Help me out here Nation.

I just spent like 2 hours at Tanforan and Serramonte trying to find some replica Alex Smith 11 Jerseys. I mad a bet with myself that if the Niners won a playoff game, I would buy myself, my boy, and the guy who runs the corner store at Gilman and Ingalls (who called Alex Smith "garbage" as recently as 2010) Smith jerseys.

I did manage to find some "authentic" jerseys, but at $90 a pop that's a little more than I bargained for. I know I can mail order Reebok replica Smith jersey's for $40-50 but I would really like to get them before Sunday.

Anyone seen these for sale around town? The Peninsula? Oakland?

I suppose if I cannot find them and can't get the wife to sign off on $300 worth of red holey fabric and I'll order them online and have them for the Super Bowl. I think as long as I *pay* for them before Sunday, I won't get a "welch on bet jinx", right?

Boy that looks like a spam title.

So, I got an xbox 360 my first console since... since... wow, ever.  When I was a kid I had a vic-20 and c-64 instead of an atari 2600 etc.  Always played PC games since then.

So I would like to pick up a couple sports games - one baseball, one foot ball.   I understand vaguely that the latest titles are not always "the best".  Also, I am cheap so I am happy to pickup MLB 2K8 for $10 instead of the new one.

My parameters:  I like more realism, but not high level of console difficulty.  Also, I will be playing my 6-year-old who I guess is pretty average for a kid who just blitzed through his first console game (Clone Wars: Republic Heroes in a couple weeks).  I would also like a baseball game that has "Player upgrades" (or historical stats) available on line... although I suppose I will have to get an XBOX 360 live pay account for that.

Hmmm... I just realized that I might have to wait for MLB 2K12 to get Brian Wilson with a beard.

So a funny thing happened to me Thursday morning.  Some who rides the Caltrain shuttle with me in Palo Alto asked me if I was "Superstitious? Or just a fan?".   I was wearing my Giants cap, black leather jacket, black cords and orange shirt.   I almost replied "just a fan" but admitted, "Superstitious.".  She replied that that she was superstitious but not about baseball, and I admitted that I was *only* superstitious about baseball.

Friday morning, the day after the game 5 loss.  I felt bad; almost hungover.  I thought of her thinking how awful it must feel to be like this all the time.  Doing crazy stuff (and there have been dozens if not hundreds on comments on it here -- including "stay in the hospital", "don't ever go to another game", etc. etc.) because you feel desperate to have SOME influence on an event that carries so much meaning for you.

And why is that?  I'm a pretty rational dude.  But I have always been superstitious about baseball; even when I spend half the time talking to myself about how silly it is.  But I have worn my Giants hat every playoff game day -- and not worn it at all during the year except for a couple of ball games I actually went to.

Lets go back a step.  Why are people superstitious at all?  It seems pretty self-evident (provided a cursory knowledge of evolution and human psychology) that superstitious behavior is at least related to reason and inference.  Something happens to us -- good or bad -- and our brains try to force and understanding or predictability on future like events.  Now in the case where there is a readily apparent pattern - "if it rains, I will get wet".  "If there are dark clouds, it often rains".  "If I see dark clouds, and want to avoid getting wet, I should seek cover in case it rains".    Where it really becomes classical "superstition" is when the reinforcement is intermittent.  I am not the first person to point this out - in fact, Wikipedia entry on superstition summarizes none other than BF Skinner.

Originally, in Skinner's animal research, "some pigeons responded up to 10,000 times without reinforcement when they had originally been conditioned on an intermittent reinforcement basis."[9] Compared to the other reinforcement schedules (e.g. fixed ratio, fixed interval), these behaviours were also the most resistant to extinction.[9] This is called the partial reinforcement effect, and this has been used to explain superstitious behaviour in humans. To be more precise, this effect means that, whenever an individual performs an action expecting a reinforcement, and none seems forthcoming, it actually creates a sense of persistence within the individual.[10] This strongly parallels superstitious behaviour in humans because the individual feels that, by continuing this action, reinforcement will happen; or that reinforcement has come at certain times in the past as a result of this action, although not all the time, but this may be one of those times. From a simpler perspective, natural selection will tend to reinforce a tendency to generate weak associations. If there is a strong survival advantage to making correct associations, then this will outweigh the negatives of making many incorrect, "superstitious" associations.[11]

