Who Has the Better September Offense: Giants or Diamondbacks?

This might seem like a ridiculous question. The Giants are a horrible offensive team, while the Diamondbacks have Justin Upton and 10 other guys that can hit 450 foot home runs. The Giants team wRC+ is 79, while Arizona is at 93. But a closer look at the individual parts that will make up both lineups in the final month of the season reveals that there potentially isn't much of a gap.

San Francisco's ideal lineup would include a healthy Carlos Beltran and Brandon Belt playing, either at 1st base or in left field. Mike Fontenot gets the nod over Tejada and Cabrera at shortstop. The only decision is whether to play Belt at first base and Ross in the outfield, or Huff at first and Belt in left field. I went with Ross. Here's the lineup and their 2011 wRC+:

Ross - 96
Schierholtz - 105
Beltran - 145
Sandoval - 132
Fontenot - 89
Keppinger - 102
Belt - 91 (before his 4 hit game on Sunday)
Whiteside - 74

Now here is Arizona's:

Parra - 103
Young - 95
Upton - 147
Roberts - 114
Bloomquist - 76
Johnson - 89
Goldschmidt - 132
Montero - 107

Let's remove Goldschmidt and Belt for a moment. They both have a small amount of plate appearances, and I am pretty confident in saying Belt is the better hitter. That's an advantage for the Giants. But let's pretend it's even, and look at the rest of the lineup. Looks pretty even as well.

This is all dependent, of course, on the health of Carlos Beltran. If he isn't part of that San Francisco lineup, it changes everything. And just because the Giants might be as good as the Diamondbacks or possibly have an edge offensively doesn't mean they'll perform better, especially in the short period of a month.

Cap of the tip to Curse of Benitez for his close reading of Baseball Rulebook, Page 1, invaluable insight that guided my work and made this post possible.

Facts and Statisticinos About Tomorrow's Starting Pitcher

Check this out, loyal readers. Madison Bumgarner turned 22 this August, meaning his official age for the 2011 season is 21 (he was 21 on June 30, the halfway point of the season). He is having an historically great season for a pitcher his age, especially in the DIPS department. He's in his first full season, and he already has better command of the strike zone than his teammates Matt Cain and Tim Lincecum right now. Lincecum and Cain already had the "stuff" when they arrived in the majors; they had to add some quality pitches and "learn how to pitch" to become the aces they've been for several years. Bumgarner has a certain amount of "stuff"; he also seems to already have a great idea of "how to pitch". His K/BB ratio is 3rd best all time for a pitcher his age in a single season, and his placement barely changes if you use age 22 as the qualifier instead. Notice that the closest pitcher in recent memory is Brett Anderson, and he's not even that close. The only recent pitchers with K/BB over 3.00 on that list are Anderson and King Felix. Madison Bumgarner right now is doing something pretty unique. Imagine what kind of pitcher he could be in 2 or 3 years. Should we expect a development in either his stuff or his overall pitching ability?

Perhaps not. Every pitcher develops differently, and Bumgarner now could be close to the finished product. Maybe he never has another 2.60 FIP season. He could still be an excellent pitcher. Perhaps the improvement occurs in his ability to prevent weak contact. His .330 BABIP is very high and a product of bad luck and poor defense, but maybe part of it is attributable to his skill or approach. There could be a regression in his home run prevention, or even his strikeouts and walks.

But is that what we should expect? No. It's only fair and normal to think that he will get better in some respect. Which is exciting. And scary.

Much Better: Hall DFA'd, Burriss Sent Down

Okay, Pat Burrell was not released. Bill Hall was. And Brandon Belt was not sent to AAA. Emmanuel Burriss was. This is good news, because these moves are exactly what the Giants should have done. But that blatant error on the part of CSN made me write a rant post that now looks kind of dumb.

You can still read it here if you like.

A lot of it still applies. There's stuff about Beltran, and while Belt hasn't been sent down, we heard today that the Giants envision him in a role similar to that of Travis Ishikawa last season. In other words, Brandon Belt will mostly be a pinch hitter/defensive replacement. And Huff is still starting. Which is terrible. So that rant still applies. Also, ALEX HINSHAW?

I don't know about you but I haven't been this excited for a game since Opening Day. I'll say Carlos Beltran goes 2-for-4 with 2 singles and 9 RBIs. Oh and he'll also make the pitcher balk. That talented.

