After Gammons claimed the Giants were "done"

[Sharpieman]

The Giants won their 7th straight game tonight after a 9th inning walk-off homer by Barry. Thats his 3rd homer in 4 games. The Giants are 3.5 games behind the first place Padres and are 3rd place behind the slumping Dodgers, who have won 2 of their last 10 and lost 3 in a row. MrBug must be getting a little nervous...

[MrBug708]

Nervous about what? The fact the Dodgers were picked to finish third in their division?

[Sharpieman]

No that the Dodgers are starting to suck and the Giants are starting to be good, just like every year when the Dodgers choke.

[MrBug708]

As opposed to the Giants who decide to pick the playoffs to choke?

[Sharpieman]

Hey, at least they make the playoffs, when was the last time the Dodgers made the playoffs?

[Vince]

My god. I have to hear enough of this inane chatter away from the internet, being a Giants fan who lives in SoCal. Clean it up guys...the Giants are a much better team than the Dodgers recently, while the Dodgers have more recent world series success to speak of. Whoopty-frickin-doo.

[MrBug708]

A lot sooner then I can remember the Giants winning anything

And if you are gonna talk trash try to have one of these things covered
A)Have a better record then theDodgers
B)Have the better H2H record vs the Dodgers
C)Actually have witnessed a World Series Title by the Giants

Lemme know when you reach one of these.....

[MrBug708]

5-1 this year Vince, 5-1......

[Vince]

I know. I don't even have that anymore

[Sharpieman]

dola, I am speaking a too soon though. The Giants could still suck this year, but these last few games have been very interesting.

[MrBug708]

Seeing as how Nomo is on the DL, we traded away Kevin Brown, Shawn Green sucks, and have a new GM, AND we don't throw batteries.....I'm not worried about this year. Most Dodger fans knew we werent doing that much since we had to go through new ownership....

[LionsFan10]

Yes, the Dodgers are "starting to suck," it took them a little while to start to suck but they somehow remembered and now they're doing what they do best. Go Dodgers! I wouldn't worry too much, though. The one man show known as the San Francisco Giants are known to choke themselves, only they like to do it later on, like around September, October ... you know, when things get important.

This from a Tigers fan .... nah, whom I kiddin'?

[MrBug708]

Hey, is Bonds back to playing in Day games followed by night games? Wasn't sure where he was again....

[Sharpieman]

MrBug always likes to go back to the World Series argument. And you're right, the Dodgers have been a better team historically. But in recent years as Vince noted the Dodgers have been average and have choked many years in a row. 5-1 against the Giants, don't care, there are many games between the two rivals left and during that time when the Giants lost to the Dodgers, the Giants were sucking.

[JeeberD]

Originally Posted by LionsFan10

Yes, the Dodgers are "starting to suck," it took them a little while to start to suck but they somehow remembered and now they're doing what they do best. Go Dodgers! I wouldn't worry too much, though. The one man show known as the San Francisco Giants are known to choke themselves, only they like to do it later on, like around September, October ... you know, when things get important.

This from a Tigers fan .... nah, whom I kiddin'?

Hey now, this is a California bitch fight. The likes of you and me don't belong in this thread. Just sit back and enjoy the anger...

[Sharpieman]

And people say that the Dodgers and Giants don't have a heated rivalry.

[MrBug708]

5-1 against the Giants, don't care, there are many games between the two rivals left and during that time when the Giants lost to the Dodgers, the Giants were sucking.

I want you to repeat that statement in your mind SM. Til you actually realized what you said....

But in recent years as Vince noted the Dodgers have been average and have choked many years in a row

How can a team "be average" and choke at the same time? If they are average, isn't not making the playoffs, par for the course?

[Sharpieman]

I'm not going to dignify your inane comments with an answer. I think you're just mad because the Dodgers suck once again.

[Vince]

LionsFan - You really a Tiger fan? I'd be curious to hear your take on how they're doing and if you think they will continue their success.

Here's my take on what I know. Keep in mind that I watched a lot of the Giants' games up until they started winning...I've been really bogged down in school work the last week and a half or so.

Dodgers: Playing above their heads to begin the season (it took serious effort not to put 'WAY above their heads' ). Also playing below their ability right now. They seem to not be getting any bounces, and not only is Shawn Green not hitting for HR power, he's not hitting at all this year. Last year he still hit a lot of doubles and was actually a productive force for the Dodgers. This year he plain old sucks. I don't know what to make of the guy, to be honest...I think that injury (two seasons ago? Maybe more?) messed him up way more than he or the team wants to admit. Prediction: They'll obviously get out of their funk, but I don't know how close they can get to their early season success. Overall - 88-74, Wildcard Contenders.

