SB Nation User Blog: lmaozedong

Manny too expensive for SF.. who knew?

lmaozedong — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 22:43:10 -0000

Manny too expensive for SF.. who knew?

Good riddance. Kinda...

"They fit because they need the bat," one NL executive said. "They're one hitter away from being a real good team. But how do they go to $100 million to add that bat? I don't think there's any way that happens."

OT: Olympics 2008

lmaozedong — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 05:08:44 -0000

Because watching that Opening Ceremony is about 10002939x less painful than watching Barry Zito pitch. Because discussing the Olympic team is much less depressing than discussing the atrocity that we see almost every day. I know the ceremony was probably a big piece of Chinese propaganda, but I have to say, it was quite impressive.

That amount of manpower put into bringing glory to a country and an event is really something that you don't really see anymore these days. I remember studying Art History in High School and wondering why no one really makes monuments for the sake of glory anymore. Everything we build has a practical purpose--an event this big, all to amaze and impress, was refreshing in a way (though my modern, practical sensibilities cringe at the "waste").

That's not the reason I'm writing this FanPost, though--it's so that we can discuss the games in general. Honestly, I haven't done my research and I don't know who or what to look out for. All I know is that there's a 40-something year old woman who has about 5x the muscle mass that I do. So, I'm asking you sports fans, what are you looking out for these Olympics? Redemption for the U.S. basketball team? Medals for the Chinese? NATE SCHIERHOLTZ?!

Discuss

Pitchers--Is there any such thing as a "winner"?

lmaozedong — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 20:07:51 -0000

WARNING: This is a topic that has possibly been beaten to death

So I've been having a season-long argument with my dad about the value of a pitcher's win-loss record. He says that a pitcher's main job is not to allow as few runs as possible, it's to get a W for his team. While I obviously agree with this, I believe that the only thing a pitcher can control is the number of runs he allows. Thus, his ERA, and statistics that can better predict ERA than ERA itself (LD%, K/BB, and all that good sabermetri-fic stuff) is the best indicator of how good a pitcher is. He disagrees, conveniently denying the importance of small sample sizes and bad run support. Basically, the argument boils down to, and began with the following question: Is it right to be down on Matt Cain because he is a so-called "loser"?

I won't deny that at least some (read: very little) fault can be placed on Matt Cain. Perhaps he's given up one run too many a couple of times simply because he is not mentally strong and does not thrive under pressure. However, the Giants in 2007 were 5-6 in games in which he gave up 1 run or fewer. Every single one of those is a game the Giants SHOULD have won! Unfortunately, he was the victim of terrible run support, and a bullpen that enjoys blowing his games, and his games only. My father also claims that a pitcher can somehow magically influence the amount of run support he gets by the attitude he has toward pitching and his actions on the mound. Now I can see how striking out the side with the bases loaded, preventing any runs from scoring can hype up an offense. But how much difference can this possibly make?

So my question to you is this (hopefully this will spice up the very typical Matt Cain-is-unlucky fanpost): What do you think Matt Cain's career record should be, if the world was a fair place (include his "un-clutch-ness," if you believe in such a thing)?

For reference's sake, Matt Cain is currently 25-34 with a career 3.84 ERA.

Extra Credit: Come up with a name for the curse on Matt Cain

My arbitrary answer: turn that record around. He should be 34-25.

Poll

Is there such a thing as "winners" and "losers" among pitchers that extends beyond their ability to maintain a certain ERA? (i.e. clutch vs. un-clutch?)

Yes!

9 votes

No!

23 votes

Maybe! (sorta..)

17 votes

stfu!

10 votes

59 votes | Poll has closed

Alex Hinshaw: on the front page of something??

lmaozedong — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 23:09:02 -0000

http://sports.yahoo.com/fantasy/mlb/news;_ylt=Al6Pzp1M6ppYLo3Hn4oFtxVNC5kB?slug=be-noise_060608

Funny. Hinshaw would be one of the last people I'd expect to be seeing on the front page of Y! Fanasy news. There are plenty of interesting middle relievers with little shot at being closers this year--why pick Hinshaw? I'm happy, but also kind of sad because he used to be hardcore-Giants-fans' little secret.

Alex Hinshaw: phenomenal enough to warrant being on the front page of Y! Fantasy despite having little-to-no fantasy value?

Brett Harper

lmaozedong — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 06:32:55 -0000

Can someone explain to me how Brett Harper is in any way, shape, or form, less deserving to be given a go at 1B than Dan Ortmeier? The man hit 36 HR in 2005 and 25 last year in minor league ball. He's younger than Ortmeier. Sure he's a lefty, but lookin' for some pop? Bowker and Ortmeier don't have ANY pop compared to this guy. Don't give me that lefty-righty crap. Ortmeier is hitting like what, .230 against lefties?