Too Much to Handle

What a freakin' rollercoaster. I don't like rollercoasters. They make me throw up. I can't know this because I've never been on a rollercoaster, but I'd like to think I'd throw up if I ever got on one. That's how I avoid them. And recent events are confirming my worries.

Let's start at the beginning.

The Giants acquired Carlos Beltran. You know that. What you may not know is how it all went down. The Giants traded Gary Brown. Damnit, I thought they could get him without giving up a top prospect. Wait, they're giving up Zack Wheeler. No! Wheeler's even better. They're trading Wheeler and Brown. YOU HAVE GOT TO BE FUCKING SHITTING ME. Oops, they're just giving up Wheeler. Okay...I hate whoever put that rumor out there. It's very possible that the Giants are giving up Wheeler, Eric Surkamp, and Francisco Peguero for Beltran. Dead. Wait, the Giants may be getting more than just Beltran. OMG REYES?! Shutup, that isn't happening. In the end, they gave up top pitching prospect Zack Wheeler in the deal, a fairly steep price to pay, and a price I wasn't willing to pay up until today. But I trust the Giants in evaluating pitching prospects and the thought of Beltran in the lineup is jus too exciting, so I'm okay with the deal.

That's not to say this isn't a huge risk. Beltran has a pretty significant injury history and is likely a two month rental. If the Giants don't win the World Series or if Beltran gets injured and Wheeler goes on to be a star, yikes. But I've decided it's a risk worth taking. Okay.

It get's announced that Beltran will play RF, with a Schierholtz/Ross platoon in LF. Small quibble, but Schierholtz is a very good right fielder, not to mention the skill it takes to play that position at AT&T park. And why is Schierholtz getting platooned? It doesn't really make sense to give one of your better players LESS playing time, but that will be a common theme later in this post.

Matt Cain is Matt Cain. Getting shit done.

Now there's the business of clearing a 40-man and 25-man roster spot for Beltran, who will be arriving and starting tomorrow. What's this? Brandon Belt is optioned down to AAA AGAIN and Pat Burrell is released to make room on the 40-man roster. Whoa.

At first glance, the real baffling move is to send Brandon Belt back to AAA. The Giants have one of the worst players in baseball this year playing Belt's position right now. There's that whole not playing your best players theme already. And it's not like they can blame this demotion on Belt's struggles at the plate, which was at least a somewhat legitimate excuse after his first demotion. Belt has barely played, but when he has, he's hit pretty well (no hits against Clayton Kershaw, one of the best lefties in the game, so who cares). And, wait a minute, Emmanuel Burriss is still on the Major League roster? That guy as an OPS+ of 41. But he's FAST!! Give me a break. The Giants don't really need him for depth - Keppinger, Fontenot, and Crawford all play SS. The case can even be made that Crawford should be sent down before Belt. For all of his great defense, he can't hit, and isn't going to get much playing time going forward.

But the decision to release Burrell might be more mind-numbingly dumb. It wasn't necessarily that surprising because Aaron Rowand is owed too much money to be cut, of course. But Pat Burrell had the 3rd best OPS on the team this season. He really can still hit. The worst part is that he did NOT need to be released to make room on the 40-man roster. Steve Edlefsen. Clayton Tanner. Alex Hinshaw (What the hell is this love affair with Hinshaw, who is AWFUL?). Bill Hall. These guys are all not very good. Why keep them? It's so un-sabermetric, but clubhouse chemistry is very important and we have every reason to believe that Pat Burrell was a big part of that. I'd love to think a team won't grab him or maybe he can retire and stay around the team. But as I pointed out, he's too good, and a smart team will pick him up.

UPDATE: CSN, who reported this news, has failed. Pat Burrell is not eligible to come off the DL and can't be released yet. Still, the point stands and I wouldn't be surprised if he's released soon.

UPDATE #2: Holy hell, Brandon Belt isn't being sent down and this post is mostly worthless. What the hell happened at CSN today?

I don't know. I haven't processed everything. There's an argument to made that the biggest upgrade this team could make was replacing Huff with Belt, and that isn't happening. And a good player and great clubhouse presence is being dumped in favor of much worse players. I love having Beltran on this team, but the Giants are doing their best to screw it up.

