, and an improved bully to reduce the stress on the rotation, maybe there can be a general improvement to all starters that results in an overall bump from last year.

Or maybe the rotation is slightly downgraded from last year, but the bully is greatly improved that the overall effectiveness of the pitching staff as a whole is improved enough to not be overly concerned with the slight downgrade in the rotation.

Maybe it's wishful, out-of-the-box thinking on my part, but I believe there would be some synergies to be had if we went to a six man rotation.

Hey, if we can try "openers", we can try a six man rotation.

Perhaps even a designated split-starter, where one guy goes 3-4 innings, and the next guy goes 3-4 innings. In the same game, of course.

 

[calsnowskier]

Maybe it's wishful, out-of-the-box thinking on my part, but I believe there would be some synergies to be had if we went to a six man rotation.

Hey, if we can try "openers", we can try a six man rotation.

Perhaps even a designated split-starter, where one guy goes 3-4 innings, and the next guy goes 3-4 innings. In the same game, of course.

I understand that the 6-man rotation is likely where the game is going, but I am not that big on the idea. I hate that we are limiting Webb’s appearances so we can give our 4 and 5 starters more rest and insert a lower end 6.

 

[Mays-Fan]

I understand that the 6-man rotation is likely where the game is going, but I am not that big on the idea. I hate that we are limiting Webb’s appearances so we can give our 4 and 5 starters more rest and insert a lower end 6.

Well, there is nothing that says we can't start Webb every 5th game, while the others start every 6th game.

 

[calsnowskier]

Well, there is nothing that says we can't start Webb every 5th game, while the others start every 6th game.

I don’t think clubhouse politics make that a viable solution. I like Webb, but he doesn’t deserve Bonds treatment.

 

[tzill]

Thank you. That is really helpful.
For hitters, you mentioned having 8-9 hitters with an OPS+ of 95 or better. Considering who you mentioned in your list that could be good, only 8 posted an OPS+ at 95 or better: Pederson (144), Villar (120), Davis (115), Haniger (114), Estrada (103), Flores (100) and Yastrzemski (96). It should be noted that Haniger and Villar's 2022 seasons are SSS (Haniger due to injury and Villar to being called up late in the season).
So from that first group you mentioned, you are counting on bouncebacks on Wade, Crawford and Conforto. However, I would add Haniger and Yastrzemski to that list. Haniger because of injury concerns. He needs to play more than 51 games for that OPS+ to really make a difference. Yastrzemski because he did a nose dive for a good portion of the 2022 season. He needs to do better to really fit into the 95 OPS+ group.

For the 2nd group, I'm surprised you put Slater into that category. His OPS+ last year was 119. I know that there is an injury concern right now but it doesn't seem very serious and he could get a good amount of playing time. But yes, the other 3 should not be counted on.

As for the 1st pitching group, Manaea wasn't very good last year. Neither was Wood or Taylor Rogers. That is 3 more rebound candidates right there. There is also the assumption that Stripling figured things out last year and will continue to do well moving forward. Based on his 2022 season, I'd put Junis in your "iffy" category but there is an assumption that he'll do better than his 2nd half of 2022 numbers suggested. That really is another 4 players in this group that are being counted on to do better (arguably 5 with Stripling).

For the 2nd pitching group, I think Brebbia is being undervalued. Sure, he faded toward the end of 2022 but he was also overused. I think he could be better in 2023 with more limited usage. This bullpen, currently constructed, may help with that. I don't have much faith in DeSclafani making meaningful contributions, Hjelle is still too much of an unknown (uninspiring 2022 but nice spring training) and Alexander is coming back from injuries. Sure, let's leave these 3 at the end of the pitching staff for contributions.

So, by my subjective analysis, I think you are counting on 9 to 10 players bouncing back from injuries and/or ineffectiveness to make meaningful contributions. However, you are also not counting too much on 2 players to repeat their 2022 seasons, so let's just say about 8 players are supposed to be much better and/or healthier than they were in 2022. I don't think, in my opinion, that depending on that many players to be better and/or healthier means that this team profiles as a 90+ win team.