Judging from his minor league statistics, Brett Harper could be the next Ryan Howard. 36 HR in 466 AB is ridiculous, even if it was 3 years ago. Please give the guy a shot, if just for some interest's sake. Bowkermania has long since worn off...

[edit: yes, I know Ortmeier is on the DL. I'm just talking about in general, for the team. I would've liked to see him make the team even off of spring training, since he has had a LOT more success than Ortmeier..]

Your All-Star Team?

lmaozedong — Wed, 28 May 2008 22:50:39 -0000

Just because I'm curious, list the players you're voting for on the ballot. Here are mine:

AL:

1B: Kevin Youkilis--I'm shocked at the lack of quality at AL 1B this year. There's really no one who is worthy of my pick. I had to pick Youkilis or Morneau by default.

2B: Ian Kinsler--on pace for .300/20 HR/140 R/100 RBI/40 SB

SS: Bobby Crosby--Not much to choose from here, either. My vote went to Bobby Crosby for FINALLY staying healthy so far..

3B: Miguel Cabrera--Yes, he doesn't play here anymore--but heck, that's where he's on the ballot. I think he starts tearing it up pretty soon. I'm not going to vote for any Yankee.. that's my rule on All-Star Ballots. They get enough votes already.

C: Joe Mauer--Gets the edge over V-Mart because, well, he's not actually SUPPOSED to hit for power

OF1: Josh Hamilton--Hey, he's on the cover of SI

OF2: Magglio Ordonez--Still a fantastic hitter

OF3: Ichiro Suzuki--Same old Ichiro

DH: Frank Thomas--Should've voted for Big Papi, but I just like Big Frank more

I'm actually kind of surprised by the lack of quality at some of these positions, particularly 1B and SS. Usually I really feel like the people I vote for DESERVE my vote...

NL:

1B: Lance Berkman--Albert Pujols is batting .360 and this is a no-brainer??

2B: Chase Utley--Could win MVP this year. Not doing all that great after that RIDICULOUS start to the year, but hey, it was that good.

SS: Hanley Ramirez--Gets the edge over Miguel Tejada because he can steal a bag, too. Gotta give some props to Tejada for playing so well while under so much scrutiny, though.

3B: Chipper Jones--Another no-brainer. Wow, the NL is really tearing it up this year.

C: Geovany Soto--Sorry, Bengie. This rookie has been crazy good AND he's on my fantasy team.

OF1: Nate McLouth--He'll go WAY downhill, especially in HR/AVG, but his start of the year has been so good it definitely deserves a spot.

OF2: Pat Burrell--Philadelphia bias, and I really wanted to vote for Jason Bay on this one, but I can't bring myself to vote for TWO Pirates..

OF3: Aaron Rowand--My token Giant

Tell me why I shouldn't become an A's fan...

lmaozedong — Thu, 08 May 2008 17:20:21 -0000

I'll be honest and say that I don't know a heck of a lot about the A's farm system, and I probably couldn't tell you how many prospects either the A's or the Giants have in any given top 100 prospect list, or anything like that.

I've been a lifelong Giants, fan, and on principle alone, I'm not ACTUALLY considering jumping ship and going to the other side of the Bay, even if their stadium is a 2 minute drive from my house. However, the grass is looking mighty green on the other side of the fence.

I realize that the A's are playing way over their heads right now. On paper, I'd say they probably have a worse team than we do, even. On paper, that is--somehow all the players the A's decide to try out turn out to be huge successes (they get Cust, we get Velez). That said, I fully expect their team to take a huge turn for the worst, and end up around third in their division with about 80 wins, simply riding on a weaker division. Let's be real. Both the A's and the Giants SUCK right now. Neither has a chance to make the postseason unless a nuclear attack destroys the entire West half of the US other than the Bay Area.

The team right now is not the reason why I have a huge impulse to jump ship every time I hear about the A's--the reason is that while the A's have reason to be optimistic in the next few years, with big name prospects coming to them in trades, we really don't. Our biggest prospect by most people's count is almost at the Bocock line, and let's be honest--our farm system is pretty crappy. We don't REALLY have anyone to be really excited about until, oh, about 2011, when Noonan, D'alessio (who will have white hairs by this point), Alderson, Villalona, Bumgarner, Fairley (where is this guy, anyway?) and Sandoval all come at once and make the first all-rookie team to win the World Series. As a rule, really young prospects all seem exciting because usually they have extremely high ceilings. Probably at least 80% of these players will flame out, with Villalona looking like the most likely to flame out out of all of these. I've never really been a big fan of him--just some athletic looking guy with tools that make him look like he's going to hit 40 HR a year--hey, I mean the guy's hit six already.. in 300 ABs.

