Game Thread: 6.25 Raw Keys @ Bum

[Stokes1931]

1. B Belt (L) 1B
2. M Yastrzemski (L) RF
3. B Posey (R) C
4. A Dickerson (L) LF
5. K Pillar (R) CF
6. E Longoria (R) 3B
7. B Crawford (L) SS
8. D Solano (R) 2B
9. M Bumgarner (R) P

Dick! Dick! Dick!

5-2 good guys.

So close.... Good call.

 

[msgkings322]

 

[msgkings322]

no

Only a month left at most in a Giants uni for Fresh Prince, I'm gonna enjoy it.

 

[1phlapdown]

Only a month left at most in a Giants uni for Fresh Prince, I'm gonna enjoy it.

 

[calsnowskier]

Will you still be sad when we get a top 75 prospect + a couple lotto tickets?

 

[1phlapdown]

Will you still be sad when we get a top 75 prospect + a couple lotto tickets?

I would venture yes, in that effective pens don’t grow on trees, and that is one element needed for a get-to-the-playoffs team.

 

[calsnowskier]

I would venture yes, in that effective pens don’t grow on trees, and that is one element needed for a get-to-the-playoffs team.

Agreed.

But 1) this team is nowhere near a playoff team; 2) they won’t be a playoff team until 2021 earliest; and 3) the Giants historically have a knack for putting together good bullies.

I get that it sucks we likely won’t be able to watch this guy moving forward and that he will not be associated as a Giant looking far forward, but that is the cost of doing business.

 

[tzill]

PQS of 3 for Bum if I'm not mistaken. Nice start.

Correct. Average start. He needed to either go a little deeper or keep the ball in the park to be dominant.

PQS isn't a perfect stat (no stat is), but it usually jibes with the eye test

 

[tzill]

According to tzill, a PQS of 3 is mediocre. Only 4s and 5s are good (dominant).

First, PQS wasn't invented by me (nor did I revise it a couple of years ago).

Second, I draw a bit of a line between a 2 and a 3. 2 is mediocre bordering on poor; 3 is average bordering on good.

 

[msgkings322]

Correct. Average start. He needed to either go a little deeper or keep the ball in the park to be dominant.

PQS isn't a perfect stat (no stat is), but it usually jibes with the eye test

See my eye test for this start was better than average. Not hall of fame level but really good. In control most of the game, 11 strikeouts in 6 IP, etc.

HRs have never been higher so keeping the ball in the park happens less and less for all pitchers.

 

[msgkings322]

Agreed.

But 1) this team is nowhere near a playoff team; 2) they won’t be a playoff team until 2021 earliest; and 3) the Giants historically have a knack for putting together good bullies.

I get that it sucks we likely won’t be able to watch this guy moving forward and that he will not be associated as a Giant looking far forward, but that is the cost of doing business.

Exactly, bullpen guys are notorious for being good for a year or two then going to hell, unless they are Mariano Rivera. By the time we need a good bully to compete, these guys will be long gone. The timing just doesn't work

 

[LHG]

First, PQS wasn't invented by me (nor did I revise it a couple of years ago).

Second, I draw a bit of a line between a 2 and a 3. 2 is mediocre bordering on poor; 3 is average bordering on good.

Wasn't trying to say you invented it, sorry if it came across that way. I just hadn't heard of it until you introduced it here.
I do think the scoring is a bit wonky. There are 5 levels but really only 3 - awful, mediocre and dominant. That, to me, places a huge void between a 3 score and a 4 score.

 

[tzill]

See my eye test for this start was better than average. Not hall of fame level but really good. In control most of the game, 11 strikeouts in 6 IP, etc.

HRs have never been higher so keeping the ball in the park happens less and less for all pitchers.

Yeah, that's fair. And we may see a tweak to the stat moving forward to account for HR increase.

The tweak three years ago was to make DOM starts more rare, which again jibes with the eye test.

I think a PQS of 3 is a good start and a perfectly acceptable outing.

