MLB Thread: 2013

[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
Just finished watching the Rangers-Angels game. I think Weaver is going to pull a Lincecum this year. You can’t lose 5 MPH of your fastball and expect to be as effective. Most of the time, when guys try to go from power pitcher to finnesse pitcher, it fails miserably. [/quote]

I wholeheartedly disagree. The upper-echelon of major league pitchers is littered with guys who learned how to pitch with finesse after a diminishing of their stuff. I suppose it depends on what you mean by “finesse”, but I personally tend to equate that term with pitching rather than simply throwing.

The fact is that there are maybe a handful of guys who can simply overpower hitters with pure stuff, even though most of the really good pitchers in the majors could do so at the minor league level and maybe early in their careers as well. And many of the pitchers who CAN overpower hitters with pure stuff are young and not necessarily that successful yet. When they lose a little stuff and have to adjust is when they are really forced to learn how to pitch with some finesse.

Matt Cain is a perfect example. Back when he was 20, 21 and in his first or second year he was throwing 95-96mph on a regular basis. But now he’s MUCH better and more effective at 90-92mph because he’s learned how to finesse hitters. He can throw any pitch at any time for a strike and that more than compensates for a dip in velocity.

In fact, the entire Giants’ starting rotation is a great example. None of them can throw more than about 93 with any regularity but they continue to rack up more strikeouts as a group than all but maybe a couple of rotations, and the past three years has there really been a better rotation in the majors? Of course not. The reason they are so good is that they know how to pitch. They have by far the best rate of first-pitch strikes with offspeed pitches of any rotation in the majors and they are excellent at inducing both groundballs and flyballs.

Sabermetricians will point to their high flyball out rate as luck or the result of pitching in a favorable park, but they do the same on the road. The reason being is that they know how to effectively pitch on top of the strike zone as well. They are very good at coming up or in on the hands late in the count and they set hitters up well in this respect, due in large part to their ability to throw their offspeed pitches for strikes early in the count. The staff as a whole is the epitome of the art of pitching, Lincecum not withstanding.

But the reason Lincecum is struggling is not due to the loss of velocity in and of itself. Matt Cain, Bumgarner and Vogelsong have all proven that you can pitch very, very effectively with a 90mph fastball that used to be 94-95mph. Hell, even Zito used to throw 87-90 with the A’s and now he’s down around 84-85, but he’s finally learned how to pitch that way after several years of adjustment.

The point is that the Giants’ rotation is a testament to the ability to go from a power pitcher to a finesse pitcher, something they’ve all had to do in their careers.

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]strungoutboy21 wrote:
Who let John Kruk in the announcers booth? Guy is freaking annoying.[/quote]

You watch your mouth. [/quote]

Sorry dude, but honestly John Kruk is the worst.

I was listening to him on the ESPN baseball tonight podcast a while back (he was guest) and he just said the most absurd things.

They were discussing the Yankees loss of HRs in the lineup from last year and he said Cano would “choose” to hit 40-50 HRs this year because the team needed it

Clayton Kershaw will post a sub 2 ERA this year.

[quote]Anonymity wrote:
Clayton Kershaw will post a sub 2 ERA this year.[/quote]

Want to bet an avatar on that?

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]Anonymity wrote:
Clayton Kershaw will post a sub 2 ERA this year.[/quote]

Want to bet an avatar on that?[/quote]

What are the terms?

[quote]Anonymity wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]Anonymity wrote:
Clayton Kershaw will post a sub 2 ERA this year.[/quote]

Want to bet an avatar on that?[/quote]

What are the terms?[/quote]

If he finishes with a sub 2 ERA you can choose whatever avatar you want for me to use for one month. He finishes with 2 or higher and I choose yours for one month. ANY avatar I want.

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]Anonymity wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]Anonymity wrote:
Clayton Kershaw will post a sub 2 ERA this year.[/quote]

Want to bet an avatar on that?[/quote]

What are the terms?[/quote]

If he finishes with a sub 2 ERA you can choose whatever avatar you want for me to use for one month. He finishes with 2 or higher and I choose yours for one month. ANY avatar I want.[/quote]

Alright, you’re on. I suppose we should put some sort of minimum IP cap on this say 175?

