tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post6425038971988738799..comments2024-02-23T20:49:09.057-08:00Comments on obsessivegiantscompulsive: Your 2015 Giants: PQS After (nearly) Three Turns of the Rotationobsessivegiantscompulsivehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11362706004246875823noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-5762748868670020162015-04-27T08:24:16.995-07:002015-04-27T08:24:16.995-07:00Ah, yes, GB vs. FB tendencies. Thanks, had forgot...Ah, yes, GB vs. FB tendencies. Thanks, had forgotten about that nuance of analysis.<br /><br />Thanks for explaining. Yes, we'll get a better view into where he is going with his next start. And I basically view his journey as much like that in AA, one start at a time, that improvement could be reversed, just like that, and we'll see how long he can stretch things out. obsessivegiantscompulsivehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11362706004246875823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-9071635118933291562015-04-25T12:37:01.867-07:002015-04-25T12:37:01.867-07:00I look at the opposing teams' GB tendencies vs...I look at the opposing teams' GB tendencies vs. the pitcher's GB historical tendencies.<br />The 2 previous starts were against teams with high FB tendencies while the Dodgers are fairly neutral. Equally, if any team were to be interested/able to adjust quickly, it is the Dodgers vs. the Giants.<br />I'd also note that while luck exists - there is luck and there is LUCK - the latter start for Lincecum was absolutely in the LUCK category.<br />I don't expect any starter to be perfect - yesterday's game vs. the Rockies was a good example of bad luck where the Rockies just doinked the Giants to death. Lincecum's last start: he got lucky at least 4 different times in that a ball hit 2 inches in either direction would have resulted in a very negative result. Once or twice either way, this happens but as you require more and more unusually positive results, you're geometrically less and less likely to get them. This is what separates a good or great pitcher vs. a mediocre one - the numbers of times good luck has to occur or bad luck not to occur in order to prevent runs.<br />We'll see with his next start - the Angels are one of the more extreme flyball teams. If Lincecum can continue his 50% GB rate, then the change is more likely to be real.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-35116311383251423222015-04-24T11:46:53.672-07:002015-04-24T11:46:53.672-07:00Well, I use the PQS methodology to guide my discus...Well, I use the PQS methodology to guide my discussions and his last start was a 4 PQS, which is considered a dominant start. Sure, getting 4 DP is lucky, but that don't mean that he would not have gotten the subsequent batters out anyway. <br /><br />Dominance, in PQS terms, means not giving up many hits while going at least 6 innings and striking out a good amount (at least IP-2, or in this case, at least 4 strikeouts), plus only give up one or less homers. It also means not walking too many, but that is why he got a 4 and not a 5 PQS rating.<br /><br />Yes, after three starts, the jury is always out, but he's at least on the right track, with three good (or good enough) starts so far, and more importantly, no disaster starts that pretty automatically sinks your chances of winning.<br /><br />Here's something different in 2015 vs. 2012-2014: his 2015 is the best start to the season he has had in the past four seasons. 2 DOM starts so far plus no DIS starts. Across the 3 years, he only had 3 DOM starts and had 2 DIS starts. <br /><br />Thanks for the observation about sink. Perhaps the workout with his dad yielded a new trick? We'll see, but I don't know how you judge that the league is adjusting already based on one game. obsessivegiantscompulsivehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11362706004246875823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-71262613594931012282015-04-24T10:58:23.199-07:002015-04-24T10:58:23.199-07:00Lincecum did well in his first 2 starts, but his l...Lincecum did well in his first 2 starts, but his last one was very lucky.<br />First 2 starts, he had an unusually high GB rate. In this last one, it was more typical but half of the GBs went for double plays.<br />Timmie got 4 DPs in 6 innings (a lineout/double off first on top of the 3 typical) - the numbers might look good but the actual pitching was far from it.<br />One thing I can say is that it seems he is getting more sink on his pitches than before - which is why he had so many GBs in the first 2 games. However, clearly the league is also adjusting so it seems unlikely that Lincecum will maintain his present 60% GB ratio (vs. his historic mid 40s%).<br />Jury is still out as to whether he's dramatically different than the previous 2 years.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-78709589550908360212015-04-23T18:45:41.065-07:002015-04-23T18:45:41.065-07:00That's three straight DOM starts against LA, a...That's three straight DOM starts against LA, and now four out of last five starts. If Heston, Hudson, and Lincecum can continue pitching well, that will help to get over that second rotation hiccup. It didn't help with Peavy trying to force things and tossing two disaster starts, screwing things up. obsessivegiantscompulsivehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11362706004246875823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-60894116693426685242015-04-21T15:27:39.998-07:002015-04-21T15:27:39.998-07:00(cont...) I'm not saying that they have a magi...