Let me begin by apologizing for the title. It could be considered misleading, because the man I am about to compare to Matt Cain is much shorter, left-handed, and from a completely different era of baseball. He does, however, show up on Matt Cain’s list of comparable pitchers on Baseball-Reference.com and has all the quintessential Matt Cain Traits in his early career including: poor win/loss records despite stellar pitching; a sterling reputation as a genuinely nice guy; and a career ERA that gives FIP fits.

The man in question is one Billy Pierce. Savvy Giants fans will know or remember him as a key piece of the 1962 rotation that helped them stifle the Yankee bats in their bid to strip the title of World Champion from their New York rivals. Yet that was at the twilight of Pierce’s career, and most of his time in the major leagues was spent in Chicago, playing for the Go-go Sox of the 1950’s.

Pierce was a short lefty who only became a pitcher in his youth league after his team’s ace left for a rival team with prettier uniforms. Pierce was an athletic sort who threw hard, and so got tabbed as his team’s new starter. He quickly made a name for himself as a highly sought young talent, although he had no major league aspirations at the time. His intent was to attend medical school, but he was wooed by a $15,000 signing bonus from the Tigers and chose to put off medical school to give a baseball career a try. That career lasted 18 major league seasons.

It’s the early career that interests us, though. Matt Cain is easily my favorite Giant, and I suspect many of us have the same reasons for liking him. He’s been with the team since the Barry years, and many of us remember the gleam of hope he provided in darker times. He’s quietly effective, good natured, and from our perspective, criminally underrated. Despite superior pitching, his win/loss record remains sub-500. We all know the futility of that as any kind of measurement of a pitcher’s success in this era of baseball, but the sheer injustice of it still infuriates.

This is where Billy Pierce makes for an interesting comparison. He isn’t at the top of the “comparable through age 26” list on Cain’s Baseball-reference page, John Smoltz is. (It makes more sense when you realize Smoltz didn’t start blowing away hitters and putting up insane numbers until his age 28 season.) Pierce was clearly the ace of his own team in those days, but it took a while for other people to notice how good he was. Pierce knew what it was to pitch on a team without an offense, as his White Sox won games based on defense and pitching, not home runs. It was a strange quirk, with many other teams in the 50’s fielding lineups bursting with sluggers. For their part, the White Sox spent most of the 50’s coming in third place, looking longingly on as the Yankees and Indians dominated the standings. For six years straight, the White Sox finished third behind those two teams. They finally got their chance to win in 1959, but lost the World Series to the Dodgers in 6 games.

Pierce was a big part of the White Sox in those days. He was nabbed in a trade from the Tigers for little cost, and his arrival coincided with the White Sox crawling out of the cellar after a horrific 101 loss season in 1948. Billy didn’t contribute right away. By his own admission, he was a wild, ineffective pitcher his first two years. In 1950 he walked 137 hitters in 219.1 innings. The next year things changed. The new Chicago manager, Paul Richards, claimed that was the year he taught Billy the slider. Prior to that, Paul said, Billy relied on his fastball almost entirely. He had a good curve, but tended to tip that pitch, letting hitters sit on his fastball. Pierce was regularly called one of the hardest throwing lefties in the game, but his fastball couldn’t do all the work.

Sure enough, with the slider as his new out pitch, Pierce took a huge step forward. He walks dropped to 73 in 240.1 innings, and he turned in a solid year with a 133 ERA+, even if his 15-14 record didn’t show it. From there, Billy just got better, improving his ability to fool even the best hitters, and even leading the league in strikeouts in 1953. But the coveted title of “20 game winner” still eluded him. The scrappy nature of Chicago’s offense produced an adequate offense for the time, but Pierce had another challenge thrown his way. As Chicago’s putative ace, Pierce was frequently asked to go up against the best teams of the league, and skipped over when the White Sox played the basement dwellers. As a result, Pierce made 155 of his 433 major league starts against either the Yankees or the Indians. 246 of his starts were against teams with a record of .500 or better. This took an understandable toll on his overall numbers, as the Yankees hit him better than any other team in the AL.