Matt Cain's Career Year

You know how we feel about Matt Cain on this blog. If you don't, just read this. Carl Steward filled in for Andrew Baggarly on Friday night, and had a very surprising opinion of Cain's 2011 season.

There's a lot to say about Matt Cain's 2011 season. His strikeouts are up from the last 2 seasons, and his walks are down. He's getting more groundballs, and allowing fewer home runs. His success against lefties has been especially impressive, possibly due to an improvement in his changeup, which he throws mostly to LHBs. The percentages differ whether you use Baseball Info Solutions or Pitch F/X, but the conclusion is similar: Cain has evolved in his pitch selection (I am using the Pitch F/X numbers):

Career:

60.3% 4 seam fastballs, 12.8% changeups, 12.6% sliders, 11.6% curveballs, 2.1% 2 seam fastballs

2010:

58.5 % 4 seam fastballs, 16.0% changeups, 8.8% sliders, 13.4% curveballs, 2.8% 2 seam fastballs

2011:

48.3% 4 seam fastballs, 17.9% changeups, 11.7% silders, 13.5% curveballs, 8.2% 2 seam fastballs

Not only has Cain increased his usage of the changeup since 2010, but he started developing a 2 seamer, and is now using it a significant amount of the time. I can't faithfully conclude what these changes mean exactly, but the difference in approach could be a reasonable explanation for why Cain is enjoying a career year.

Cain has maintained low ERAs, BABIPs, and HR rates throughout his career while having only above average K and BB numbers, leading to two explanations from the statistical community: he's overrated and lucky, or he's the exception to the rule. Both views may now be outdated, because Cain's FIP this year is down to 2.87, almost a run better than his career average, and 15th best in the majors. His amazing 4.5% HR/FB this year means his xFIP isn't as kind, but at 3.51 it's still .75 runs better than his career mark. His BABIP and LOB% are normal for his career, in fact a bit worse, partly to blame for his Fangraphs-adjusted ERA (ERA-) being only just as good as the total for his career.

I've been paying attention to this development in Cain for some time, which is why Carl Steward's confounding article from Friday bothered me so much. I don't imagine Steward cares what Matt Cain's FIP is; someone who rates Ryan Vogelsong as the most effective pitcher for the Giants this year probably only knows wins and ERA. Yet Cain's ERA is lower than it was last year. None of what Steward wrote really made sense. He described some kind of weird pattern of Cain pitching well in one start and then poorly in the next, something I haven't noticed nor what the record suggests. It could just be a case of looking at the past with...whatever the hell that metaphor is.

"He hasn't been horrible, he just hasn't been the Cain everybody saw in 2010."

That's unfair, and completely wrong. And so is Steward's line about Cain needing to become the rotation's "horse" again. I don't love that term, but it does describe part of Matt Cain's profile: he has never been hurt, and he pitches many innings each year. He can be counted on. Steward would have you believe that he has not been as reliable this season. Meanwhile Cain leads the staff in inning pitched, and he's been excellent at going deep into games. Lincecum and Vogelsong (Vogelsong in far fewer starts) have both failed to get past the 6th inning in 5 starts this season. Bumgarner hasn't gone past the 6th inning 4 times. Cain, reliable as ever, has only failed this criteria once, April 20th in Colorado. Very equine of him.

Now stop saying mean things about Matthew Thomas Cain.

CIN 10, SF 2: Lincecum Cold Streak Continues

That's now 3 iffy starts in a row for Tim Lincecum and today's was the worst. After striking out the first batter of the game, he struck out no more, walked 4, and gave up 7 earned runs in 4 innings. And just 36 of his 73 pitches were strikes. Yikes. Many, including the brilliant FOX broadcasters, are speculating that Lincecum's complete game, 133 pitch outing against the A's is the reason for the recent struggles. But I don't buy that one start is gonna mess with Lincecum and cause him fatigue, especially because it's not like he hasn't thrown a lot of pitches before. With him, there's really no concern that he won't figure it out; he's a great pitcher who has gone through struggles before, most notably August of last season. But it'd be nice if he figured it out soon because this offense can't afford for the pitching to be anything less than perfect.

