Outside Topic 2022 Giants thread - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Outside Topic 2022 Giants thread (/thread-23115.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Outside Topic 2022 Giants thread (/thread-23115.html)
RE: lex24 - Mick - 06-05-2022
(06-05-2022, 08:52 AM)lex24 Wrote: If Giants are sellers(things will have to go very badly for that to happen) it will be a bleak second half of the season. But if it does happen, maybe we will see some pressure applied to ownership to stop being CHEAP. And a realization that stars matter.
Giants are 28-24, which project to an 87 win rate. At this time last year, the Giants were....32-20. I'm not worried, tbh. I'm much more worried that the Warriors won't win the championship and even more worried that Stanford football is headed for a string of sub-four-win seasons.
RE: lex24 - lex24 - 06-05-2022
(06-05-2022, 09:20 AM)Mick Wrote:(06-05-2022, 08:52 AM)lex24 Wrote: If Giants are sellers(things will have to go very badly for that to happen) it will be a bleak second half of the season. But if it does happen, maybe we will see some pressure applied to ownership to stop being CHEAP. And a realization that stars matter.
Giants are 28-24, which project to an 87 win rate. At this time last year, the Giants were....32-20. I'm not worried, tbh. I'm much more worried that the Warriors won't win the championship and even more worried that Stanford football is headed for a string of sub-four-win seasons.
They will be sitting home in Oct if they win 87. I think it will take 90.
RE: lex24 - DC 86 - 06-05-2022
(06-05-2022, 12:22 PM)lex24 Wrote:(06-05-2022, 09:20 AM)Mick Wrote:(06-05-2022, 08:52 AM)lex24 Wrote: If Giants are sellers(things will have to go very badly for that to happen) it will be a bleak second half of the season. But if it does happen, maybe we will see some pressure applied to ownership to stop being CHEAP. And a realization that stars matter.
Giants are 28-24, which project to an 87 win rate. At this time last year, the Giants were....32-20. I'm not worried, tbh. I'm much more worried that the Warriors won't win the championship and even more worried that Stanford football is headed for a string of sub-four-win seasons.
They will be sitting home in Oct if they win 87. I think it will take 90.
The third wild card will alter teams' behavior, and may result in stronger teams fighting to make the playoffs than what historical data shows.
But since the introduction of the second wild card in each league (meaning 2012-2021) the median seventh highest win total has been 84. So theoretically 85 wins would be sufficient around half the time.
Of course the actual seventh highest win total has ranged between 79 and 90.
So even adjusting for behavioral changes, it would appear that more than 90 wins should mean a very likely wild card, around 86 wins would be close to a 50/50 proposition, and something like 82 wins would make it very unlikely but not impossible.
P.S. this is why the MLBPA was opposed to expanded playoffs and drew the line at twelve. It's rational for a team like the Giants to build a very profitable team with a moderate payroll that still has a good chance to reach the playoffs. The marginal cost of competing with the Dodgers for the division title is enormous, so better to target 86-90 wins which will keep fans engaged and qualify for a wild card more often than not, and then possibly get lucky in the postseason.
RE: 2022 Giants thread - Phogge - 06-05-2022
Who would have thought that on June 5 the Giants best starter would be Jacob Junis?
lex24 - lex24 - 06-05-2022
(06-05-2022, 12:45 PM)DC 86 Wrote:(06-05-2022, 12:22 PM)lex24 Wrote:(06-05-2022, 09:20 AM)Mick Wrote:(06-05-2022, 08:52 AM)lex24 Wrote: If Giants are sellers(things will have to go very badly for that to happen) it will be a bleak second half of the season. But if it does happen, maybe we will see some pressure applied to ownership to stop being CHEAP. And a realization that stars matter.
Giants are 28-24, which project to an 87 win rate. At this time last year, the Giants were....32-20. I'm not worried, tbh. I'm much more worried that the Warriors won't win the championship and even more worried that Stanford football is headed for a string of sub-four-win seasons.