[quote]Anonymity wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]Anonymity wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]Anonymity wrote:
Clayton Kershaw will post a sub 2 ERA this year.[/quote]

Want to bet an avatar on that?[/quote]

What are the terms?[/quote]

If he finishes with a sub 2 ERA you can choose whatever avatar you want for me to use for one month. He finishes with 2 or higher and I choose yours for one month. ANY avatar I want.[/quote]

Alright, you’re on. I suppose we should put some sort of minimum IP cap on this say 175?[/quote]

He has to qualify for the ERA title. To qualify, a pitcher needs to throw one inning for every game played by his team (Rule 10.22B). So, assuming that the Dodgers play 162 games this year, he would have to throw 162 innings.

Those are the terms.

Are you an idiot anonymity?

He didn’t even post a sub 2 era in his Cy young year. He would have to have one of the greatest seasons of all time for you to win that bet.

Even if you bump it up to 2.75 it would be pretty risky

[quote]therajraj wrote:
Are you an idiot anonymity?

He didn’t even post a sub 2 era in his Cy young year. He would have to have one of the greatest seasons of all time for you to win that bet.

Even if you bump it up to 2.75 it would be pretty risky
[/quote]

The terms have already been set, Raj. Vanish. I’ll enjoy seeing you with an avatar of my choice after your pathetic Blue Jays get stomped by the Giants in their two series this year.

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
Are you an idiot anonymity?

He didn’t even post a sub 2 era in his Cy young year. He would have to have one of the greatest seasons of all time for you to win that bet.

Even if you bump it up to 2.75 it would be pretty risky
[/quote]

The terms have already been set, Raj. Vanish. I’ll enjoy seeing you with an avatar of my choice after your pathetic Blue Jays get stomped by the Giants in their two series this year.[/quote]

Not yet he hasn’t agreed to the terms

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
Are you an idiot anonymity?

He didn’t even post a sub 2 era in his Cy young year. He would have to have one of the greatest seasons of all time for you to win that bet.

Even if you bump it up to 2.75 it would be pretty risky
[/quote]

The terms have already been set, Raj. Vanish. I’ll enjoy seeing you with an avatar of my choice after your pathetic Blue Jays get stomped by the Giants in their two series this year.[/quote]

Not yet he hasn’t agreed to the terms[/quote]

I’ll probably agree to 175 innings. In fact, I DO! You’re on anonymity! We officially have a deal!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

As for you, Raj, I can’t wait either. I have several GIFs/avatars in mind for you, the front runner at this point being the feminism one with the lightning bolts coming out of that pixie woman’s vagina.

I might also lean toward something about the plight of Indians stricken with cholera. Nothing racist about that. I’m not perpetuating any stereotype by doing so, nor am I making fun of anything because of their race. Only the country itself. I wouldn’t have stooped to such low depths if you hadn’t pulled the bitch move of the century by refusing any sort of racist or gay-themed avatar and then choosing an overtly racist avatar for myself.

Here’s another possibility for you, Raj.


This one should suit you well for your abortive forays into PWI.


I think this one would also look good next to every one of your posts.


I’m starting to notice a theme here, Raj.

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
Just finished watching the Rangers-Angels game. I think Weaver is going to pull a Lincecum this year. You can’t lose 5 MPH of your fastball and expect to be as effective. Most of the time, when guys try to go from power pitcher to finnesse pitcher, it fails miserably. [/quote]

I wholeheartedly disagree. The upper-echelon of major league pitchers is littered with guys who learned how to pitch with finesse after a diminishing of their stuff. I suppose it depends on what you mean by “finesse”, but I personally tend to equate that term with pitching rather than simply throwing.

The fact is that there are maybe a handful of guys who can simply overpower hitters with pure stuff, even though most of the really good pitchers in the majors could do so at the minor league level and maybe early in their careers as well. And many of the pitchers who CAN overpower hitters with pure stuff are young and not necessarily that successful yet. When they lose a little stuff and have to adjust is when they are really forced to learn how to pitch with some finesse.

Matt Cain is a perfect example. Back when he was 20, 21 and in his first or second year he was throwing 95-96mph on a regular basis. But now he’s MUCH better and more effective at 90-92mph because he’s learned how to finesse hitters. He can throw any pitch at any time for a strike and that more than compensates for a dip in velocity.