In 1955, Pierce put up what may well have been his best year. He had struggled in 1954 with a severe toothache, as well as arm troubles, and had pitched fewer than 200 innings for the first time since 1949. In ‘55, he was given more chances to rest, often being held back until the White Sox played tougher teams. He only made 26 starts that year, but lead the league with an astonishing 1.97 ERA, good for an ERA+ of 200.

200.

Pierce was undoubtedly helped by his defense, which was speedy, sure handed, and threw out more than it’s share of runners on the basepaths. It was still baseball’s best mark, by a wide margin. The next best ERA was fellow lefty and Yankee rival Whitey Ford, with 2.63. Alas, his record was a meager 15-10 (and two of those wins were in relief), as his White Sox teammates only scraped together 3.7 runs of support per game he pitched. They weren’t nearly that bad over the season for the other pitchers - that number was nearly a full run per game below what the White Sox scored overall. The White Sox scored 2 or fewer runs for Pierce in 10 of his starts that year, and Pierce got stuck with the loss in 9 of them. His lone victory with such poor support came in a 1-0 shutout of the Senators on June 12th. In addition, fully half of Pierce’s starts came against two American League powerhouses, the Indians and Yankees, thanks to the managerial strategy outlined earlier. In short, Billy Pierce got Cained.

Billy Pierce got the coveted 20 win mark the following year, and again the year after that. He tailed off in his 30’s, and by the time he was on the Giants he reportedly didn’t have the zip on his fastball like his younger days. He was still a good pitcher, and was asked to face the Yankees yet again in the series. He lost game 3, but managed to beat Whitey Ford in game 6 to force the infamous game 7.

Pierce never got much support for the Hall of Fame. His career was strong early on, but had a lackluster finish. Fangraphs doesn’t do pitcher WAR that far back, but Baseball-reference sees him as ending with 53.5 WAR, very comparable to Whitey Ford, as it turns out. Pierce never got consideration for the Cy Young award, since it didn’t exist during his peak, but there is a good chance he could have won one or two had it been around. His career ERA is substantially under his FIP (3.27 to 3.49), and certainly having players like Nellie Fox (his roommate for 11 years), Luis Aparicio, and Minnie Minoso backing him up couldn’t have hurt. Overall, a stellar career, and likely an underrated one everywhere but Chicago.
I won’t pretend this means anything concrete for Cain, at all. Different pitchers, different methods, different eras. But if Cain ends up with anything like Pierce’s career, I’ll be thrilled. Thrilled for Cain, a guy I love to see succeed, and thrilled for all us fans that get to watch him pitch. And one day I’ll be happy to annoy my kids once again as I point to Cain’s picture and tell them, “I saw that man pitch. You should be so lucky.”

For your enjoyment: some highlights of Billy Pierce pitching here. Only clip I could find of him pitching on MLB. Also check out the SI issue from 1957 that featured Billy on the cover. Also entertaining and Giants-related is this piece from the SI vault about the '62 World Series. My favorite part might be the Jose Pagan quote on his sac bunt to bring in Willie Mays from third.

Or: Do you believe in Vogelsong at first sight?

He's been one of the best stories on the Giants this season, and we're all rooting for him to become this year's Most Improved Zombie ™. But it is not always the case that where the heart leads, the head will follow. Many of us remain staunchly distant, like lead on a romantic comedy who has been hurt by love before, and won't let herself fall for a guy that easily again. We guard our hearts, in spite of the urging of our best friend who wants us to “let go” and “just find out where it might lead” and tells us, “what if he is 'the one', and you just let him go?”

So here we are, and Vogelsong has made 5 starts, four stellar and one not so hot. His ERA is dropping, he's missing bats (surprise!), he's not walking guys (bigger surprise!). Where's the point at which you let your guard down, run to him through the rain, wrap your arms around him and shout for all the world, “This is real! THIS – is who I want in the starting rotation!”