(cont...) I'm not saying that they have a magic touch in such situations. But such situations do not appear to scare them much (definitely not as much as it scares us fans) nor affect how they play. <br /><br />They play to win today's game, nothing more, nothing less. Even in 2013, when they were getting close to getting a Top 5 pick overall (I was salivating, I'll admit it, they were at 6th I believe), they bring back Pagan and he played his heart out and they finished well enough to push their pick into the teens last year (where we got Beede).<br /><br />So as a fan, I agree that the poor start bodes very poorly for repeating. But it is early and this team has a lot of players who refuse to yield. And that's always exciting, at least to me, even if we don't win it all (part of my upbringing following the Giants in the 70's and 80's, I guess :^).obsessivegiantscompulsivehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11362706004246875823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-16196492831777064812015-04-21T15:27:04.094-07:002015-04-21T15:27:04.094-07:00Great comment! Yes, without Heston, it would be h...Great comment! Yes, without Heston, it would be hella worse. Just like last season, without Hudson, it would be hella worse. At that time, to rely on Hudson to continue that would be foolish, but just as foolish betting against Bumgarner correcting himself at some point and returning to normal.<br /><br />And thanks for pointing out that the offense has been horrible. I should have covered that in my comments, but focused more on the pitching since that was my topic starter (but that never stopped me before :^). <br /><br />You listed all the "highlights" of how bad we are. We have been pretty bad overall.<br /><br />But you state 2014 Padres as if that is our talent level. Buster, Crawford, and Belt have been hitting below what they are capable of. Is it realistic to believe that this 2 week slowness is their performance for the year? I don't think so. And Crawford has already gotten his numbers back up to his normal career levels. So I don't think that it is fair (yet) to label them like that right now. <br /><br />Players have bad two weeks all the time. Most of our hitters happen to be having it at the same time, unfortunately. It was bad enough losing one of our middle of the lineup hitters in Pence, but then to lose Belt to injury then him losing his stroke while sitting, plus Posey going through another slow stretch, there goes all the guys you expect to drive in runs, no wonder we aren't scoring runs.<br /><br />When batters are in a bad rut, it don't matter how good or bad the other pitching is, they just look bad. They showed some life in that other game, eventually losing it, then won on ring day. So who knows how long this streak will last. <br /><br />To your point, the awful start could really kill our chances of repeating and breaking the even year thing (and really, I don't like this term, because if you take a deeper look into the statement, you realize the Giants have NEVER won in an odd year, in their time in SF). <br /><br />And it could get worse before it gets better. We are getting some life from Crawford, Panik, Duffy, and Blanco, but now Aoki, Pagan, Posey, McGehee, and Belt are all struggling to some degree. <br /><br />Posey looks like a temporary thing, he's still not striking out much, meaning it's bad BABIP time, but Belt has been striking out way too much. Same for Aoki, Pagan, McGehee as well, great contact rate, just not for hits. But until we get some actual slugging from our middle lineup hitters, we will continue struggle.<br /><br />And to your great point, at some point the bad start will cost a chance for a playoff spot. <br /><br />However, that's the beauty of a long baseball season. Teams off to hot starts suddenly face reality and fall back to the pack. Teams off to cold starts suddenly get healthy and rise in the pack. It is way too soon to be talking about blowing our chances of repeating. As I've analyzed, we have a good team overall. The problem is getting them to perform to their abilities. <br /><br />If Bumgarner and Posey were doing what they were projected to do, instead of being 4-10, we should be at least 6-8 (assuming Bumgarner would have won one of his last two starts and Posey was hitting his normal way) and the angst would not be as wailing wall as it has been among the Giants fans. <br /><br />Lastly, I'll end with this: this is the team that came back from far behind in 2010 to win it all, including winning on the last day of the season, the team that was on the edge of elimination in 2012 and was down two wins in both went 6-0, the team that nearly fell out of the playoffs, held the last wild card spot, then rode the back of their ace into another championship. They were also the team that continued to lead the NL West in 2011 without Posey until they acquired Carlos Beltran. obsessivegiantscompulsivehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11362706004246875823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-36675648366458176172015-04-21T14:52:51.727-07:002015-04-21T14:52:51.727-07:00I agree with you, I love Petit, and I would have m...I agree with you, I love Petit, and I would have made him the starter, just on the concept of it, taking