Giants: Playing WAY below their ability level to begin the year. To steal a quote from Westwood Blues (A Giants Fan Blog...quite amusing too), the clusterfuck that is right field (Michael Tucker, Jeffrey Hammonds and Dustin Mohr) are better than this...they're playing below replacement value players right now. Combine that with everyone not named Bonds, Schmidt or Grissom on the team playing like ABSOLUTE TRASH, and it's easy to see why they have sucked so far. Brett Bombko is horrendous, and our bullpen is pretty shakey as well. However, Rueter seems to have found a groove, and the rest of the team is starting to turn it around (I haven't been watching much, so I don't know why/how). Prediction: We'll play at or above .500 ball the rest of the way out, I think...but that could be my orange and black colored glasses getting in the way. Overall - 82-80, Wildcard hopefulls for a while, but never serious contenders.

I think in all honesty that the Padres are going to pull out the NL West this year.

[Vince]

Dola - Can't be sure about this Bug, but I believe that Bonds has been playing Night/Day games back-to-back more often this year. I don't know why, though.

[Sharpieman]

I think thats a pretty accurate prediction about the Padres. I have no idea where the Dodgers or the Giants will end up this year. I'm not going to try to begin to predict. These last seven games have been great though. Schmidt is back to his old self, Bonds is healthy, Pedro Feliz has been great all season, Williams is steady, A.J, is starting to hit pretty well, Alfonzo is starting to play pretty decent, and the bullpen has finally come through and been very steady. Brian Sabean has said that he's been tempted to re-work this team through trades, we'll see what he does. One thing to note though is that if the giants can stay at least around .500 until the trade deadline, they'll be able to work a more benefical trade then if they were way below .500 because they would be too desperate at that point.

[Crapshoot]

I think the Giants will be better, especially once they dump Tomko and give Correia the spot, and I expect Williams to keep improving. I also think they've got to get better offensively- Alfonzo cannot possibly be this bad.

[daedalus]

Originally Posted by Vince

Here's my take on what I know. Keep in mind that I watched a lot of the Giants' games up until they started winning...I've been really bogged down in school work the last week and a half or so.

Damn. That's got to be one of the suckiest thing for a fan.

Originally Posted by Vince

Giants: Playing WAY below their ability level to begin the year.

I don't know. Did they really play below their ability? I don't see a whole lot of talent on that field beyond a few positions . . . well, actually, Bonds. Pierz . . . Pierzy . . . what's-his-head was bound to have a drop off after leaving the friendly confines of the Baggie Dome for a fairly tough park for hitters. Alfonso isn't really the Alfonso of his glory days . . . otherwise the Giants wouldn't be able to feature him. Not much else. Perhaps they were just playing to their ability and are just now playing over their head? I would put a lot of it on Bonds' dominance and what seems to be Felipe Alou's best quality: some mystical ability to just wring out every last bit of performance out of whatever team he's been given. And I'm not an Alou fan. I'm happy they're doing well, though, since I like Sabean and Bonds.

[Glengoyne]

I am a Giants fan and Even I think this thread should be titled "My team sucks less..right now".

With regards to Mr Bug. It does pain me that the Giants haven't won a WS in my lifetime, while I have watched the Dodger's win twice. However, I would rather have a team to root for in the post season, than tout yesteryear.

P.S. for Mr Bug. How old were you when the Dodgers won the World Series in '88?

[clintl]

I was really concerned with the makeup of this Giants team when the season started. I'm really happy to see them doing well now (and the Dodgers doing poorly), but when you're in trouble as a team when you have to give two spots in your rotation to Brett Tomko and Dustin Hermanson. Not to mention actually playing Michael Tucker as a starting outfielder, and Neifi Perez as a starting shortstop.

[kingfc22]

I love this rivalry. Especially, when the Dodgers blow and they are only .500 at home. With this recent homestand, it seems like the Giants have finally remembered that they dominate at Pac Bel...er....SBC Park. With that said, this next road trip for the Giants is going to kill their bullpen as they travel for a 4-game series in Arizona and a 4-game series in Colorado. What was the schedule make smoking???

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Glengoyne

I am a Giants fan and Even I think this thread should be titled "My team sucks less..right now".

