Lincecum - Another Fans View

[SF11704]

Thought I'd pull this out of the main thread just to give it some isolation. I've been a Giant fan for a little over 60 years but I'm also a somewhat different fan that what is typically on this forum. My views are somewhat different and may actually explain some of what we are seeing about the Lincecum re-signing.

The most important difference is that I am NOT a SF native. My passion with the Giants started in NY and just followed them to SF. But, that changes my view of things quite a bit. I would love to hear how Freeport22 also sees this.

I understand Lincecum's importance to the organization but for me it almost appears to be centered in the business aspects of what he represents to them. He is very marketable commodity to them and does represent his own 'cashflow' for them. Many of you have mentioned his 'marketing' value and also the stadium value. As a 'displaced' fan these have little impact for me. I don't see any of the marketing and I will most likely not attend any home games. My value assessment of Timmy is purely a performance metric. Based on that I see a pitcher that has struggled quite a bit over the past three seasons. In the 2008-2010 period Timmy was CY material as we all know. For whatever reasons he has been a sub 500 pitcher for the past 3 years and almost all of his surrounding stats have risen as well. This is the same pitcher we placed in the pen in 2012. If we ever did this again we would have a 17.5M bullpen specialist. For me that's troubling. But, for only two years it's somewhat workable. If things go well, it was a great gamble ... if not .... then it's nothing gained if nothing ventured.

But, to be fair this is also what happen in NY about three years ago. Derek Jeter was given a 3 year contract at 16.5M per year. He was 33 at the time. Most non-Yankee fans critized this contact as just 'nuts'. Paying 16.5M a year for a 33 year old Short Stop was crazy. Living in NY I did understand it from a marketing perspective and what he meant to them but as a non-Yankee fan I still thought it was crazy.

I think to really understand and appreciate Timmy's re-signing it really helps if you live locally and see the impact on an everyday basis ..... and of course you have to be a fan .... IMHO this is what' lends itself to the flashback that we see from some of the trolls.

 

[tzill]

Thought I'd pull this out of the main thread just to give it some isolation. I've been a Giant fan for a little over 60 years but I'm also a somewhat different fan that what is typically on this forum. My views are somewhat different and may actually explain some of what we are seeing about the Lincecum re-signing.

The most important difference is that I am NOT a SF native. My passion with the Giants started in NY and just followed them to SF. But, that changes my view of things quite a bit. I would love to hear how Freeport22 also sees this.

I understand Lincecum's importance to the organization but for me it almost appears to be centered in the business aspects of what he represents to them. He is very marketable commodity to them and does represent his own 'cashflow' for them. Many of you have mentioned his 'marketing' value and also the stadium value. As a 'displaced' fan these have little impact for me. I don't see any of the marketing and I will most likely not attend any home games. My value assessment of Timmy is purely a performance metric. Based on that I see a pitcher that has struggled quite a bit over the past three seasons. In the 2008-2010 period Timmy was CY material as we all know. For whatever reasons he has been a sub 500 pitcher for the past 3 years and almost all of his surrounding stats have risen as well. This is the same pitcher we placed in the pen in 2012. If we ever did this again we would have a 17.5M bullpen specialist. For me that's troubling. But, for only two years it's somewhat workable. If things go well, it was a great gamble ... if not .... then it's nothing gained if nothing ventured.

But, to be fair this is also what happen in NY about three years ago. Derek Jeter was given a 3 year contract at 16.5M per year. He was 33 at the time. Most non-Yankee fans critized this contact as just 'nuts'. Paying 16.5M a year for a 33 year old Short Stop was crazy. Living in NY I did understand it from a marketing perspective and what he meant to them but as a non-Yankee fan I still thought it was crazy.

I think to really understand and appreciate Timmy's re-signing it really helps if you live locally and see the impact on an everyday basis ..... and of course you have to be a fan .... IMHO this is what' lends itself to the flashback that we see from some of the trolls.

