The Giants have turned upper management into believers.
Why does president of baseball operations Farhan Zaidi feel a team with a 50-50 record is a legitimate threat in the NL Wild Card race?
“The team is fundamentally different, the roster is different,” Zaidi said. “That’s why I don’t think you can just look at this team’s run differential and make an assessment of our quote-unquote true talent level.”
“You do have to look at the totality of the season, that’s what the standings are based on, but I think one of the reasons we put a lot of credence in our recent play is because the composition of the team is very different,” Zaidi said Sunday.
“We know for us to continue on this path, that group of players is critical,” Zaidi said. “I’ve said a few times, there’s interest in a lot of of our relievers and we have interest in our relievers.”
Sam Dyson, Tony Watson and Reyes Moronta could all fill set-up roles for teams with visions of locking up a playoff spot. In Zaidi’s eyes, they’re already doing that.
“I’m not going to stop teams from calling, I’m going to have to have those conversations, that’s my job,” Zaidi said. “But we recognize that for us to continue to play that well, we’re going to have to continue getting the kind of performance from the bullpen that we’ve gotten.”
“I’m excited we’re playing well because it gives us options,” Zaidi said. “It doesn’t paint us into a corner where maybe we feel that pressure of, ‘Hey, we really have to reload for the next five years because we have a real investment of what’s going on here right now.”
ogc big picture thoughts
With all the talk about run differentials, Zaidi beat me to the punch in discussing how that don't make sense given how different the roster is now vs. the start of the season. Heck, this is the same problem with all the people who point to the last "2.5 seasons" and say that the overall record is an indictment of the talent on this roster (how similar is the roster today compared to the roster at the start of 2016?). This has always been a major problem of Giants fans trying to analyze what the current state of the Giants is, they let the one bad apple spoil the whole barrel.
And it's not like I'm saying they are world beating: I'm still beating the same drum, that they are a .500 team, perhaps wild card contenders if some things roll right.
Savvy Sabean and Zippy Zaidi
For all the back-handed compliments naysaying Giants fans have been giving Sabean over the past few years, he's done right for the Giants: rebuilds were never that long. His first off-season, where he wasn't the village idiot, he turned the 68-94 1996 Giants into the pennant winning 90-72 1997 Giants. Once the Giants ownership gave up on the Barry Bonds home run record attending bonanza after the 71-91 2007 Giants, Sabean had them changed into the 88-74 2009 Giants, then World Champion Giants in 2010.
I expected the same silent order to be given to Zaidi, same as Sabean (minimize losing, maximize attendance), but after that lackluster off-season, I thought I was wrong. But here we are today, the Giants are 52-51, 3 games behind the second Wild Card spot, the one they won in 2014 and 2016, though with six teams in the mix, and three ahead of them. Zaidi has done it, with his move by move, incremental 51/49 improvements.
Run Differential
At least in one clear division, there is a huge break between the first ten games of the season, and the rest, because our starting outfield was Reed, Duggar, and Joe, and Parra was the only other alternative OF. Joe had a .192 OPS, Reed had .000 OPS, and Parra's .546 OPS wasn't all that good either. Duggar had a .620 OPS, but after some nice hitting early on, hit only .597 OPS the rest of the way, forcing the move to AAA. In those 10 games, based on run differential, they should have been 3.4-6.6, which they roughly were at with their 3-7 record.
Once Joe and Reed were replaced with Austin and Pillar, the outfield began to be more like a viable MLB starting outfield. In the 93 games since that early experiment gone awry, the Giants have been 49-44, and their run differential, a slim +2 runs, yielded a pythagorean 46.7-46.3 record, only 2 games different.
And right now, with the Giants being so good in one-run games, one would expect them to be beating pythagorean right now.
Bochy Back?
As I've been documenting over the past half dozen years or so, Bochy has been a master in one-run games. He is currently at 637-559 in one-run games, +78 games above .500, a .533 winning percentage. He has frequently been atop or near the top in the NL among managers in games above .500 in one-run games. He has had 10 such type of seasons (assuming he stays at +8 or higher, which seems to be an outlier among managers) out of his 25 total seasons as manager, or 40% of his seasons as managers. He has also had seasons of +4 and +5, which is pretty good too, which means 12 out of 25.
However, he hit a career lull from 2013 to 2018, six seasons of mostly negative one-run records. That happened to another manager who was good in one-run games, Bobby Cox, who ended his career not so good in one-run games. So Bochy appears to be back, and, not surprisingly, happens to be in possession of a great bullpen. Which most have believed to be his magic sauce.
Trade Deadline
Zaidi said another thing in a recent interview that reminded me of Sabean, circa 2008: he has to listen to offers for Bumgarner, much like Sabean had to be open to deals for Cain and Lincecum. But it doesn't mean that he has to do the trade, if the value in return is not good, in a baseball sense.