With regards to Mr Bug. It does pain me that the Giants haven't won a WS in my lifetime, while I have watched the Dodger's win twice. However, I would rather have a team to root for in the post season, than tout yesteryear.

P.S. for Mr Bug. How old were you when the Dodgers won the World Series in '88?

Two things, these past couple of seasons, I do root for the Angels (unlike most Dodger fans) and so 2002 was especially fun to watch Bonds literally hurt his WS chances with his major blunder.

I've been alive for 2 Dodger WS's. That should help in that aspect.

I'm not going to dignify your inane comments with an answer. I think you're just mad because the Dodgers suck once again.

If I'm not mistaken, that is message board speak for "Game, Set, Match".

[IMetTrentGreen]

the padres are going to win the west anyway. i don't even know why you guys are getting all worked up

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by IMetTrentGreen

the padres are going to win the west anyway. i don't even know why you guys are getting all worked up

Kinda like how the Spurs weree going to beat the Lakers?

[Vince]

Originally Posted by daedalus

I don't know. Did they really play below their ability? I don't see a whole lot of talent on that field beyond a few positions . . . well, actually, Bonds. Pierz . . . Pierzy . . . what's-his-head was bound to have a drop off after leaving the friendly confines of the Baggie Dome for a fairly tough park for hitters. Alfonso isn't really the Alfonso of his glory days . . .

The entire offense, minus Barry Bonds, is batting .250 right now. Here's a rundown of career Average vs. Current Season Average for some of our players:

Player	Career	Current	Diff
Alfonzo	0.287	0.278	0.009
N. Perez	0.268	0.210	0.058
Hammonds	0.272	0.207	0.065	Average
Mohr	0.252	0.157	0.095	0.057333
Tucker	0.258	0.246	0.012
Pierzynski	0.298	0.269	0.029
Snow	0.263	0.238	0.025
Team Avg.	0.271	0.229	0.036
Rueter	4.15	5.24	1.09
Tomko	4.65	5.15	0.50

That Average on the right is the average of Hammonds, Mohr and Tucker, the black hole that is Right Field for the Giants. The Team Average for the difference between Career and Current average is taken from that average for the three of them. So 5 of our 8 every day fielding starters combine to bat 36 points below their career average. That is definitely playing below your ability. You combine that with Rueter and Tomko absolutely blowing it early in the year, and it's easy to see (in my opinion at least) that the Giants are better than they've played early. What you also have to remember, is that these stats include the latest 10-15 game stretch in which the Giants have played pretty well...so two or three weeks ago it was even worse than this...as of May 2nd, Rueter's ERA was 7.06

My conlcusion is that the Giants are better than they played for the first 35 to 40 games of the season.

[MrBug708]

How did you compute the stats though Vince? Assuming you just took the average, it's skewed a lot by Mohr, to the point where he shouldn't be a starter period and a bench person could do better, even hitting at .200.

[Sharpieman]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

Two things, these past couple of seasons, I do root for the Angels (unlike most Dodger fans) and so 2002 was especially fun to watch Bonds literally hurt his WS chances with his major blunder.

I've been alive for 2 Dodger WS's. That should help in that aspect.



If I'm not mistaken, that is message board speak for "Game, Set, Match".

The reason you have to root for the Angels is because the Dodgers have sucked it up.

No the guy asked HOW OLD WERE YOU when the Dodgers won both those WS?

Thats 8 wins in a row for the Giants after last nights win and they're leading 2-0 right now.

[Vince]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

How did you compute the stats though Vince? Assuming you just took the average, it's skewed a lot by Mohr, to the point where he shouldn't be a starter period and a bench person could do better, even hitting at .200.

That's the point, though...I'm trying to show you that these guys are playing way below their ability. If you take Mohr out of the equation, the Right Fielders still have a difference of over .036, so they're still dragging down the average.

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Sharpieman

The reason you have to root for the Angels is because the Dodgers have sucked it up.

No the guy asked HOW OLD WERE YOU when the Dodgers won both those WS?

Thats 8 wins in a row for the Giants after last nights win and they're leading 2-0 right now.

I was conceived during the Dodgers '81 Series and saw Kirk Gibson's '88 World series.

And your Giants WS memory?

[Vince]

To further explain...I combined Mohr, Tucker and Hammonds. The average of their differences was computed as the Right Fielder's difference, then that combined Right Fielder difference was used in the team average difference. So Mohr was 1/3 of one person, or 1/24 of the total.

[Chief Rum]

Ignoring for a second that average is probably at best only a very subpar indicator of hitting success, I see reason to believe that your take on this is a bit flawed, Vince.

