SB Nation User Blog: baetown415

Projecting the Giants hitters: the Olivers

baetown415 — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 18:40:43 -0000

I'm actually not too familiar with Brian Cartwright's Oliver system, but using information from these two sites, it's supposed to be slightly more advanced than the Marcels, including some minor league and batted ball data. Someone, preferably a non-computer, correct me if I'm wrong.

Looking at our favorite targets using batting average/on-base average/slugging average and weighted on-base average (which I think was .333 for an average hitter last season. correct me if i'm wrong again. humans only):

Manny Burriss: .262/.316/.324 for a wOBA of .291 (ouch)

Pablito: .290/.318/.453 for a wOBA of .332. That's kind of Meh

"Scott": .273/.331/.434 for a wOBA of .335

I have to run to class, but these projections so far have me more pessimistic about 2009 than I already was.

What do you all think?

Follow your own fantasy team on Fangraphs..

baetown415 — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:33:51 -0000

Follow your own fantasy team on Fangraphs..

A cool way to track your fantasy team or just your favorite players

hat tip: Tango

Bowling.... I guess

baetown415 — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 17:11:45 -0000

No, this is not about the Gamertastic Aaron Rowand and his chemistry-building efforts. This is about McCoven favorite Matt Cain. And I guess this should be a fanshot, but I'm too lazy to do one of those. That makes sense to me if it doesn't to you. Moving on....

In this recent sfgiants.com story, Chris Haft (who's one of our best beat reporters btw) talks about the likelihood of offers being entertained for Matt Cain by Sabes. He doesn't really lean to either side but acknowledges that Sabean did listen to offers for Tim Lincecum last season before signing Aaron Rowand (hey, that's a point in Scott's favor. right?) and that the right package could be worth trading Cain.

Then there's some stuff about Prince Fielder and prospects and scouts' opinions and then a mention about the Dan Haren trade (which would be the minimum type of caliber trade [?] I'd want in return for Cain, though I love him so much I still wouldn't want to part with him).

So what I would like to know is this: what kind of offers would bowl you over for Matt Cain? Be ridiculous. After all, trading McCoven's favorite son at this stage of his career, with his utter bargain of a contract, would be pretty ridiculous. Unless, say, the Mets wanted to get rid of David Wright, Jose Reyes and Mike Pelfrey...

Defensive Projections for 2009

baetown415 — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 04:28:09 -0000

Sean/Chone Smith of the blog Anaheim Angels All the Way has just published his 2009 Defensive Projections (don't forget to read the comments) at his personal site.

Infield projections are here and outfield projections are here.

Some quick thoughts:

1. Manny Burriss is projected here as -3 runs below average at shortstop. Though that's not great, if he can be league-average (at shortstop) with his bat, I'll consider it a successful year for him.

2. Randy Winn and Aaron Rowand have the same projection, both as corner outfielders (+7) and in center (at 0). I don't even have to add anything else.

3. Travis Denker is projected as a league-average second baseman. I'm not sure that would happen if he was given full PT in 2009 but it's still sad we won't be able to see it firsthand next season.

4. The highest-projected infielders that will likely be back are Dan Ortmeier (if they let him play there a lot) and Rich Aurilia at +2 at first base. The lowest-projected infielder (surprise surprise): Eugenio Velez at -12 at second base.

5. Only Ortmeier and Bowker are projected as below average in the outfield, with identical -5/-16 corner/center projections. The two young guys, Lewis and Schierholtz, are 1/-8 and 4/-5 corner/center respectively.

Again, these are only one person's projections (and only one type of them too), but it's still good to see the good (the OF), the bad (the infield) and the Velez.

Your thoughts?

Kickin' the tires (and breaking mah toes)

baetown415 — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 23:02:01 -0000

I'm not sure anyone has fanposted about this, but I just wanted to have your thoughts on a trade proposal. No, it's not Matt Cain-related. Yes, I still love him. Forever... in a non-creepy way...

So the Red Sox need a catcher because Jason Varitek is for all intents and purposes done. While I think the Rangers are probably the most likely trade partner for the Red Sox in this endeavor (Boston's pitching depth in the minors plus the Rangers' three solid-to-good catchers), the Giants might be able to work something out. It all pretty much depends on this guy. He had a breakout season this season and is still fairly young. If the Red Sox think it was a one-year fluke and they'd be better off trying to find an external option, then this idea goes where Castillos go. But if they determine that Exposito just needs another year of experience, then we're in business.