Bumgarner Probably Staying
And with the deadline only a week away, I don't really see any deal being made for Bumgarner. As one recent rumor noted, the Giants clubhouse would be in an uproar if he's traded. But more importantly, all the analyses I've seen about Bumgarner since the last off-season began says that he has declined, that he's not all that good anymore. And with so many teams analytics oriented, you have to think many teams buy into those arguments and won't be offering much, and thus not enough, for Zaidi to pull the trigger. This has been my belief all off-season and I see no reason to change it. There will be no Charlie Williams trade.
However, it does seem likely that there will be a trade of at least one reliever. Will Smith, Sam Dyson, and Tony Watson all have strong value to other teams who need relievers, and the Giants have an abundance of backup options in the minors, including Coonrod, Selman, Abad, Venditte, Jerez, Black, Adon, Cyr, Wolff, and even starters, like Menez, D-Rod, and Suarez. With Melancon, Moronta, Gott, Coonrod, and Pomeranz, though, it could be rough sledding initially, should more than one of the three be traded.
So one way Zaidi might be able to keep the winning going while not damaging the bullpen as greatly, would be to trade another reliever who is valuable, both because he's young and still have 4 more seasons of control, in Reyes Moronta. While the older guys are more rentals (Smith is free agent after the season, Dyson only has one last year in control in 2020, and Watson, while he's under contract for 2020, he has a player option and could decide to opt out), Moronta has been about as good (in ERA and FIP), is more of a traditional fireballer, and provides many more years of control.
Moronta might be able to draw a much bigger package of prospects/players (Zaidi talked about picking up arb-eligible players that other teams don't want to hold onto anymore) than the oldies but goodies because of this player control. Meanwhile, the Giants can turn to relievers like Coonrod, Selman, Black, to find a replacement, maybe even Pomeranz, if they bring up, say, D-Rod to be long relief instead, as Pomeranz opened up some eyes with his relief appearance.
Of course, this is all my guessing. It will be very interesting to see what Zaidi does in the next week. Will he trade? Who will he trade? Is he selling and thus killing the chances for the second wild card? Or will he buy and support the effort to win?
Not a lot of places where he can look to improve: 2B and SP. We'll see soon.
Well, this didn't age well. Which is not a criticism as that's baseball...
ReplyDeleteDyson, Pomerantz, Black & Melancon are gone. Selman has been rocked in the majors though at least it's just small-sample size.
D-Rod bitches about the Sacramento express, failing to deal with the fact he's on it because he pitched himself off the 25-man. Making it ironic, he comes back up and gets plastered. Defense didn't help him, but he got plastered.
Last night we got the Reyes Moronta experience, again, and he's upto 4 blown saves and 6 losses on the season in 46 games. That's a 20% failure rate.
Dyson has melted down since being traded with a 32.4 ERA since being traded and an 81.0 (no that's not a typo) ERA in August. Though I'm sure it'll swing back down.
And, now that many of the hot-streaks are coming home to roost, we're 5-5 in the last 10.
Which gets us to Smith & Bumgarner. Rental or QO (possible draft pick). All things considered trades have a higher expected probability of success (just under 20%) compared to QO draftees who come in at under 10%.
Which gets me to I stand by my belief they should have been sellers and should have started under Bobby Evans way back in 2017 when it was clear this aging, becoming brittle roster was in decline.
You claim to be all about the analytics, yet you had to post this just seven games after I posted it: small sample size, almost to the extreme, perhaps?
DeleteAnd all I've said is that the team is a .500 team, and they have been 3-4 since that post, which you conveniently decided it was worth complaining once they finally lost two games in a row, after their hot streak. I still think .500 is doable, and that would keep the team close to the Wild Card chase, no matter how many teams are in the race. And if Duggar can spark the offense some, along with Gennett, that could push them into WC position.
Yes, we need some players to step up, particularly in the bullpen. Moronta is no savior, I think most know that. But there are interesting bullpen pieces, and it might take a week or four to figure out who gets to stay, but I think it's doable, based on the talent available.
Then you continue with the small sample sizing, like with Dyson.
About trades, all the major trade analyses I've seen over the years say the same things. Teams generally know what they are trading away. They generally keep their good players and give up ones they are not as sure about, including prospects.
And success, what's your definition? I agree that QO draftees come under 10% success rate if we are talking about good players, my recent draft study found that it's around 6-7% in the second round. Given that success standard, getting a good player (which I've defined as a 18.0+ WAR player), I doubt that the success rate for trades is 20%, you need to share where these studies show that level of success in trades.
The same thing was said about the 2008-2010 teams: aging, brittle roster in decline. We have a lot of young prospects coming up who look very interesting. They should be matriculating in 2020-22: Menez, Adon, Webb, Bart, Ramos, Luciano, maybe Labour, Canario, Toribio, Pomares, Matos, Santos, Genoves, Hjelle, Wong, Frisbee, Wolff, Corry.