 

[tzill]

Wasn't trying to say you invented it, sorry if it came across that way. I just hadn't heard of it until you introduced it here.
I do think the scoring is a bit wonky. There are 5 levels but really only 3 - awful, mediocre and dominant. That, to me, places a huge void between a 3 score and a 4 score.

well, if you prefer the term "average" to mediocre that works too.

Bottom line: a 0 or a 1 is poopy; 2 is meh; 3 is acceptable; 4 is really good; and 5 is elite.

(my terminology)

 

[1phlapdown]

Agreed.

But 1) this team is nowhere near a playoff team; 2) they won’t be a playoff team until 2021 earliest; and 3) the Giants historically have a knack for putting together good bullies.

I get that it sucks we likely won’t be able to watch this guy moving forward and that he will not be associated as a Giant looking far forward, but that is the cost of doing business.

That knack falls to FZ now. I guess we'll see. I think the stock broker's disclaimer applies in this situation.

Are they/he suddenly going to be able to reliably predict which prospects that they acquire for the pen personnel will pan out?

 

[LHG]

That knack falls to FZ now. I guess we'll see. I think the stock broker's disclaimer applies in this situation.

Are they/he suddenly going to be able to reliably predict which prospects that they acquire for the pen personnel will pan out?

Remember, he had a big part in building the current Dodgers' pen.

 

[calsnowskier]

I don’t really get the extremely short fuse fz has been given by fans (and media, but I understand why they act chicken little). He came into a steaming pile of aardvark poop. He isn’t going to make an immediate contender out of that. It will take him some time, and not ALL of his moves are going to be a HR.

But as LHG just said, he had a pretty big hand in building the dogs roster. Let’s give him some time before we run him out of town.

 

[LHG]

I don’t really get the extremely short fuse fz has been given by fans (and media, but I understand why they act chicken little). He came into a steaming pile of aardvark poop. He isn’t going to make an immediate contender out of that. It will take him some time, and not ALL of his moves are going to be a HR.

But as LHG just said, he had a pretty big hand in building the dogs roster. Let’s give him some time before we run him out of town.

While I've been critical of some of his moves, I'm not anywhere close to ready to see him gone. The idea that he could have made a contender out of this team is ridiculous. I lay that unrealistic expectation at the feet of ownership. In some ways, they put him in a place where he was set up to fail. Of course he was going to talk this past offseason about making this team competitive. No way was ownership going to tear down this year, in fear that the fans would react negatively. Now, the inevitable and quite foreseeable response by the fans who bought into this kind of nonsense is playing out.
Do I like everything that FZ has done? No. Have I been right about every outcome of those moves? No. Do I think he should be gone? No. Will I look with an uncritical eye at his moves? No, but I will keep in mind that some of what seem like silly moves could work out.
Oh, and nice spin on my snarky remark about his building the current Dodgers' pen.

 

[calsnowskier]

Oh, and nice spin on my snarky remark about his building the current Dodgers' pen.

 

[Stokes1931]

While I've been critical of some of his moves, I'm not anywhere close to ready to see him gone. The idea that he could have made a contender out of this team is ridiculous. I lay that unrealistic expectation at the feet of ownership. In some ways, they put him in a place where he was set up to fail. Of course he was going to talk this past offseason about making this team competitive. No way was ownership going to tear down this year, in fear that the fans would react negatively. Now, the inevitable and quite foreseeable response by the fans who bought into this kind of nonsense is playing out.
Do I like everything that FZ has done? No. Have I been right about every outcome of those moves? No. Do I think he should be gone? No. Will I look with an uncritical eye at his moves? No, but I will keep in mind that some of what seem like silly moves could work out.
Oh, and nice spin on my snarky remark about his building the current Dodgers' pen.

I have been to a couple of Giants games this season. And by my estimate, the stadium has been half full or less for each game. It is a really bad look. I know they count tickets sold, and lots of seats are "owned" by local businesses.

It looks like Dodger Stadium before the 3rd inning!