Speaking of the offense, that's going to be rough to watch for a while. It's been beaten to death, but it's really amazing that the Giants have not only been hit by a ton of injuries, but they've been injuries to very important players. As Grant at McCovey Chronicles pointed out, the entire Opening Day starting infield, with the exception of Miguel Tejada, is out right now. Posey, Belt, Sanchez, Sandoval. That's UNBELIEVABLE. I mean, it's not too great when Andres Torres is your best player on offense by a pretty large margin. The only glimmer of hope is that the offense really can't get too much worse (knock on wood), and they are still in first place. Pablo Sandoval may not be the same player he was at the beginning of the year when he comes back, but he's still better than Tejada. Brandon Belt isn't too far away from returning. Maybe Bruce Bochy will realize that Pat Burrell should be getting more starts at the expense of Aaron Rowand, who is again terrible. Things should get better, but it's gonna be ugly for a while.

Also, Burriss and Tejada hitting 1-2 in the lineup? Hahah, I guess Bochy never figured out what OBP is.

Draft Reaction: Giants Select SS Joe Panik, RHP Kyle Crick

The Giants had two picks on the first day of the MLB Draft - one in the 1st, and one in the supplemental round - and used them on a college SS and a powerful high school RHP.

Here's a scouting report for St. John's SS Joe Panik from Keith Law (Insider Only):

http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/draft/player/_/id/19119/joe-panik

And here's a more optimistic report from John Sickels of SBNation:

http://mlb.sbnation.com/2011/6/6/2210519/2011-mlb-draft-tracker-results-giants-snag-infielder-panik

I do not like the Joe Panik pick. He put up good numbers (.398/.509/.642) in college, but when it comes to draft prospects, stats usually don't matter as much as tools. He supposedly has a weak arm, may need to move to 2B, and doesn't have much power. And if you listen to most scouts, the Giants made a major reach and probably could have selected him with the 49th pick in the supplemental round. I don't like criticizing the Giants when it comes to the draft because they've been pretty freakin' successful in that department recently, but Panik is the type of low upside, limited power hitter the Giants always seem to go for. If you can't read Law's report, he calls Panik a likely utility infielder. Baseball America called the pick the "first truly off-the-board pick of the night" and compare him to Freddy Sanchez. Not really what I'd like from my first round pick.

My main issue with the Giants is that it seems like they doubt their ability to develop raw hitters, so they take safe players like Panik instead of somewhat risky players with more star potential. And then they decide to sign guys like Aaron Rowand and Aubrey Huff to supply the power in the lineup. That's worked pretty well. Not. You may point to guys like Buster Posey, Pablo Sandoval and Brandon Belt as hitters that have come through the Giants' minor league system and had success. I'd argue that Posey didn't need much development, Sandoval was signed on the international market, and Belt may be the exception to rule, assuming he pans out like we all think he will. Gary Brown (a pick I hated, so maybe you can call me an idiot in a year or so) is tearing up the minors right now, but his absolute ceiling is an All-Star leadoff man. I don't mean that to sound like a bad thing, but the Giants don't lack scrappy, high average hitters with speed as much as they do true middle of the order hitters. Maybe I'm being unreasonable; a good player is a good player. I suspect the Giants did prefer HS pitchers like Robert Stephenson and Joe Ross, who went slightly before the Giants picked. But with guys like Dillon Howard, Daniel Norris, and even someone like Travis Harrison on the board, Panik was still an overdraft. Maybe it has to do with my hatred of how the Giants deal with the draft and free agency. I've said it before: imagine Aaron Rowand not signing with the Giants, and the team using that $12 million every year on the draft. It's how it should be. The Giants played it too safe in my opinion and didn't get the best player on the board.

In the supplemental round, the Giants selected Sherman HS RHP Kyle Crick.

Here's another report from Keith Law (Insider Only):

http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/draft/player/_/id/19102/kyle-crick

There were other available high school arms on the board I preferred, like Howard and Norris, although they probably had high price tags and I certainly liked the Crick pick better than Panik. Crick is 6'3", 220 lbs, so he's not very projectable but has the body of a typical power pitcher. His fastball sits 92-97, and according to Law he has an average changeup and average slider right now. There may be some question as to whether or not he can be a starting pitcher, but he has the potential to be a No. 2 or 3 starter. Mostly, I like the pick because it's not a huge overdraft and I always love pitching prospects. There's not really much else to say for Crick, who shouldn't be an especially tough sign out of high school.

Day 2 of the draft begins tomorrow. Let's hope for Josh Bell. Ha!