Good post, SF. I think that those who see this as a "massive overpay" are focusing in on Timmy's first 40 starts the last two years, and not his last 20. Anyone who followed the team over these last two years has seen Timmy 3.0. Timmy 1.0 was Cy Timmy, and that guy is gone. Timmy 2.0 was struggling/stubborn Timmy who was pitching off a 90 mph fastball, striking a lot of guys out, but getting lit up pretty consistently. Timmy 2.0 didn't last in the majors and was considered a pitcher who needed to transition to the bullpen to remain in the game. Then, about June 1 this year, Timmy 3.0 emerged. This new pitcher altered his between start workouts, began studying opposing hitters with Buster, and generally was open to suggestion from more experienced guys [notably Gaudin]. Again, if you followed closely, you saw a pitcher who was pitching to contact more, having quicker innings, and actually got stronger as the season went on. Timmy 2.0 and Timmy 3.0 had one thing in common though -- bad luck. The bullpen let in 65% of his runners left on base [league average is 25%] and his defense failed him [below league average]. This created a situation where he needed to throw more pitches and subsequently his ERA ballooned.

Unfortunately, troll doesn't look at him with a discerning eye or fine-grained analysis. Troll looks at the ERA, lumps Timmy 2.0 and Timmy 3.0 together and says "he's terrible and it was a massive overpay." A closer look shows that with average defense and average bullpen work behind him, his ERA should have been closer to 4.25 in 2012 and 3.5 in 2013. With those conditions, he likely wins more games too and his WAR would be close to 3.0 [take a look at his 2011 season for a decent statistical comp]. Troll doesn't see any of this because troll doesn't follow Timmy or the team like we do. Troll's purpose is to hijack threads and provoke reaction.

Troll also wouldn't know that Timmy's fastball, which sat at about 90mph under Timmy 2.0, was at 92.5 in September. This suggests that his mechanics are being smoothed out as he learns to pitch with less velocity than Timmy 1.0. It also suggests that there is upside to his fastball and while he will not likely return to the 96-97mph Timmy 1.0, he is also not going to be the 90mph Timmy 2.0. With his change and curve and a 92-94mph fastball, there is every reason to think he'll be a 3.50 ERA, 14-16 win pitcher and return 3.0 WAR on his $17.5MM contract.

But you'd need to actually know what you're talking about to see it.

The marketing angle is a secondary consideration after the baseball analysis. Simply put, if the Giants thought they could get a better pitcher at the price they would not have signed Timmy to the contract, irrespective of his box office cache. Note that they cut the GOAT a year before he was probably done, even though they would have cashed in fabulously as he chased 800 HRs, because keeping him wouldn't have made good baseball sense.

I'm fairly confident Timmy 3.0 will be a solid #3 pitcher and along with Bum and Cain will form the core of an effective starting rotation. If we bring in Tanaka that would be the jackpot. Failing that, if we sign Nolasco, Ubaldo, or Arroyo then we have a solid 1-4 with Tron/Petit/Grope/Kick/Kamp all vying for the #5 slot. That's a pretty healthy situation. Not a $200MM payroll situation, but one that's good enough to challenge for the division.

But troll looks at ERA and makes his jackass conclusions. Trolls gotta troll.

 

[SF11704]

GREAT response. It explains a lot of what YOU guys see. Since I don't live in the SF area I get a very limited view of the 2.0 and the 3.0 versions. As a matter of fact I mostly unaware unless someone on this board brings it up. But to be honest, it is the Giant fan in me that wants him to succeed. I want another run at a WS and I think we need the 3.0 version to make that happen. This is where the otherside of the coin comes into play. If Timmy does (for whatever reason) struggle again what will they do. Do they leave him in the rotation to work it out or do they put some sort of a leash on him. At what point is a 'win' more important than correcting the mechanic? If he goes back to the pen to 'retool' himself we will hear it all again .... but I would rather that approach then have us forfiet the season trying to correct whatever is wrong. I have to go by what you all say. I really don't see the 2.0 and the 3.0 Timmy. I do remember the 1.0 and that seems to be lost at the moment. As a fan I hope the 3.0 is ready for action ......

 

[StanMarsh51]

Again, if you followed closely, you saw a pitcher who was pitching to contact more, having quicker innings, and actually got stronger as the season went on. Timmy 2.0 and Timmy 3.0 had one thing in common though -- bad luck. The bullpen let in 65% of his runners left on base [league average is 25%] and his defense failed him [below league average]. This created a situation where he needed to throw more pitches and subsequently his ERA ballooned.

Some of which may need to be taken into context, because we'd need to look at when he exited games. I think it can reasonably be guesstimated that the later a game goes on, the lower the inherited runners scored % is, since obviously your typical 8th and 9th inning relievers tend to be the best relievers on the team.