Skinner might have been wrong about the pigeons, but I think his theory of human superstition is essentially correct.  Now - what is the difference between superstition and religion?  Well, essentially the model of reality!  In religion - some supernatural forces and/or gods control the outcomes.  Our actions can influence the gods in their control over events.   Note that this is actually no difference between religion and science here!  They are both different models of reality!   So - what is the difference between superstition and statistics?  The only real difference is that in statistics, you keep better notes!   In fact, for 90% of statistics as applied to the real world - be it baseball or genetics or meteorology the underlying model is not relevant.  It is a technique of pure outcome prediction; quantitative superstition, if you will.  (I feel compelled to point out for those who don't know; I am a big fan of statistics in baseball.)

So that brings us back to baseball.  All those playoff stats?  Superstitions.  Pitcher/Batter splits?  Superstition.  11-0 at home?  Superstition.  Just because you count something doesn't make your (non) model predictive.  And that is why baseball is so superstitious.  It is the absolute KING of intermittent reinforcement.   You have guys throwing a 3.5" irregular sphere 60' at 90 mph trying to carve a special arc through an invisible box while another guy takes a rounded oddly shaped club and tries to hit it where 7 other guys ain't.   There are literally hundreds of sources of human error / extreme performance on every pitch; and about 330 pitches per game.  It's amazing that it's even recognizable on a day-to-day basis as the same activity.   We might as well just throw a big bag of quarters on the field and decide who gets to go to the World Series (Giants get 2 bags).

So why does it hurt so damn much when they lose?  There's an evolutionary biology answer for that one too... but I think I have rambled on enough.  But I will leave you with this.  We fans don't always bet on our teams with our wallets.  But we bet with our hearts, minds, and spirits. 

Rollin' the dice

Just

One

More

Time.

So, I want to take my Mom to the World Series (assuming, of course, that the Giants are in it).  She's 66 and lets' be honest - there may not be another chance in MY lifetime (I'm 39), let alone hers.

From a post in yesterdays non-game thread:

If you are among the lucky winners chosen for the World Series purchase opportunity, you will be notified via email, as will those not chosen, no later than tomorrow (Wednesday) night. On Friday, October 15th at 10am, winners will have the opportunity to purchase tickets for the World Series (via online only) and will be allowed to purchase up to four tickets total. Please note that tickets available for purchase on Friday are extremely limited and include reserved seating and Standing Room Only and are on a first-come, first-served basis.

I have no connections; no special status; I don't even really have a whole lot of time or money.  I can, however, write scripts to spam websites (although I don't think I can get through a capcha). So what exactly does "first-come, first-serve" mean?    Stand in line all night at 3rd & King tomorrow?   Set up an old school autodialer on the phone?   Does anyone want to pool for 2 tickets each? (double the chances).  I could certainly use 4 tickets (take wife and kid).  I would prefer game 7  since... hey, GAME 7.

This is the kind of thing that gets to me.  YOU ARE GIANTS FANS.    There is no hope, no salvation, no light at the end of the tunnel (maybe an on rushing K-Ingleside with an unconscious driver...).    Remember 2003?  2002? 2000? 1997? 1993?  1989?  1987?  1962????

It's hopeless.  We are doomed to have our spirits crushed.  Again.  Further.  Just when you thought that there was nothing left to crush.

This team (2009) cannot hit.   It has one great starter and one damn good one.  The back of the rotation is shaky, and the bullpen is way over it's head.   If we do make a move, you can guarentee it will destroy the future team and probably not work.

Now let's BRING BACK THE PESSIMISM!

Remember that car commercial where that guy is driving with his buddy who catches him with the "Play: Micheal Bolton"?

This post is inspired by the "indy rock gods" thread posted a couple days ago... I bring you the flip side.  Which is the single most indefensible, indy-rock-cred shattering musical guilty pleasure that you have?

NON-IRONICALLY.  And I am not talking stuff that could be considered vaguely retro nostalgia cool, like Def Leppard, or Loverboy, or Pat Benatar (what?  yes, speak up, I am old).    Not even "Bad" by MJ, which has some (albeit little) coolness factor, or Manowar or Gwar or something intentional/unintentionally funny.

I am talking the pop music equivalent of Air Bud 2: Golden Receiver.  And you have to really like the song too... as in put it on a mix CD and sign aloud in the car on the way to work like I did this morning (alone of course).