Maybe we're splitting hairs here but I'm not counting on "bounceback" but just "not sucking." If Slater, e.g. doesn't suck then that another one of the 8-9 we need. Wood was a lot better than you think if you look at his FIP. He was both unlucky and mittfucked last year. I'm not too worried about him. You want to call it a "bounce back" OK, but I'd call it "not getting screwed by the d"

I'd expect Disco to be fine. When healthy that's kind of what he is.

I'm also counting on addition by subtraction: no more fielding gloves for Hebrew, no Longo, no LaStella, no Ruf.

I think we'll get much better production out of 3B and probably 1B, definitely DH and OF.

C is the quandary.

For pitching, no McGee, no hurt Disco, no Marte, no Alvarez.

No Wholestaff games. If someone is hurt/ineffective, we have lots of depth of guys who...wait for it...don't suck. I can see that type of deep team winning 90.

 

[Mays-Fan]

I don’t think clubhouse politics make that a viable solution. I like Webb, but he doesn’t deserve Bonds treatment.

I'm not sure how that would qualify as "Bonds treatment".

If anything, they would be making Webb work harder for his money, relatively speaking, by playing every 5th game, instead of every sixth game.

It's really no different than batting your best hitters toward the top of the order, and your poorer hitters toward the bottom. The better hitters get more PA's. Our better starters should get more starts.

 

[calsnowskier]

I'm not sure how that would qualify as "Bonds treatment".

If anything, they would be making Webb work harder for his money, relatively speaking, by playing every 5th game, instead of every sixth game.

It's really no different than batting your best hitters toward the top of the order, and your poorer hitters toward the bottom. The better hitters get more PA's. Our better starters should get more starts.

He would be on a regular rotation while everyone else would be on a messed up schedule. And it would be blatantly telling all the other starters that he is more important than the rest of them. Similar to how Rodon was miffed last year when the shut Webb down but expected Rodon to make his remaining starts. That went over like a lead balloon.

 

[Mays-Fan]

He would be on a regular rotation while everyone else would be on a messed up schedule.

He would pitch every 5th game. The other starters would pitch every 6th. Not PhD-level math here. Schedules get "messed up" all the time, even with standard rotations - rain outs, double headers, days off, ASB's. So, sorry, I reject your "reasoning" here.

And it would be blatantly telling all the other starters that he is more important than the rest of them.

Well, he is better. This is up to the manager to communicate. If the manager can't, then find one that will.

Similar to how Rodon was miffed last year when the shut Webb down but expected Rodon to make his remaining starts. That went over like a lead balloon.

Again, communication is the key.


Remember, this sub-discussion started when you thought Webb should pitch every 5th game. I would urge us to pitch him every 6th game.

 

[calsnowskier]

He would pitch every 5th game. The other starters would pitch every 6th. Not PhD-level math here. Schedules get "messed up" all the time, even with standard rotations - rain outs, double headers, days off, ASB's. So, sorry, I reject your "reasoning" here.

Well, he is better. This is up to the manager to communicate. If the manager can't, then find one that will.

Again, communication is the key.


Remember, this sub-discussion started when you thought Webb should pitch every 5th game. I would urge us to pitch him every 6th game.

I never said he should pitch every 5th while all the other peons pitched every 6th. In the clubhouse, blatantly saying player X is more equal than everyone else is poison. As good as Bonds was, his royal treatment was not conducive to a winning environment.

 

[calsnowskier]

Slusser was on M&M this AM and said that the final roster decisions apparently did not go over very well in the clubhouse. The players felt that Bryce had earned the job and the fact that the team went outside the org for a journeyman castoff felt like a bit of a knife in the back to the org players. Also, they had told Wisely that he didn’t make the team, then changed their minds at the last second so his family was not able to make it to NY to see his debut.

End of the day, the team has to do what is best for the org as a whole. But this FO runs the team like a video game. They don’t treat their players like humans. And that MAY explain some of the problems they have attracting FAs.