In fact, the entire Giants’ starting rotation is a great example. None of them can throw more than about 93 with any regularity but they continue to rack up more strikeouts as a group than all but maybe a couple of rotations, and the past three years has there really been a better rotation in the majors? Of course not. The reason they are so good is that they know how to pitch. They have by far the best rate of first-pitch strikes with offspeed pitches of any rotation in the majors and they are excellent at inducing both groundballs and flyballs.

Sabermetricians will point to their high flyball out rate as luck or the result of pitching in a favorable park, but they do the same on the road. The reason being is that they know how to effectively pitch on top of the strike zone as well. They are very good at coming up or in on the hands late in the count and they set hitters up well in this respect, due in large part to their ability to throw their offspeed pitches for strikes early in the count. The staff as a whole is the epitome of the art of pitching, Lincecum not withstanding.

But the reason Lincecum is struggling is not due to the loss of velocity in and of itself. Matt Cain, Bumgarner and Vogelsong have all proven that you can pitch very, very effectively with a 90mph fastball that used to be 94-95mph. Hell, even Zito used to throw 87-90 with the A’s and now he’s down around 84-85, but he’s finally learned how to pitch that way after several years of adjustment.

The point is that the Giants’ rotation is a testament to the ability to go from a power pitcher to a finesse pitcher, something they’ve all had to do in their careers.[/quote]

Power pitcher, not thrower. Weaver could still pitch when he was throwing 90+. Last night his fastball was 84-86 most of the night. Yes, some power pitchers have had success after losing 5+ on their avg. fastball, but they were not as good as they were when they threw harder. You use Zito as an example, but he is not anywhere near the Cy YOUNG award winner he was when he threw harder. Cain can still get it up when he needs to. Shit, Pedro learned how to pitch better supposedly when he came back from injury in 2000 and lost a little mustard on his fb. He had a good year and a few after. But was he as effective as The Cy YOUNG nearly MVP pitcher tha he was in '98 when he was hitting 98mph as a power pitcher HELL no.

Throwing slower does not always = learning how to pitch.

[quote]therajraj wrote:
Are you an idiot anonymity?

He didn’t even post a sub 2 era in his Cy young year. He would have to have one of the greatest seasons of all time for you to win that bet.

Even if you bump it up to 2.75 it would be pretty risky
[/quote]

Hahahah, I know, but it makes things much more interesting. There’s no money on the line, just a little bit of internet ego so it’s not a big deal.

I accept the bet.

[quote]Anonymity wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
Are you an idiot anonymity?

He didn’t even post a sub 2 era in his Cy young year. He would have to have one of the greatest seasons of all time for you to win that bet.

Even if you bump it up to 2.75 it would be pretty risky
[/quote]

Hahahah, I know, but it makes things much more interesting. There’s no money on the line, just a little bit of internet ego so it’s not a big deal.

I accept the bet.[/quote]

Fuck yeah! Don’t worry none of the above gifs are going to be yours. For you, I think something aggressively homosexual in nature is in order.

Here is some fun facts about the Padres!

  1. SAN DIEGO PADRES
    Watching Edinson Volquez get creamed by the Mets to start the season, a thought immediately crossed my mind: Is Volquez the worst Opening Day starter ever?

Turns out “ever” is a lofty standard.

Highest single-season ERA for Opening Day pitcher (Minimum 50 IP)
YEAR PLAYER TEAM INN ERA
1973 Steve Blass Pittsburgh Pirates 88.2 9.85
1923 Bill Hubbell Philadelphia Phillies 55.0 8.35
2004 Hideo Nomo Los Angeles Dodgers 84.0 8.25
1983 Brad Havens Minnesota Twins 80.1 8.18
1912 King Cole Chicago Cubs/Pittsburgh Pirates 68.0 7.68
Just a delightfully eclectic mix of pitchers here, headed by the legendary Steve Blass. Not familiar with the former Pirates hurler? Blass was one of the best pitchers in baseball in 1972, going 19-8 with a 2.49 ERA,4 249⅔ innings pitched, and a runner-up finish in the NL Cy Young race. The next season, the right-hander suffered the biggest collapse by a pitcher in baseball history, walking 84 batters, with 12 HBPs and nine wild pitches ? in just 88⅔ innings. That 9.85 ERA season was so iconic that whenever a pitcher completely loses his ability to find the strike zone over an extended period of time, we still call it Steve Blass disease.