Since I know that it's going to come up, I am not sure if Disco counts.  It might count depending on your age bracket.  If I asked this ~10-15 years ago, Disco would definitly be in the "super lame" category, but I think it's been given new respect in the Millennium.

Oh, and I have a *great* one.  So great that I am going to make you wait for it.   I will post my bombshell after I get 25 (for Barry!) from you dudes.  Not that I have any indy rock cred... but still

EDIT: I forgot the best part... I am sure that such an outpouring of embarassment will be awesome karma for the Giants going forward in 2009.  So if you don't pony up, you hate the Giants!!!

Hey MCC I am looking for 2 tickets - good seats if you got 'em -  for the Wednesday day game 9/9 after labor day weekend vs. the Podracers. 

I would use stubhub, but I am annoyed at them for the moment.   I am especially interested in section 75, 75 is probably the best section of all the sections.   That or 109.  I hear 109 is a good section.  Seriously, looking for lower box something on the order of $30-$50 per.

(originally appeared in Gameday thread part II of postponed RJ 300 game @ Nats)

Your! 2009 Giants Drinking game.

Get an alcoholic beverage. Define a “drink” and a “chug”. A chug should equal 1 12 oz. beer, 1 shot of hard liquor, or 1 4 oz. glass of wine. There are approximately 10 drinks to a chug. Feel free to alter to your taste/liver/probability of getting up in the morning.

Take a drink whenever: 

• Any Giants player swings at the first pitch
  
• Any Giants player hits into a double play
• Any Giants pitcher walks a batter
• Rich Aurillia fakes a bunt
  
• Sandoval hits a ball no where near the strike zone
• Brian Wilson puts the lead of man on.
• Fred Lewis looks at strike 3

Chug a drink whenever

• Bochy Double switches
• Velez gets picked off (sadly no longer on roster)
• Molina or Sandoval draws a walk
• Aaron Rowand runs into something
• Burriss gets an extra base hit- Giants get a runner to third with no outs and fail to score
• Molina or Sandoval hit a triple (or inside the parker!)
• Schierholtz gets into a game
•  Giants get a runner to third with no outs and fail to score

OK, this is wierd.  I am going to make a defense of the Sabean De-Boch-able that is the April 2009 25 man roster.  Also - the original thread hit 1200 comments and is busted like a Dravecky Wing.

Consider that I am highly critical of Sabean's (and a lesser extent, Boch's) decisions WHEN THERE IS EVIDENCE that they are wrong.  That means, if a decision is a scouting or coaching decision, I have no choice but to shrug and hope they know what they are doing.  I also do not care, nor take as evidence, anything said to or by the media that is not independently verifiable.  Finally, I am totally ignoring spring stats, as they are utterly meaningless.

In order of MCC outrage:

6th and 7th Relievers:  What ever.  It's a shit sandwich and we all have to take a bite.

Burriss over Frandsen.   Well, I think it's clear that 1 should start and the other should start in AAA.  THIS POINT IS KEY.  Because if you have both on the ML roster, then many of the shenanigans below don't make sense.  They both need the reps.   I cannot imagine the 2009 Manny out hitting the 2009 Kevvie but I suppose it could be close enough that Burriss' defense (and we certainly could use IF defense) is the deciding factor.  So, "meh" but have little hard evidence other than Burriss projects to a .300 wOBA and Frandsen  a .318 or so.  It's certainly possible that defense closes this gap by a lot, and neither of these guys have reliable def. stats.

Bench  - Other than the guys guarenteed to make the team:

Uribe: wOBA(avg proj) .300

Velez: wOBA (avg proj) .317

Torres: wOBA (avg proj) .313

Aurillia: wOBA (avg proj) .319

Uribe can play 3B/SS/2B.  Aurillia can play 3B/1B.  Velez "2B/LF".  Torres: OF

None of these guys are prospects, and another year in AAA doesn't really do squat for them.  I would have put Phelps or maybe even Bowker on the the team instead of Aurillia - but perhaps their 1B defense is really unacceptable poor.  In any case, one will come up if Ishikawa commits suppuku with the bat.   Note that if you cut Aurillia, you cannot get him back (no way he goes to AAA), and that leaves only Pablo and Uribe as 3B.    You could take Guzman instead... but he can't play D and is probably well served with some glove/bat time at AAA.