Is 5 starts with 2.25 ERA enough? How about 10, with 2.50 or so? 15? 25? Three seasons?

I hate making an assertion on something like this without having a frame of reference, so let's do this. Here's your montage of the guy we used to be committed to, focusing on just the best points; like the time he brought us flowers even though there was no occasion, and the time he brought us breakfast in bed, and the time he helped keep us in that pennant race that we REALLY wanted, but we didn't know he'd been listening when we told him.

In non-metaphor speak, here are most of Zito's best stints as a Giant. Which of these does Vogelsong have to surpass for you to believe he's the better rotation option?

2007 – 5 starts (April 16 – May 7), 33.1 IP, 22 K, 13 BB, 0 HR, 8 RA, 2.16 ERA

2007 – 10 games, 9 starts (August 2 – September 14) 58.2 IP, 44 K, 18 BB, 7 HR, 17 RA, 2.61 ERA

2007 – 4 starts (the best stretch of the previous set) (August 17 – September 2) 29 IP, 24 K, 4 BB, 1 HR, 4 RA, 1.24 ERA

2008 – 5 starts (September 3 – September 25) 34.1 IP, 27 K, 15 BB, 3 HR, 14 RA, 3.15 ERA

2009 – 6 starts (April 22 – May 19) 40.2 IP, 24 K, 13 BB, 3 HR, 10 RA, 2.21 ERA

2009 – 12 starts (July 18 – September 15) 72.1 IP, 61 K, 27 BB, 6 HR, 21 RA, 2.36 ERA

2010 – 6 starts (April 6 – May 5) 42.1 IP, 28 K, 12 BB, 0 HR, 7 RA, 1.49 ERA

2010 – 6 starts (July 8 – August 6) 40.1 IP, 40 K, 16 BB, 6 HR, 10 RA, 2.23 ERA

For comparison, here are the same numbers (IP, K, BB, HR, RA, and ERA) for Vogelsong's starts:

2011 – 5 starts (April 28 – May 20) 28 IP, 26 K, 10 BB, 2 HR, 8 RA, 2.25 ERA

For myself, I like to be cautious. I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop, and I'm not sure how much it would take to change my mind. I'll go with 15 starts with a walk rate below 4 per 9, and keeping up the strikeouts. If he can do that, I might start to change my position. I also reserve the right to be skeptical if he continues to do this against weak competition. 

Let me also say that even though I'm not convinced, I'm enjoying every moment of this. I love for a guy who has worked for so hard and so long to get a chance to enjoy his time as a pitcher on a major league rotation. That is very, very special and it warms the cockles of my heart to think about it. Until things turn south (while hoping they won't), I'm looking at this as pretty much playing with house money. It's like we're getting a really good stretch of pitching from Zito, even though he's out with an injury. I have nothing but good feelings about what has happened so far, but I'm not going to be doubling down for the next roll of the Vogelsong dice. 

Addendum: Apologies for the format - I don't know how to do fancy stuff, and even if I did I'd be paranoid of messing it up. If someone who knows this stuff better wants to make a fancy graph or table or whatever the cool kids do these days, by all means have at it.

You begin by checking the key stats (AVG/DINGRZ!/RIBBIES!), then proceed to kick tires with due diligence until, at the end of the day, you have amassed a sufficient quantity of gamery grit to bury the opposing teams in gritty gamerness. Then insult your prospects right before yo-yoing them about for a while until you decide to bench them for long periods of time. After a prolonged bout of poor play, DFA the obviously crappy (but well paid) vets and any fair to middl'n prospects, and begin again.