The A's farm system isn't AMAZING, like it has a reputation of being historically. However, all levels have legitimate prospects in them (unlike us, where our high A team has a million prospects and none of the others have anyone even slightly interesting). A comparison of the average ages of players in the system says it all:

AAA

Pitchers-- A's: 25.9 Giants: 28.1

Batters--A's 25.5 Giants 27.4

Pitchers--A's 23.4 Giants 25.0

Batters--A's 24.7 Giants 24.9

A+

Pitchers--A's 22.1 Giants 22.2

Batters--A's 23.0 Giants 23.3

Pitchers--A's 22.5 Giants 22.2

Batters--A's 22.9 Giants 21.3

Basically, what these numbers tell me is that the higher levels of our organization is filled with loser AAAA players that other teams got rid of. And it's true--we have guys like Scott McClain and Justin Leone jamming up our Fresno roster. It's funny, because you would think that these veteran players would be there so that if one of our big leaguers went down, we wouldn't have to disrupt the development of one of our real prospects. Oops, I guess we forgot a SS somewhere in there. Anyway, the point is that they have real, legitimate prospects at every level in their farm system, while we basically have our 2007 draft class that we have to put all our hopes in. I could name names, but do you really want to hear about the A's here?

I'm a big fan of young players, and I get excited every time a new player is called up. My fantasy teams are generally composed of high risk, high reward young guys and I generally follow those the most. I'll be biased toward the young guy, even when he's batting .200 and killing my team. By this disposition, you would think I'm an A's fan, right? But way back when, before I knew anything about baseball, I probably decided that the Giants stadium looked cooler and orange and black are much better colors than green and gold, which happen to be my high school's colors as well (boring). Now I'm just sticking on principle. Why do I hang on?

My San Francisco Giants

lmaozedong — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 16:25:10 -0000

The Giants really shouldn't be this bad. Had our organization not essentially trainwrecked itself going after a Ring for Barry, we wouldn't have signed all these old hags. But the past is the past, and Marquis Grissom is gone. What's our excuse now? What reason do we have to continue signing players like Ray Durham and Rich Aurilia, who, while not obviously totally devoid of skill when we signed them, were dangerously approaching that age where baseball players can no longer produce anything of value except that so-called "veteran presence"--and who needs that when all your players are 50, anyway? You say that our club is "headed in a new direction". If we're headed in a new direction, show me! Don't play those old vets who are headed for retirement next year when we already know this year is going to be a bust. Show me Eugenio Velez! Show me Dan Ortmeier (actually, I take that back. Why didn't you sign Dan Johnson?) Fred Lewis! Rajai Davis! NATE SCHIERHOLTZ!!

Understand this, Giants organization--what gets people excited about this team is NOT when Barry Zito starts, but when Matt Cain, Tim Lincecum, and occasionally Jonathan Sanchez start! Doesn't it make sense to you then that you should be playing your young players not only to develop them for the future, but to sell tickets NOW? Playing Ray Durham and Rich Aurilia is not only bad baseball, it's BAD BUSINESS!

With that, here is what MY San Francisco Giants would look like:

C: Bengie Molina

1B: John Bowker (I'd like to see him eventually end up in the OF though)

2B: Eugenio Velez

SS: Warm Body

3B: Jose Castillo

LF: Lewis

CF: Aaron Rowand

RF: Nate Schierholtz

With a batting order of

Velez

Schierholtz

Rowand

Bowker

Molina

Lewis

Castillo

Warm Body

This team doesn't have to be the WORST in the Majors offensively, it could be just plain bad. And with our pitching, maybe we don't lose 100 games this year. Please do it?

EDIT: I actually did miss the news about Rajai Davis being DFA'd. Busy weekend.. anyway, yeah, we had like 10 CFs anyway. I'm not too sad about that.

The people who have posted on this blog post have actually brought up a couple of good points. The Giants this year HAVE been playing the youngsters.. probably a lot more than I would have expected. It's nice to see Bowker, though not Bocock so much (though I don't think he's going to suddenly learn to hit..). I just would like to see Durham and Aurilia benched FOR GOOD (seriously, who actually thinks they'll have any value) and Randy Winn traded (I don't think he needs to prove himself--everyone knows what they're getting--basically your average OF in every way). If you're going to commit to something, why not commit to it completely and totally? The WHOLE hog, you know? That's what I figure.