Your stance also lack a critical dimension: business aspect. As this season has shown, attendance is tied strongly to lack of hope, and thus why the Giants continue to try to win.
Your comment today would be as crazy if I were to post a retort that the Giants won today, making them 4-4 since the post.
DeleteI'm patient, just as I was in 2008-2014, to see whether I was right or not. I also know that 8 games is not enough to show one way or another. 4-4 does not prove either of our contentions. It is aligned with my contention, that they are .500 team, perhaps better if some players step up, but I know 4-4 proves nothing.
Next time you feel like gloating, just take a beat and ask yourself whether there's enough evidence. Think of that saying: "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt."
3-7 last ten and I am about the analytics. The analytics that said the Giants were 75% hot-streak and 25% just dumb luck (+5 pythagorean) and that the regression to the mean was to be expected and payback would be a bitch.
ReplyDeleteThis team is, basically, a 3W-4L every 7 games team. Fangraph's offensive/defensive WAR:
March/April: -0.6 WAR
May: 1.6 WAR
Jun: 1.6 WAR
Jul: 4.4 WAR
Aug: 0.2 WAR (to date)
The Giants are, despite the massive-hot-streak July just 25th in offensive+defensive WAR. And in most months, they were 28th in Fangraphs WAR.
However, in July we had 7 hitters hitting above well above league average. Four them were hitting over .300. Only 40 hitters (qualified) hit .300, or better, in July. Also, as we all know .300 hitters are pretty uncommon. Only 16 managed to hit .300 (or better) last year. Just 25 in each of 2016 & 2017. And when those .300 hitters aren't actual MLB .300 hitters career wise (and not close to it) they're all hot-streaks that we all understand wil regress.
Now, lets get to pitching. Giants pitching quality is always over-stated (just like it's hitting is understated) due to park factors. And, except for July, there were never really better than league average DESPITE Oracle's run suppression.
Mar/April - 4.13 ERA (12th)
May - 7.32 ERA (30th)
Jun - 4.42 ERA (15th)
Jul - 3.64 ERA (6th)
Aug - 8.19 ERA (28th)
July was a mirage. Poor pitchers pitching over their talent. Poor hitters hitting over their talent. A club all set-up for a massive and painful regression while failing to move talent they won't have in a couple of months for some prospects that might (but with no certainty) help the club in the future.
And all 100% predictable. And something I expect Zaidi quite well understood, but failed to act for reasons beyond trade-based roster management (fan/roster goodwill + QO's and comp. picks).
I thought you would know better to be boasting about things when things look the worse. I've been writing about how people have been crying that the sky is falling for all the time I've been blogging, that it's better to take the longer view of the situation, as well as not be swayed to much by good or bad. I take it you missed those or forgot about those.
DeleteI wrote this on July 25th, and since then the Giants have been 7-9. Yes, there have been some swings down, and perhaps further swings lower, but it could get better too, as Gennett is starting to heat up some, helping to make up for the loss of Dickerson's hot bat. I would also add that the changes to the roster in the wake of the trade generally need some time to adjust to new roles, new teammates.
I felt in the pre-season that the pitching would be strong enough to support a .500 team, given enough offense. Zaidi crippled the offense for a while, horribly with Joe and Reed, and only stabilizing with Pillar and Austin, but then taking off with Yaz, Dickerson, Solano, and now Gennett. It didn't help that Duggar regressed, had he at least been as good as last season, that would have helped stabilized things further. With the offense coming through finally, the team started winning. With the pitching coming through also, they won at an epic rate.
But with the young SP starting to let us down, maybe you are right, we'll find out soon. Same for the new relievers. For now, it's all confirmation bias, whether it's you or it's me, trying to look at things, series to series.
I'm certainly not saying I'm right yet, it's only been 16 games so far, there's still 43 games left to play, over a quarter of the season. I still think .500 is totally doable, but I'm going to wait for the season to end to see where we are, and not be swung back and forth by one series or another series.
In any case, the Giants need some young starters to start stepping up, whether Beede, Anderson, Menez, Webb, D-Rod, or Suarez. D-Rod complained about the ups and downs, and how being up helps stabilizes him, but he forgot that he was up for a long time at the beginning of the season, he was in the rotation and would have kept his spot had pitched better, and he probably didn't even have to pitch as well as last season, but he had 8 starts and only 2 were any good, the rest were really bad, so that's totally on him, he had the stability he asked for, he was an incumbent from last season, but he couldn't hold onto that position. I still like Beede's and Menez's K/9, so if they can work on reducing the walks, they can be okay to good, depending on how low they can get the walks down to.
And no one has stood out yet in the bullpen as okay replacements for Dyson and Melancon. So we'll see how that goes as well.
Go Giants!