If he's leaving games in the 5th or 6th inning for instance with runners, on, you'd expect a higher than average IR% since not many teams have dominant relievers who come in the 6th. In 2013 for instance, Lincecum left games with 18 runners on base, and of those 18 runners, 13 of them came in games where he exited in the 6th inning or earlier. When 72% of the runners you leave on base occurs before the 7th inning begins, you're may expect a greater than average % of them to score (you'll see a guy like a Joba Chamberlain come in at that time rather than Mariano Rivera) . How much greater than average, I don't know (don't have the inning-by-inning breakdowns).

 

[sfsportsfan]

2011 would be considered a down year?

 

[tzill]

GREAT response. It explains a lot of what YOU guys see. Since I don't live in the SF area I get a very limited view of the 2.0 and the 3.0 versions. As a matter of fact I mostly unaware unless someone on this board brings it up. But to be honest, it is the Giant fan in me that wants him to succeed. I want another run at a WS and I think we need the 3.0 version to make that happen. This is where the otherside of the coin comes into play. If Timmy does (for whatever reason) struggle again what will they do. Do they leave him in the rotation to work it out or do they put some sort of a leash on him. At what point is a 'win' more important than correcting the mechanic? If he goes back to the pen to 'retool' himself we will hear it all again .... but I would rather that approach then have us forfiet the season trying to correct whatever is wrong. I have to go by what you all say. I really don't see the 2.0 and the 3.0 Timmy. I do remember the 1.0 and that seems to be lost at the moment. As a fan I hope the 3.0 is ready for action ......

Well, there is always risk with any contract. However, the Giants gave him more money (he was projected to get 3/48) for a shorter term. Worst case, he Timmy 3.0 fails and he heads to the bullpen as Timmy 4.0. That would be a bad overpay, but for 1+ years not budget killing.

 

[calsnowskier]

Some of which may need to be taken into context, because we'd need to look at when he exited games. I think it can reasonably be guesstimated that the later a game goes on, the lower the inherited runners scored % is, since obviously your typical 8th and 9th inning relievers tend to be the best relievers on the team.

If he's leaving games in the 5th or 6th inning for instance with runners, on, you'd expect a higher than average IR% since not many teams have dominant relievers who come in the 6th. In 2013 for instance, Lincecum left games with 18 runners on base, and of those 18 runners, 13 of them came in games where he exited in the 6th inning or earlier. When 72% of the runners you leave on base occurs before the 7th inning begins, you're may expect a greater than average % of them to score (you'll see a guy like a Joba Chamberlain come in at that time rather than Mariano Rivera) . How much greater than average, I don't know (don't have the inning-by-inning breakdowns).

Good point.

This brings up the point that the G's BP was not a typical G's BP this year. The loss of KCya and Patty REALLY hurt the entire team. Add into that the complete implosion of Kontos and Mijares, and the season begins to come into clearer focus.

It also emphasized the importance of a pitcher to be able to get into the 7th inning. Timmeh 2.0 was a 4 IP pitcher. Timmeh 3.0 became a 6+ IP pitcher. Still not a 1/2, but he is getting closer to a low-end 3 / solid 4.

This same point explains why Gaudin is not a lock to be back. Dude was untouchable for 3 or 4 IP, but then he disappeared. It was clock-work that we would gas at pitch 80 or so. He really wants to be a starter (who wouldn't with the sal differences between starters and relievers) so I doubt he would accept the G's offer of the long-man roll again.

 

[tzill]

Some of which may need to be taken into context, because we'd need to look at when he exited games. I think it can reasonably be guesstimated that the later a game goes on, the lower the inherited runners scored % is, since obviously your typical 8th and 9th inning relievers tend to be the best relievers on the team.

If he's leaving games in the 5th or 6th inning for instance with runners, on, you'd expect a higher than average IR% since not many teams have dominant relievers who come in the 6th. In 2013 for instance, Lincecum left games with 18 runners on base, and of those 18 runners, 13 of them came in games where he exited in the 6th inning or earlier. When 72% of the runners you leave on base occurs before the 7th inning begins, you're may expect a greater than average % of them to score (you'll see a guy like a Joba Chamberlain come in at that time rather than Mariano Rivera) . How much greater than average, I don't know (don't have the inning-by-inning breakdowns).