They will be sitting home in Oct if they win 87. I think it will take 90.
The third wild card will alter teams' behavior, and may result in stronger teams fighting to make the playoffs than what historical data shows.
But since the introduction of the second wild card in each league (meaning 2012-2021) the median seventh highest win total has been 84. So theoretically 85 wins would be sufficient around half the time.
Of course the actual seventh highest win total has ranged between 79 and 90.
So even adjusting for behavioral changes, it would appear that more than 90 wins should mean a very likely wild card, around 86 wins would be close to a 50/50 proposition, and something like 82 wins would make it very unlikely but not impossible.
P.S. this is why the MLBPA was opposed to expanded playoffs and drew the line at twelve. It's rational for a team like the Giants to build a very profitable team with a moderate payroll that still has a good chance to reach the playoffs. The marginal cost of competing with the Dodgers for the division title is enormous, so better to target 86-90 wins which will keep fans engaged and qualify for a wild card more often than not, and then possibly get lucky in the postseason.
Well, that’s a losers mentality. I’m talking ownership. Goal should be to build a fricking monster. You know, like the Dodgers. That takes money. They have it. Spend it. Or play the fringes.
RE: lex24 - Mick - 06-06-2022
(06-05-2022, 12:22 PM)lex24 Wrote:(06-05-2022, 09:20 AM)Mick Wrote:(06-05-2022, 08:52 AM)lex24 Wrote: If Giants are sellers(things will have to go very badly for that to happen) it will be a bleak second half of the season. But if it does happen, maybe we will see some pressure applied to ownership to stop being CHEAP. And a realization that stars matter.
Giants are 28-24, which project to an 87 win rate. At this time last year, the Giants were....32-20. I'm not worried, tbh. I'm much more worried that the Warriors won't win the championship and even more worried that Stanford football is headed for a string of sub-four-win seasons.
They will be sitting home in Oct if they win 87. I think it will take 90.
After last night's victory, projection is 89 wins.
RE: 2022 Giants thread - Phogge - 06-06-2022
Projections don’t deal with injuries, Covid, slumps. Illusory.
RE: 2022 Giants thread - Giants - 06-06-2022
How are the big money free agents doing this season?
In yesterday’s Chronicle, John Shea suggested not so good…
Overall, only three of 25 hitters who signed for $6 million+ are batting above their career OPS so far this season. Chris Taylor, Joc Pederson and C. J. Cron.
RE: lex24 - DC 86 - 06-06-2022
(06-06-2022, 05:06 AM)Mick Wrote: After last night's victory, projection is 89 wins.
Whose projection? you can't simply apply a team's win percentage to date to the rest of the season. You have to consider the specific remaining schedule, personnel changes (e.g Tatis returning), individual performances regressing to the mean, etc. Fangraphs currently projects the Giants to win 87 games the season (.547 thus far but .535 ROS).
(06-06-2022, 05:45 AM)Phogge Wrote: Projections don’t deal with injuries, Covid, slumps. Illusory.
You are confusing Projection with Prediction.
lex24 - lex24 - 06-06-2022
(06-06-2022, 07:20 AM)Giants Wrote: How are the big money free agents doing this season?
In yesterday’s Chronicle, John Shea suggested not so good…
Overall, only three of 25 hitters who signed for $6 million+ are batting above their career OPS so far this season. Chris Taylor, Joc Pederson and C. J. Cron.
How are Freeman, Betts and Taylor doing. One can always find excuses for not signing big name free agents. (Andrew Friedman had a nice quote on this. Can’t find it, unfortunately.) Carlos Correa and Trea Turner may be available next year. Giants will pass. Dodgers won’t.
RE: 2022 Giants thread - Giants - 06-06-2022
I mentioned Taylor, Betts signed his contract in a prior year and Freeman is the only nine figure free agent signed this year hitting close to his career OPS (per John Shea).