There is a decently-sized problem in my view though: for whom would Sabean trade in a deal involving Bengie Molina?

My first reasonable want would be Jed Lowrie, since I'll believe Burriss can put up average production (which would probably exceed every projection on him) when I see it over a full season, but I figure Lowrie'shighly unlikely, since Julio Lugo's turned into a bench-caliber player over the past 2 seasons and is now injury-prone. Who else would be reasonable?

Here's a rank and file of all the Sox's prospects, in case you need your memory jogged.

Mortgaging.... or something like that

baetown415 — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 17:21:21 -0000

Because this organization (the Giants, not McCoven) is in a state of limbo (well not really, since there's still plenty of rebuilding to do), differing opinions are flying all around regarding what Sabean should do this off-season. Instead of posting what I think he should do (like keeping young middle infielders who can hit some and aren't embarrassing in the field. oh wait), I wanted to pose a question to all you McCoven faithful, unfaithful, and polygamous.

Would you mortgage (or sell off, throw away, etc.) the Giants' next fifty years for the team to win 2009 World Series championship?

I mean completely horrible, unwatchable, heartbreaking and utterly depressing for the next fifty years for one championship. Think: Detroit-Lions-minus-Barry-Sanders bad. or LA Clippers sans Elton Brand bad. Think Omar-Vizquel-hitting-in-2008 horrible. For the next fifty. For one ring. Like lending your baseball soul out to el diablo.

This is, indubitably, hypothetical, but think about it. It's been fifty years in San Francisco and only twice has the team even been close enough to get a whiff of a world championship, only to see it snatched out of their grasp at the last second. (What's that you say? There was a Game 7 in the 2002 World Series? uhh.... let's just move on). As Cubs, Indians, and Rangers fans (and formerly Sox and Sawks fans) can attest to, fifty years isn't THAT long.

Problem is, the way the Giants are headed right now in scouting and, less so, player development, it looks like the Giants could actually start being actual multi-year contenders beginning in the mid-2010s. By throwing everything for one championship, you'd be deprived of seeing good baseball for quite a while. Then again, the Giants have always had great players and great teams, yet no team could bring home a World Series title.

So enough with my babble. What do you think? The greatest thrill next year for fifty years of worse-than-2007 ball? Or building the organization and facing the possibilty of another fifty years without a World Series.

Cain

baetown415 — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 15:39:56 -0000

I have a test in less than two hours for which I have not studied, but I felt I needed to let my emotions ride out.

Simply put, I love Matt Cain.

I love how Matt Cain straddles the line between Gamer and good without giving in to too much Gamer and always holding two bags of good.

I love how Matt Cain hits home runs for himself.

I love how Matt Cain loves San Francisco, despite the fairweathered-ness of many of the ballpark-goers, despite being from the South and probably not initially a Giants fan, and despite receiving .02 non-Cain runs of offense per game (statistic may be a little off).

I love how Matt Cain gives me hope for the Giants' future.

Most importantly, I love Matt Cain, the American story: the story of rising up amongst the tribulations, perservering through adversity and grabbing problems by the neck and yelling, "Listen here partner, I'm in charge of this party now!". All on a smaller scale, of course.

I love Matt Cain, 3rd-- at best!

Who to trade?

baetown415 — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 17:45:40 -0000

First day of the off season (for us Giants fans anyway) and I think the time's right for inane (and not so crazy but probably unlikely) roster moves. Normally, I don't think this does much good, aside from giving me fantasies about getting rid of people, but I think this might be a good way to release pent-up frustration that we've had throughout this season.

I'll start with a highly unlikely and partially stupid, and possibly incredibly rash decision:

Trade Aaron Rowand.

Now, I think no team would take him after the season he had, but if I had to choose one team that MIGHT possibly take him, I'd guess the White Sox. The problem here is that, well, the Sox don't exactly have any good prospects outside of Aaron Poreda (who I think Kenny Williams would deem "untouchable" right now) and they're probably extremely reluctant to trade any of their everyday guys for just Rowand. So I guess I fail.

What about you people?