Fair points, but with a large enough sample (in this case 60 starts over two years, or about 400 IP) you tend to approach a normal bell curve for distribution of IR%. Your point is a good one and I hadn't really thought of it, but I'd be surprised if Timmy is below league average in average IP/start so we should expect his IR% to approach league average. I don't have the stats handy, but I can't believe the standard deviation from 25% is much more than 10% (meaning, if I'm right about the hypo numbers, that 95% of all pitchers would fall in the below 45% IR%). In other words, if more than 35% of your IR score, you're pretty unlucky and if more than 45% of your IR score, you're incredibly unlucky. Statistical outlier unlucky. Timmy was over 60%.

Your thought would explain a lot more if Timmy didn't regularly pitch 200 innings a year, meaning on average he leaves the game in the seventh. If he were a 150 IP guy, then I'd start to wonder about how much bad luck really plays in his IR%. Then again, if he were a 150 IP guy, he wouldn't have gotten the contract he did.

 

[tzill]

Good point.

This brings up the point that the G's BP was not a typical G's BP this year. The loss of KCya and Patty REALLY hurt the entire team. Add into that the complete implosion of Kontos and Mijares, and the season begins to come into clearer focus.

It also emphasized the importance of a pitcher to be able to get into the 7th inning. Timmeh 2.0 was a 4 IP pitcher. Timmeh 3.0 became a 6+ IP pitcher. Still not a 1/2, but he is getting closer to a low-end 3 / solid 4.

This same point explains why Gaudin is not a lock to be back. Dude was untouchable for 3 or 4 IP, but then he disappeared. It was clock-work that we would gas at pitch 80 or so. He really wants to be a starter (who wouldn't with the sal differences between starters and relievers) so I doubt he would accept the G's offer of the long-man roll again.

I'm not sure about that. Looking at 2012 plus his first two months of 2013 (My Timmy 2.0 definition), he started 44 games and pitched 251 innings for an average start of 5.2). Timmy 3.0 started 21 games and pitched 132.2 innings for an average of 6.1. It doesn't seem like a lot, but those two extra outs add up to 20-25 less appearances by the bullpen over the course of a regular year. And as was pointed out, that means JA/KCya coming in with runners on instead of Mijares and Kontos.

So, I agree that Timmy 3.0 is a guy who takes the ball into the 7th, but the numbers don't bear out that Timmy 2.0 was a 4 IP guy.

I wouldn't be shocked if Freak gives us 200 innings of 3.5 ERA pitching with 200 Ks and his IR% returns to a more normal 25. That's a solid #3/borderline #2 pitcher.

 

[tzill]

Oh, and a last thought on Grope:

He became a starter at almost the same exact time Timmy 3.0 emerged (June 1). 12 GS 65.1 IP 3.58 ERA. As mentioned, he didn't go deep into games (average 5.1 IP). However, if we could get that type of production over the course of a season, he'd be a solid #4/fringy #3 type pitcher.

What we don't know is if he could take the ball 32 times and if he does, can he give us 160+ innings of 3.6 ERA ball.

Worth a couple million to find out, I should think, and worst case he goes to the bullpen as a pretty good long man. Then again, other teams are seeing the same things and may offer him a more concrete #5 slot and a little more money.

 

[Mays-Fan]

Oh, and a last thought on Grope:

He became a starter at almost the same exact time Timmy 3.0 emerged (June 1). 12 GS 65.1 IP 3.58 ERA. As mentioned, he didn't go deep into games (average 5.1 IP). However, if we could get that type of production over the course of a season, he'd be a solid #4/fringy #3 type pitcher.

What we don't know is if he could take the ball 32 times and if he does, can he give us 160+ innings of 3.6 ERA ball.

Worth a couple million to find out, I should think, and worst case he goes to the bullpen as a pretty good long man. Then again, other teams are seeing the same things and may offer him a more concrete #5 slot and a little more money.

Agreed - I'd like to see Gaudin come back. And now having re-signed Timmy, odds are that, budget-wise, we don't sign another high-priced FA SP (that money should go to a RHH LF, IMO). 1/2/3 = Cain/Bum/Timmy, and 4/5 now look like the best of Petit/Gaudin/Vogey, assuming we sign Petit and Vogey, of course. And this is not to sell short the possibility of another prospect emerging (Dunning/Blackburn/Kickham/Crick et al). Competition for starting spots is a very good thing.

So while it's not like the late-2010 SP's, we should still be in decent shape there. And if we do land a solid RHH LF, getting some runs scored and allowing the SP's to attack the hitters in the strike zone will work wonders all around.