Throwing money around is not the solution. Wisely investing resources is the answer.
RE: lex24 - Phogge - 06-06-2022
(06-06-2022, 07:50 AM)DC 86 Wrote:(06-06-2022, 05:06 AM)Mick Wrote: After last night's victory, projection is 89 wins.
Whose projection? you can't simply apply a team's win percentage to date to the rest of the season. You have to consider the specific remaining schedule, personnel changes (e.g Tatis returning), individual performances regressing to the mean, etc. Fangraphs currently projects the Giants to win 87 games the season (.547 thus far but .535 ROS).
(06-06-2022, 05:45 AM)Phogge Wrote: Projections don’t deal with injuries, Covid, slumps. Illusory.
You are confusing Projection with Prediction.
And you Sir are confusing real baseball with today's hybrid game. The game where you remove an effective pitcher and replace with gasoline.
RE: 2022 Giants thread - DC 86 - 06-06-2022
(06-06-2022, 07:20 AM)Giants Wrote: How are the big money free agents doing this season?
In yesterday’s Chronicle, John Shea suggested not so good…
Overall, only three of 25 hitters who signed for $6 million+ are batting above their career OPS so far this season. Chris Taylor, Joc Pederson and C. J. Cron.
It's true that as a whole free agents haven't been great so far this season. Of course the sample size is very small, and free agents historically tend to trend down in the first year (and especially the first part of the first year) on a new team, especially in a new league. Nevertheless, it's true that some players (e.g. Semien) have been terrible.
But comparing 2022 OPS to career OPS is really misleading to the point of being dishonest, given that we are in the worst offensive season of the DH era and therefore offensive numbers are down across the board. Let's take Freddie Freeman as an example:
Last year Freeman hit 300/393/503 (.896 OPS) which was basically right in line with his career OPS (.890). This year's he's hitting 294/379/455 (.834 OPS), i.e. a 62 point drop in OPS driven by a 48 point drop in slugging percentage. Yet his OPS+ (which normalizes for league wide conditions as well as park factors, etc) was 133 last year (33% above league average) and 132 this year (32% above league average), essentially identical. So by Shea's superficial analysis he's solidly in the "bad" category but he's actually performing at the exact same level as last season.
I don't know the exact number but I'm assuming the vast majority of hitters are hitting below their career OPS due to the current offensive environment. Mike Trout is in the top ten in OPS with an OPS+ of 172 (completely consistent with his career OPS+ of 176) and he's 47 points below his career OPS.
(06-06-2022, 08:02 AM)Giants Wrote: Throwing money around is not the solution. Wisely investing resources is the answer.
That statement is axiomatic. The issue is how to define wise investing. I would argue that the Dodgers have thrown money around but that in the grand scheme of things it's been wise, even with some overpayments. Giants management has convinced its fans that every signing has to be "smart" in the sense of producing surplus value. But the goal should be winning baseball games, not winning negotiations.
Take Carlos Correa as an example. He's making $35 million this year, and presumably he's in Shea's list of underperformers. And it's true that he's hit a modest 279/344/407 (only 22% above league average, according to OPS+). But would he be an upgrade in the Giants infield or not? would you rather have him out there every day for the rest of the season or one of Tommy La Stella, Brandon Crawford or Evan Longoria? The Giants front office (and its shills in the press) will posit that "it's a good thing we didn't sign him, he's being overpaid right now" but fans should be arguing that the team can easily afford him and that he represents a major upgrade to the team.
RE: 2022 Giants thread - Giants - 06-06-2022
DC…
You are better than that. Don’t fall into the trap of attacking the messenger “shills in the press” when making your case. That only weakens your position.
RE: 2022 Giants thread - Phogge - 06-06-2022
Bravo Giants.
RE: 2022 Giants thread - DC 86 - 06-06-2022
(06-06-2022, 08:34 AM)Giants Wrote: DC…
You are better than that. Don’t fall into the trap of attacking the messenger “shills in the press” when making your case. That only weakens your position.