Improving the Giants' rotation (and the rest of the team with it)

baetown415 — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 20:33:19 -0000

I've discussed this with xanthan via e-mail. I think he might have a post like this over at his site but I'll put one here just in case he hasn't.

I don't know how many of you have read The Book by Tom Tango, Mitchel Lichtman and Andy Dolphin, but if you haven't, it's definitely something to pick up (if you do, please do so from the site I linked; it helps out the authors, and they in turn are donating a good deal of their royalties to Retrosheet). Basically, the three authors investigate certain baseball strategies (e.g. reliever use, platooning, the sacrifice bunt) and come to conclusions based on empirical evidence (using play-by-play data mainly from 1999-2002). The run values for this time period are slightly higher than now, but the difference is essentially negligible. The strategies presented in The Book make sense (based on the numbers) but are all a bit unorthodox. This one is especially "strange" but would make the most sense for any team that wanted to score more runs (or need to, like the Giants).

In Chapter 5, entitled "Batting (Dis)Order", Tom Tango explores various ways to optimize one's lineup. There are a bunch of little things Bochy could do to squeeze out a couple runs here and there, such as batting the pitcher 8th (it actually works! for a couple of runs a year anyway). I don't want to describe all the little things because that's a lot to write, but if you optimized your lineup like Tango showed in his constructed simulation model (that mirrors reality pretty much perfectly, as shown in The Book), the result is about 10-15 runs per season. That's only about 1-1 1/2 wins per season added, which isn't that much really. However, Tango presents an interesting question:

What if you don't ever let the pitcher hit?

According to his model, an average NL team will score 5.25 when the pitcher never hits, yet when the pitcher hits 65% of the time (which is how it is now), the team will only score 4.83 runs per game. That difference is about 68 runs per season, and, FTW!, that's 68 EXTRA RUNS PER SEASON. That's between 6-7 wins right there. Now, as Tango points out, the value of having your good (Cain), great (Lincecum), and above-average (Sanchez) pitchers on the mound is greater than substituting them for an average (at least) batter. One should, therefore, only use this strategy of never allowing the pitcher to hit when you're talking about average/below-average starters on the mound.

The Giants fit these roles pretty much perfectly, with a true 1, 2, 3 , some candidates for the 4/5 roles and a slew of good relievers.

How the "rotation" would look.

Day 1: Lincecum

Day 2: Cain

Day 3: Zito/Correia/Valdez (Tango says 3rd best reliever here, so I'm just going to throw Merkin in here, with the assumption he's healthy next season)

Day 4: Sanchez

Day 5: Correia/Zito/Valdez

The "three-headed monster" takes you through the sixth inning most days.

Relievers 1,2, and 4-6 would be used as usual, plus if any pitcher of the "three-headed" mini-rotation pitched a relatively short outing on an earlier day, he could also pitch in relief.

This setup also allows the bench to be stronger overall, with 6 bench players instead of the customary 4. Best of all, some of those guys don't even need to be able to field well in order to contribute regularly.

The only obvious downfalls here are:

a. Zito/Correia/whomever you assigned to those roles would probably be pretty upset.

b. The best bench bats wouldn't be there at the end of the games (for higher-leverage situations) for some games.

c. The third-best reliever is pretty restricted.

Not a whole lot really.

Using these strategies, along with the other ones listed in the chapter, would (in the model) add around 50 runs per season to the team's total and keep the pitching/runs against around the same level. That's about 5 wins, which is pretty damn huge.

Of course, this in itself won't help our beloved Giants become contenders. But it sure couldn't hurt.

The Ultimate Matt Cain Trade Proposal

baetown415 — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 20:04:56 -0000

It's been pretty chic around here lately, so I thought I'd give it a try. If everyone hates this post like pretty much all the previous "Trade Matt Cain" posts, then here's a good hijack topic: The best beer in the world comes from (insert opinion here).

"The San Francisco Giants trade pitcher Matt Cain to...."

"....the New York Yankees...."

".....for...."

".....ONE...."

".....BILLION...."

"...DOLLARS."

Awesome, eh?

Unrealistic you say? Well, so are most of the other fanposts.

Maybe my main point is SABEAN SHOULD NOT TRADE CAIN UNLESS HE GETS A BLOW-YOU-OUTTA-THE-WATER-WITH-TWENTY-POUNDS-OF-C4 kind of deal...

And none of us should want anything less than that.