Uribe also backs up SS/2B... but that leaves only 1 back up MI.  Enter Velez.  He's only going to play 2B if 2 of Burriss/Renteria/Uribe are down, and the other is playing 2B...   There are also some (extra inning?) shenanigans where Aurillia is playing 1B, Pablo C, Uribe 3B, Burris/Rent/ SS and Velez is needed to play 2B.

So what it comes down to is Torres vs. Holm vs. X.    I don't have a problem AT ALL with Sandoval playing C.  He should play all the C his chunky lil' body can handle.  He is only going to be a star at C, he will never be more than a solid regular at 1B/3B because his bat isn't that good and neither is his IF defense (this is just a guess, btw so please don't argue... the fact remains no matter how good a 3B he is, he will be a better Catcher, relative to his peers, if he can stick at the position).

The only "problem" with Pablo as Bengie's primary backup is that you can't give them both the same "off" day.    You *can* PH for Bengie, and slide Pablo over (down?) anytime you want, because you have a couple other guys who can play 3B.

So really - would you rather have Holm on the bench than Torres?  Keep in mind that Holm has about 1 whole season of PAs - TOTAL - in the last 3 years.  And Velez isn't really a back up OF - he's the 3rd string 2B and pinch runner.  Now, does Torres defense suck?  I dunno.  But I bet it's better than Holm's OF defense!   Or Velez' for that matter.  Would I rather have Bowker or Phelps than Torres?  Sure.  I suspect what is going on is that someone on GINTS BRASS decided to take the "statement" that "AT&T really has two centerfields" to heart, and refuses to play a mediocre corner OF in RF.  So while Winn and Rowand can both play CF - the other is needed to play RF.  Lewis is probably the worst of the 3, so he can sub at RF in a pinch if the other two are down... but then we need someone to play CF - and that has to be Torres.

Now - there are other solutions - mostly involving Frandsen, but if you start from the assumption that one of Burriss and Frandsen goes to AAA... the roster they came up with is not really that wacky.

Finally - I COMMEND Giants' brass for thinking a little outside the box here and not going with the obvious "back up catcher wasting 25th spot"

The Redsox just traded Coco Crisp to the Royals for relief pitcher Ramon Ramirez.  Crisp is like a younger, slightly worse Randy Winn.  He is due <$6M next year with a small ($500K) buyout for 2010.

Marcel projects Crisp with a .321 wOBA and Winn with a .329 (both.8+ reliability).  I think Winn is probably the better defender, but it's hard to say because Crisp usually plays more CF.  Still, he's certainly cheaper and younger than Winn.

Ramirez is a solidly average bullpen arm.

So, the inevitably horrible has happened (unless you own stock in Disney/ESPN) and the Dodgers are playing the Red Sox in the World Series.    Do you wish for a stray meteor to strike the stadium and kill the TEAMS (whole 40-man, +coaches, management, etc.) or the FANS at the park.

Or do you split the difference?  Does it matter where they are  playing? 

Bonus question: If you can spare ONE mortal from each team, who would it  be?

At the beginning of the season I wondered if the Giants could manage to put together one of the worst offensive infields of all time.  This you can measure with a stat call sOPS+ - which measures how well your IF hits relative to the leagues' infields (100 would be average).  The 1985 Giants and 2007 Giants racked up bad, but not historically score sOPS+ of 80 and 81.   The record is the 1995 Cards with an astronomically awful 66.

After a hot May and Durham resurgence, this Giants squad looked to be run of the mill bad... but with Vizquel entrenched at the sub-neifi line, and a cold summer for 1B... The Giants infield  sOPS+ now stands at 77!

Now this data only runs back to 1958, but hey, that's a good starting point:

1995 STL 66
1982 OAK 71
2003 DET 71
1999 ANA 74
1977 OAK 75
2002 DET 75 (two years in a row this low)
1972 TEX 76
1979 SDP 76
1981 TOR 76
1989 ATL 76
2004 SEA 76
1965 HOU 77
1983 SEA 77
1983 NYM 77
1994 CAL 77
2000 TBD 77
2003 CLE 77

So the 2008 Giants are in a tie for 12th (or alternatively, have the 6th worst sOPS+).  I I doubt they can crack 70, but some weak hacking and bizzare callups could drop them down past the 1999 Angels!