Hammond and Perez inflated their averages significantly by playing in Colorado. Alfonzo and Snow are on the down side of their careers, especially Snow. There is reason to believe all four aren't much better than what they have shown this year.

Tomko pitched a good deal of his career at Safeco, very much a pitcher's park.

You have a saving grace in Pierzynski and Mohr, who are probably suffering from changing leagues. They should get better, although neither of them is truly anywhere near even a solid hitter, much less the top kinds of hitters you need to make a serious run to and in the postseason.

You also hurt the statistical validity of your argument when you exclude those players playing well, and fail to mention how you're factoring in the right field trio (only explaining it later). You shoyuld have all of the Giants listed there and see if anyone is hitting over his previously proven ability (Grissom and maybe Feliz come to mind).

Reuter should be better, no doubt about that. In fact, he's the only guy on your entire list that is really not playing the way he should be, and only he, Pierzynski and Mohr have a realistic likelihood to return to their normal levels of production, IMO (among players that are significantly different than their current stats--I don't regard Tucker that way, or Alfonzo for that matter).

CR

[Bad-example]

Alfonzo had a horrible first half last year but put up solid numbers in the second half. After another slow start this season it would not be unsurprising to see him pick up steam again.

"You have a saving grace in Pierzynski and Mohr, who are probably suffering from changing leagues. They should get better, although neither of them is truly anywhere near even a solid hitter, much less the top kinds of hitters you need to make a serious run to and in the postseason."

Um...I thought Pierzynski was a career .300 hitter and an all star a couple years ago. You really think he is nowhere near a solid hitter?

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Bad-example

Um...I thought Pierzynski was a career .300 hitter and an all star a couple years ago. You really think he is nowhere near a solid hitter?

It might be a difference of what you and I mean by "solid". He's definitely not a bad hitter. I'm talking the kind of hitter that serves as a run-producer, maybe not a star but is the kind of guy you find on good teams in the #2, #5, #6 type spots. Pierzynski is not that guy.

As for his average, once again, average is at best an iffy indicator of true hitting success. The guy gets hits, but he doesn't know the meaning of a walk, has mediocre gap power and very subpar power to the fences. An All Star at catcher doesn't mean so much. It's a defensive position, so players with a good run offensively can easily get into the All Star game at this position. I haven't heard that Pierzynski is all that great a defensive catcher, although I could be wrong about that. Consider that Damian Miller has an All Star appearance. Damian Miller?

So, now, I would not consider Peirzynski anywhere near the "solid hitter" as I am defining it. Bonds needs significant help on this team offensively, not a decent support player like Pierzynski.

CR

[Vince]

CR - It was only a hastily compiled set of statistics, in all honesty

That being said...I categorized the data at the beginning as the Giants' non-Bonds offense. The only players I excluded were Grissom, Feliz, and Durham. Durham is batting almost exactly at his career average. But he has only played in 25 games. I could include his replacements, but the point is to show that our regulars are sucking it. In the original data set, I did explain that I used an average of the three players in right field, although I did word it terribly.

If I wanted to further qualify it, I would let you all know that Mohr's only had 50 or so at bats, and that he's likely to improve with more plate appearances as his stats normalize. I also am of the camp that thinks that Batting Average is a terrible indicator of offensive production. But I don't know how many people subscribe to that theory, so I took one of the more noticable numbers.

As for having reason to believe that Hammonds, Perez, Snow and Alfonzo are not very much better than they have been playing, well I think that their drop in production is a bit much. Sure, we should expect a decline...but this much? And Tomko having pitched in a pitchers park seems to be a moot point...Pac Bell (SBC, whatever) is one of, if not the, best pitcher's parks in the league.

As for Pierzynski and Mohr...I think you're selling them a little short, but you are correct in indicating that they aren't typical of the power hitters a team needs to perform well in the post-season. However, with Bonds in our lineup, we don't NEED that amazing a power hitter to back him up...simple solid hitters should be enough. And Pierzynski is at least a solid hitter.

The point of my numbers wasn't to excuse the Giants' lackluster performance in the least...only to point out that the majority of the Giants' offense has been playing sub-par baseball this season.

[Vince]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

It might be a difference of what you and I mean by "solid". He's definitely not a bad hitter. I'm talking the kind of hitter that serves as a run-producer, maybe not a star but is the kind of guy you find on good teams in the #2, #5, #6 type spots. Pierzynski is not that guy.