So OK, Volquez probably isn’t going to plunge to such depths, not even after getting pounded for four runs and nine hits Sunday at Coors Field, leaving his ERA at 10.00 after two starts. He’s also got no shot to catch Steve Blass disease, because he already has worse control than maybe any other pitcher in the game, including a league-leading 105 walks last year.

That a pitcher of such dubious pedigree would be the Opening Day starter for the Padres tells you how far this pitching staff has fallen. Injuries have played a huge role in the rotation’s Volquezisation. Cory Luebke, who’d started to emerge as one of the best young lefties in the game in 2011, made just five starts in 2012 before going under the knife for Tommy John surgery. Joe Wieland, a promising young right-hander, hit the operating table himself two months later. Casey Kelly, one of the main pieces in the big Adrian Gonzalez trade with the Red Sox in 2010, had TJ himself just last week.

If the Padres’ only affliction were a string of pitching injuries, that’d be easy to understand, given how common major surgeries for young arms still are. But there’s a lot more going on in San Diego, some of it the result of bad luck, some of it due to lousy decision-making, some of it iffy public relations. The other major piece to the Gonzalez trade, Anthony Rizzo, looks like a potential top-10 first baseman ? but he’s now a Cub, having been dealt for right-hander Andrew Cashner. Cashner has an electric fastball with triple-digit velocity ? but he can’t stay healthy, and he’s languishing in middle relief while the Padres rotation burns, at least for now. Rizzo was deemed expendable because the Padres acquired first baseman Yonder Alonso (and three other players) for staff ace Mat Latos ? only there’s real question over whether Alonso will ever hit for power, while Latos anchors the rotation for a World Series contender in Cincinnati. The prize of the Latos deal was probably catcher Yasmani Grandal ? only he’s been suspended for PED use, casting doubt over his future.

There’s much more. Chase Headley had a career year in 2012, came into this offseason as either a prime contract extension candidate or prime trade candidate ? and neither happened. Now he’s got a fractured thumb that’ll keep him out for most if not all of April, and given the track record of thumb injuries for other players, could continue to eat into his value as the season goes on.5 The Padres have in fact been aggressive in signing other arbitration-eligible players to extensions, but those deals have yielded spotty results, with even Nick Hundley’s dirt-cheap three-year, $9 million deal somehow being a bust a year and change into it.

Slap a dollar sign on any Padres analysis and you can drop into a rabbit hole of financial mishaps, starting with John Moores and his partners walking away with a big chunk of the Padres’ lucrative new TV deal as a condition of last year’s franchise sale. Also, much of San Diego County can’t watch Padres games because of an ongoing cable dispute, one that froze out 42 percent of viewers in the county last year and 22 percent now. A Padres fan named David Marver made a documentary called Padres: The Sad Truth, which takes ownership and management to task for poor decision-making, promises allegedly made and broken, and the team’s perennially rock-bottom payrolls. The Padres can make several reasonable counterarguments, such as that winning tends to beget spending more than vice versa; that the free-agent market hasn’t been particularly attractive over the past couple years; or that making $17 million a year in stadium payments, along with needing to maintain an undisclosed amount of funds in available free cash flow to satisfy three different lenders, puts a big strain on the team’s ability to spend.

But even if both sides have a point,6 the bottom line is the Padres simply don’t have nearly enough good players in the majors, or even close to the majors. That’s a function of a farm system that has been terribly broken for much of the team’s existence. There’s a longer article to be written about how little top-shelf talent has been drafted, developed, and nurtured into big league stardom by the Padres, and how much moves like draftingMatt Bush over Justin Verlander (to save money) and Donavan Tate over Mike Minor, Shelby Miller, Mike Trout, and others (who the hell knows why) have hurt the team’s fortunes. Today, there’s hope in the lower minors, with a strong Class A Fort Wayne TinCaps rotation headed by last year’s first-round pick Max Fried the jewel of the system. But we’ve already established what can happen when you pin your hopes on young arms: Who knows what the big league team will look like when the highly touted next generation of pitchers finally makes The Show ? assuming more than one or two make it at all?

So sure, we shouldn’t overreact to any team’s first week, not even one in which a team with the worst starting rotation in baseball somehow doubles down by scoring only 14 runs in its first six games. But when you look at the Padres’ hopes for contention, they look pretty grim. Now, and for the foreseeable future.