How bad have the Giants SS been?

.214/.283/.260  

Johnnie Lemaster, Career: .222/.277/.289
Neifi Perez, WORST season (OPS+ of 44!)  .236/.260/.303

Have you ever noticed how the worse a teams' offense, the better perceived it's defense (including pitching)?  I have noticed this for the last couple years with the Giants and 49ers.  In the 49ers case, the defense hasn't even been average, merely not "historically awful".   I have heard excuses (which don't apply to baseball) that "it's because the defense is on the field so much" - but that doesn't stop many teams from having good defenses and terrible offenses.

Some numbers:  by Football Outsiders DVOA, the niners ranked 32nd in offense, and 28th in defense.  That's bad.   By comparison, the number 1 ranked defense (Tennessee) had the 21st ranked offense, and the Ravens coupled the 9th best defense with the 26th best offense.

I see a similar thing going on with the Giants in the view of their pitching.  The Giants pitching/defense is not good.  It's merely average.  Now compared to their utter ineptitude on offense, it seems like a bright spot - but getting past Lincecum and Cain there is some talent but not much in the way of results (although Brian Wilson has been quite good in high leverage situations).

So, it has been mentioned, many, many times that there are too many fan posts, and particularly too many on the same subjects.  So, I would propose to use this Fan Post thread as an area where future fan posts topics can be vetted and approved by the community - so that we don't have to waste our precious time reading redundant fan posts - or even worse - berating those who "accidentally" post another fan post when a perfectly adequate one already exists.

I really think that having a forum where we can suggest and debate the validity of topics proposed before they actually appear as topics will substantially improve the signal-to-noise ratio of McCovey Chronicles.

Thanks for your time and consideration,

A concerned MCC net.denizen

Zito DEMOTED to bullpen!   That is really truly shocking.

Also, I cannot believe I am the first one to post it.  Also, I can't beleive these stupid things hav to be 75 chars.  If I wrote it in UNICODE could I do it in 25?

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ap-giants-zito&prov=ap&type=lgns

Alright all y'all Bochy haters!  What NOW?  HUH!?!  WHO'S THE MAN (with the large head).

Anyone still think Sabean has "turned the corner" as a GM?  

I posted this on BTF... and I thought it was good enough to repeat here:

Sabean is the GM equivalent of Scottish food.  It's like all his moves are based on a dare.

At least it's not Juan Pierre!

OK, I decided there weren't enough Diaries on this issue, so I made my own.

It makes no sense for the Giants to trade either Lincecum or Cain (barring some ridiculous deal).

a) any such deal is highly unlikely to turn SF into a 2008 or even 2009 contender

b) Their trade value will likely RISE in 2008 if they put up solid numbers in MLB (even on a poor team)

So, there have been 999,999 threads on Mcc about retooling the Giants for 2009 and beyond.

I just want to point out that the probability of your rebuilding success is not dependent on the amount of punishment you deal to your fans in terms of fielding pathetic losing teams.

Correlation is not Causation!

The Giants management job is, I think we all agree, to maximize the chances of pennants for 2008 and the future.  Note I switched from the 2009 everyone is assuming to the 2008.

"Playing kids" because they might miracle their way above mediocrity does not help.  

There's no Punting in baseball.

When it's all said and done - which will end up being a more criminal waste of baseball talent by Giants management?  

Barry Bonds, 14 years, 1 WS loss
Cain/Lincecum, X years, no offense?

Just a little. Since they swept a 4-bagger from the Dodgers...

Can I like them more than the diamondbacks?

So this is a fork from "Walks and the Giants" diary:

Noah Lowry
2004-2006  465 IP 222 RA = 4.30 RA/9
H/9  8.88
BB/9 3.10
K/9  6.35
HR/9 1.00

(this is so close to a BP average pitcher it's almost scary)

2007
H/9  8.94
BB/9 5.02
K/9  5.02
HR/9 0.69

RA: 156 IP, 76 R: 4.38

So, if he has purposfully traded HRs for BBs, then it hasn't really done him much good.

Note:  By blruging 2004-06, I don't account for the fact that the league ERA is 2004 was 4.14 as compared to a more typical 4.4-4.5.  So that means his 2007 adjusted RA is a little better.