I thought I was attacking ownership and adding the messengers as a supplement. You don't think certain writers (e.g. Baggerly) consistently carry the party line? I may be mistaken since I don't consistently read the beat writers.
RE: 2022 Giants thread - Phogge - 06-06-2022
In my day working for the Giants and later covering over 30 World Series, the writers and other press were wined and dined. Free meals at the Curley Grieve Room at Candlestick, places on the team charters, gifts at Christmas. I have two sets of autographed hi-ball glasses from Horace (fitting), a briefcase, assorted knickknacks, my own labeled bat, an old pair of Adidas spikes, a glove and a wall plaque. The beat writers received substantial presents at Christmas. All this helped lead to coverage that was miles away from criticism and never told the unknown stories that we witnessed on the road.
All that has changed.
RE: 2022 Giants thread - old spanish trail - 06-06-2022
All I know is that Mike Trout is obviously never going to get another hit.
RE: 2022 Giants thread - Giants - 06-06-2022
(06-06-2022, 08:54 AM)DC 86 Wrote:(06-06-2022, 08:34 AM)Giants Wrote: DC…
You are better than that. Don’t fall into the trap of attacking the messenger “shills in the press” when making your case. That only weakens your position.
I thought I was attacking ownership and adding the messengers as a supplement. You don't think certain writers (e.g. Baggerly) consistently carry the party line? I may be mistaken since I don't consistently read the beat writers.
I regularly read Baggerly and Brisbee in The Athletic. I occasionally read the Chronicle writers. I would not characterize either Baggerly or Brisbee as guys who tote Zaidi’s water.
In fact, prior to Opening Day, Brisbee leaned strongly in the direction of signing a big dollar free agent. He expressed disappointed it did not happen in a couple of articles. In essence, he is the voice of the fan who watches games at a bar and enjoys sharing his opinions.
Baggerly is more measured in his approach. He focuses more on writing background stuff - the how did we get here type of articles - along with features about players. It is evident from his work that he was close to Posey and wrote frequently about Buster.
I’m not interested in reading material from the Giants PR department. I enjoy reading articles that tell me something I didn’t know. If a writer is going to simply toe the party line, I would suggest to him/her that Pravda might be a better place of employment.
RE: 2022 Giants thread - lex24 - 06-06-2022
(06-06-2022, 08:02 AM)Giants Wrote: I mentioned Taylor, Betts signed his contract in a prior year and Freeman is the only nine figure free agent signed this year hitting close to his career OPS (per John Shea).
Throwing money around is not the solution. Wisely investing resources is the answer.
You consistently throw out that strawman. Do you trust Zaidi? If so, he can “wisely invest” $250,000,000. Right? I’m not suggesting he throw money around without thought. I’m suggesting that a guy that gets high marks for his brains, won’t suddenly get dumb if the owners loosen their grip on the purse strings.
The Giants may hang in for the third WC spot. The Dodgers and Pads will leave them in the dust. Second WC comes from the Central. Third will be between the Giants, Braves and maybe (although I doubt it) the Phillies.
Giants have the misfortune of playing in a Division with a team that’s very smart, loaded with stars, great farm system and an ownership that doesn’t care what it spends. It just wants to win. And they do. Now you have the Pads. Last year gave all the “see money doesn’t matter” folks ammo. Well, looks like that money may pay off.
I just don’t get the mentality from fans that it’s “ok” for the Giants to be a mid level payroll team. There is this kind of strange (to me) attitude that - “the Giants are just smarter than everyone one. They can keep making little deals. The Donnie Waltons of the world are thrilling. They don’t need stars.”
Sorry, I don’t buy that. And yes, I know they won 107last year. I also know they were led by old previously thought finished previously thought overpaid veterans.
Take a look at the three best records in baseball. Tell me what their payrolls are. But then, you always have the Angels…..