 

[LHG]

Slushed was on M&M this AM and said that the final roster decisions apparently did not go over very well in the clubhouse. The players felt that Bryce had earned the job and the fact that the team went outside the org for a journeyman castoff felt like a bit of a knife in the back to the org players. Also, they had told Wisely that he didn’t make the team, then changed their minds at the last second so his family was not able to make it to NY to see his debut.

End of the day, the team has to do what is best for the org as a whole. But this FO runs the team like a video game. They don’t treat their players like humans. And that MAY explain some of the problems they have attracting FAs.

Who is Slushed? Are you tzill?

These stories make me sad. The way that they handled Johnson was wrong, even before hearing this story. Why play him up to the media, only to grab someone last minute? I know that is very FZ but that doesn't make it right.

And that is just horrible communication on the Giants' part with Wisely. I'd be pissed if I was his father and missed his big league debut because the org didn't communicate with the player on time. Of course, I'd also be excited by the fact that he made it and the team did decide to carry him. Which would make me even more pissed I missed that once in a lifetime moment for my offspring.

I remember, probably 3 years ago, someone interviewed FZ and he (not sure if the reporter assumed this or FZ said it outright) was painted as a guy who really sees players as human beings and not interchangeable parts on a roster. I was already suspicious about the credibility of that statement. Time has only proven my suspicions correct. I understand that baseball is a business and sentimentality has its limits but FZ seems to go out of his way to take the human element out of the equation in decisions.

 

[calsnowskier]

Who is Slushed? Are you tzill?

These stories make me sad. The way that they handled Johnson was wrong, even before hearing this story. Why play him up to the media, only to grab someone last minute? I know that is very FZ but that doesn't make it right.

And that is just horrible communication on the Giants' part with Wisely. I'd be pissed if I was his father and missed his big league debut because the org didn't communicate with the player on time. Of course, I'd also be excited by the fact that he made it and the team did decide to carry him. Which would make me even more pissed I missed that once in a lifetime moment for my offspring.

I remember, probably 3 years ago, someone interviewed FZ and he (not sure if the reporter assumed this or FZ said it outright) was painted as a guy who really sees players as human beings and not interchangeable parts on a roster. I was already suspicious about the credibility of that statement. Time has only proven my suspicions correct. I understand that baseball is a business and sentimentality has its limits but FZ seems to go out of his way to take the human element out of the equation in decisions.

I am very much so of the mindset that MLB is a business first, and that players need to buck up and understand that. But at the same time, if org A treats players like people and understand the realities of life, and org B views players as widgets, org B is going to have a very hard time attracting FAs when competing with org A. And they will have a hard time KEEPING their own FAs (see Rodon, Carlos).

And what sucks is that the Giants have (had?) a rep as being very player/family friendly. Their attachment to their history (Mays, McCovey, Clark, Kruk, Kuip, etc) was one of the reasons I became a part of the lunatic fringe. This new Moneyball philosophy is making me seriously question my very fandom of the team. This current regime is laundry only. I don’t want to root for a corporate entity.

 

[Mays-Fan]

I am very much so of the mindset that MLB is a business first, and that players need to buck up and understand that. But at the same time, if org A treats players like people and understand the realities of life, and org B views players as widgets, org B is going to have a very hard time attracting FAs when competing with org A. And they will have a hard time KEEPING their own FAs (see Rodon, Carlos).

And what sucks is that the Giants have (had?) a rep as being very player/family friendly. Their attachment to their history (Mays, McCovey, Clark, Kruk, Kuip, etc) was one of the reasons I became a part of the lunatic fringe. This new Moneyball philosophy is making me seriously question my very fandom of the team. This current regime is laundry only. I don’t want to root for a corporate entity.

The best organizations do BOTH, run a business well AND treat its people as human beings. When there is an apparent conflict between the two goals, communication and sensitivity are critical.

Running the bottom line well is a science. Treating your people well is an art. Over time, the two goals are fully compatible.