As for his average, once again, average is at best an iffy indicator of true hitting success. The guy gets hits, but he doesn't know the meaning of a walk, has mediocre gap power and very subpar power to the fences. An All Star at catcher doesn't mean so much. It's a defensive position, so players with a good run offensively can easily get into the All Star game at this position. I haven't heard that Pierzynski is all that great a defensive catcher, although I could be wrong about that. Consider that Damian Miller has an All Star appearance. Damian Miller?

So, now, I would not consider Peirzynski anywhere near the "solid hitter" as I am defining it. Bonds needs significant help on this team offensively, not a decent support player like Pierzynski.

CR

AJ Pierzynski is an above average defensive catcher. I just did a ton of statistical research on him this last year in hopes of helping him win his arbitration case against the Minnesota Twins. I was a little chagrined when it turns out I actually helped him win more money from my favorite team, the Giants.

What I found out is that Pierzynski is above average in almost every respect, as a catcher. So he outperforms the average catcher in nearly every statistical category. However, that's not saying much. His true value is to be a role-playing hitter; Chief Rum is definitely correct that he's not your prototypical #5 hitter. But like I said before, I think the Giants would be fine if they had 4 #6 hitters batting right behind Bonds all in a row.

Defensively, Pierzynski is also strong...he is attributed with a fair portion of the success of Minnesota's pitching staff, and his CERA (the ERA of the pitchers on his team while he's catching) was much better than that of his teammates for his years with the Twins. He also throws out batters at a better than 32% clip...and the magic number at which stolen bases become successful is 70%. So he's keeping stolen bases from hurting his team.

[Bad-example]

To say AJ is not a #1-5 hitter is one thing, but saying he was "nowhere near a solid hitter" did sound like you were making him out to be a bum

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Bad-example

To say AJ is not a #1-5 hitter is one thing, but saying he was "nowhere near a solid hitter" did sound like you were making him out to be a bum

Yeah, sorry for that impression. He's definitely not a bum, one of the better hitters on the Giants and, as Vince pointed out, at the position of catcher, too.

I just don't think he's the guy the Giants need to support Bonds (other than getting on to be driven on, and even that is hurt by his poor plate discipline--at least he doesn't strike out a lot).

Vince may be right that the Giants don't need two or three other true quality bats with Bonds to succeed. After all, they didn't have all that much last year, and they had a very good record and won the West. But I think the Giants were much better when they had Kent and Burks and a healthier, younger Aurillia around. Even Santiago provided more protection (although if I had to choose between the two, I would definitely go with Pierzynski).

I suppose that it might be obvious they are better with those guys around.

CR

[Sharpieman]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

I was conceived during the Dodgers '81 Series and saw Kirk Gibson's '88 World series.

And your Giants WS memory?

And the winning streak extends to 9

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by Sharpieman

And the winning streak extends to 9

Wow, quite the comeback you have ther. I answered the question and all you have is "9 in a row"?

[kingfc22]

We'll be ahead of you by the end of next week.

At lease we can agree that the Lakers will go on to win game 6 and then destroy any of the Eastern pretenders.

[DeToxRox]

This is a funny debate because it's all based off the best team in peoples lifetimes. Recent history tells the story better then anything. And within the last, we'll say four years, to get us back at the start of the millenium, the Giants have been better.

In October we'll see, but even though I hate agreeing with IMTG, I doubt it will matter; the Padres are taking the NL West.

[Sharpieman]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

Wow, quite the comeback you have ther. I answered the question and all you have is "9 in a row"?

Dude let me answer your question. The Giants haven't won a WS. So what? I think this is a clear case of "What have you done for me lately?" So what have the Dodgers done lately? OH thats right, they haven't made the playoffs in 8 YEARS! They haven't won a playoff game since 1988.

[MrBug708]

Because making the playoffs and not doing anything is OH SO MUCH BETTER then not making the playoffs and doing something.

Lemme ask this, if "What have you done for me lately" is so popular with you, what have the Giants done this year and how is their record vs the Dodgers? Why do you get to pick the time frame?

Oh ya, the Dodgers won tonight. You cant gain ground without us losing.

[DeToxRox]

I still think the point is you're arguing about second place.

[clintl]

Originally Posted by DeToxRoxDVHStyle

This is a funny debate because it's all based off the best team in peoples lifetimes. Recent history tells the story better then anything. And within the last, we'll say four years, to get us back at the start of the millenium, the Giants have been better.

It has been more like seven. The last time the Dodgers finished ahead of the Giants in the standings was 1996.