Now that the jokes are out of the way, let me say what I think is really going on. I enjoy a good Sabean joke as much as the next guy, but it honestly bothers me sometimes that I really don't understand his process. Let me also say that I'm the kind of annoyingly reasonable person who goes out of his way to understand the why behind an action. For instance, if you cut me off on the freeway, I'm probably going to say something unsavoury about you in the privacy of my own car, and then feel bad and assume you were on your way to the hospital with a kitten in dire need of an adorableness transplant. 

Where was I? Oh yes - the Sabean Process. I've never really understood it, and it bothered me, because I know he's made good baseball decisions in the past and he's been around the game long enough he had to have learned something. Maybe he's "old school" or whatever, I don't know. Then, I had a thought that made his whole system seem to click into place. 

Sabean is risk-averse.

Get a coin, and a pair of $50 dollar bills. Go to Sabean and give him one $50, then tell him you're going to flip the coin. If he chooses to call it, he can win the other $50, or else loose it all. $100 or nothing on the coin-flip. Or, he could walk away now with the $50. I'm 99% sure that Sabean would walk away with the $50 and never look back.

Look back at his decision making - almost every one, I think, is best described by him going for the more certain of the available choices. A.J.? Established level of play, over the more risky Torrealba and assorted young arms (which are always risky). No Vlad? Several okay players are less likely to all fall short than one big contract to a superstar. Schimdt? Decent pitcher with upside for low cost - no risk. 50 billion vets signed? Established track records and usually short contracts. The big exception? Zito, one of the most consistently healthy pitchers in the game. 

Ok, how about the draft? I think it's pretty clear Sabean trusts the opinion of his staff when it comes to young pitching, which makes Lincecum not as risky as it sounds - at least not to him. Whatever other scouts thought, ours liked Lincecum plenty, and Sabean trusted their track record. It also hold with regard to prospects - Sabean clearly has no trust of strong hitting performances in the PCL, so it takes major league success to prove the guy will pan out. Opportunities will be provided but only while there is a vet to step in if the prospect falls short, and the prospect will only continue to play if he has sustained success.

In short, Sabean will always go for the proven commodity, unless the upside is substantial with limited downside. What does that mean going forward? My guess would be no trade for a bat this year - the pitching cost would be too high (all teams would ask for Sanchez or Cain). Sabean will continue to throw up retaining walls made of veteran bodies against the erosion of the offense, but will continue to shy away from the one big impact bat. Prospects will be invested in, but hitters will need a two or three season look to know if they fit his team. This means we'll likely know Schierholtz's fate by next spring training or shortly after, and Bowker will get one more season on the leash. Posey gets now through 2012 to prove he belongs, but will probably stick after bouncing up and down a couple times. Neal won't be real, and most other position prospects will fizzle before Fresno or stall between there and the SF bench. Lincecum walks as a FA (not traded), Cain stays on a reasonable contract, Sanchez eventually gets traded AFTER a poor stretch, when Sabean's confidence in him is destroyed. The return will be minimal. The Giants will muddle through the next three years with a barely competitive lineup and solid pitching staff and stay generally in contention, winning between 77 and 86 games. Sabean will eventually get canned prior to the beginning of the 2014 rebuild. 

Whether or not I'm right, I think it's pretty clear Sabean is actively avoiding bold moves in a season and industry where the bold moves are most rewarded. I do not think the Giants will win while he is in charge.

Tommorrow night I'm headed with my girlfriend to Spokane to watch the Salem Kizer Volcanoes. For those of you who are in the know, who are the guys to watch? I know Sharlon Schoop has gotten some mention in places, but I'm not familiar enough with the Giants prospects to know who else is exciting on this team, although I do know the Volcanoes are mopping up the floor with the rest of the league this year.

For the rest of you, consider this an open thread for tips on enjoying a minor league ballgame. Personally, I like to get the best seats available, because they are all so affordable; something I cannot exactly do in SF. I'm also a big fan of finding the right promotional night, if you have the option. The Spokane club occasionally has a night where they offer all hot dogs and cheap beer for only a buck, which is a pretty sweet deal for ballpark food.