the spot that Peavy got (Plus we would have saved $13M for 2 years). <br /><br />But I see why they kept him there. Not every starting pitcher can make the transition to a reliever unscathed. One consistent message I've read from relievers who finally were good was that they were not good relievers until they accepted that they were no longer starters. Petit has that mindset already and is fine with it. Vogelsong, however, has not. <br /><br />And what a weapon Petit is! We've all seen it the past couple of years, particularly last season. You can't buy a pitcher who can do that as a reliever and just throwing a prospect in there to do that won't guarantee such performance, which is probably the reason why the Giants chose to keep him in that role still for this season. <br /><br />So I still would have rather had him as a starter, but can see why they decided to keep him in this role, particularly once they picked up Vogelsong as another long starter. May as well use the guy whose mindset is that of a starter as the starter. Plus, who would we put in that role instead AND can expect to get the same type of results?<br /><br />Here's another reason I accept his role: I don't know what the effect of familiarity will be on his performance. He's actually another version of Heston to me: a pitcher who the scouts do not see much advantage too or skill in, and yet is performing well in the majors right now. <br /><br />I remember discussing Petit with prospect hounds and the general consensus was that he didn't have any good skills, and hence they were very negative about him bringing what he was doing in AAA to the majors. Yet he has so far.<br /><br />An analysis I saw on Fangraphs showed that he has a deceptive throwing motion, his throwing hand (and thus the ball) disappears behind his head in his throwing motion and then pops out at the hitter. That moment of lost motion has caused MLB hitters to swing and miss a lot more than they should against a pitcher with not much velocity and not much "stuff" (i.e. his pitches have little movement). <br /><br />What if familiarity allows hitters to get used to his throwing motion? He's effective now because of his deceptive motion, but once hitters get used to that, he's got nothing else to fall back on, which is why he was dumped as a prospect by a number of teams, and why he was available for nothing to the Giants. <br /><br />I don't know pitching motion to know the answer to that, but given the Giants actions so far, that is my best explanation of why they don't give him a spot in the starting rotation so far. Seems like a no-brainer to me too, but they have their reasons for it. Based on what I see from his numbers, I would start him. <br /><br />But one of the tenets of saber thoughts is that you want your best pitchers pitching when the situation gets tough in relief. The way Petit is pitching, he is among the best, and he shuts down the other team long enough generally that we can then catch up and hopefully win. We lose that most probably if we start him and replace him. <br /><br />He's basically being used the way I've been advocating to use Lincecum as once he is not a full-time starter anymore, as a super-utility pitcher who can spot-start, come into the middle of a game and bridge to the set-up and/or closer, come in and shut down rallies as a set-up guy, or close out a game, particularly an extra inning game where multiple innings are needed. Petit has mostly inhabited that role, I realize now from this comment, but that was what I was hoping to get from Lincecum at some point. Basically, he showed the value of such a role in the 2012 playoffs. obsessivegiantscompulsivehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11362706004246875823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-2801821887944350162015-04-21T14:16:05.804-07:002015-04-21T14:16:05.804-07:00Do you have any insights as to why the FO decided ...Do you have any insights as to why the FO decided that Petite should continue his role as an occasional starter and 1-2 inning "hold the game guy" and not use him as starter this year? Wouldn't he have been cheaper, more reliable and within the reward for doing great things in the playoffs than Peavy? and easier to replace from within the system (atleast the middle of the game holding role)? 22's SweetSwinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02224679009729884861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23735245.post-79172563248534832572015-04-20T21:27:36.497-07:002015-04-20T21:27:36.497-07:00Agree that the pitching hasn't been that bad -...Agree that the pitching hasn't been that bad - although that's mostly only because of Heston doing so well.<br />However, the real problem is offense. The Giants are tied for the 4th fewest runs scored in the NL - and are worse than that because they've played more games than the other 3.<br />Some is the absence of Pence, the most is because Buster, Crawford, Belt, *and* McGehee have not started well at all. Pagan and Aoki have done well, but there's only so much you can do when the 4 above are averaging under 0.200 collectively. Can we say 2014 Padres?<br />More of a concern is that this hasn't even been against the toughest pitching in the NL - the Giants haven't played either LA or Washington.<br />It is still early, but equally, a really awful start bodes poorly for breaking the even year thing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com