Conversation

Replying to

8) Anyway, Bonds defined the 2000's Giants. But the golden years of the team game later, in the 2010's. There was something so likeable about them: a quirky bunch who managed to win 3 world series in the decade without having a single bona fide superstar.

4

2

26

9) Trivia question: who was the last Giant to hit 30 home runs in a season? It was this guy, back in 2004. Since then, the Giants have won 3 world series.

10

2

16

10) Three was

and his scooter; The Freak throwing baseballs the way no one should be able to; the homegrown infield of

, Crawford, Belt, and Sandoval; and MadBum taking the entire team on his back in the 2014 playoffs.

1

2

17

11) My favorite pitch from the era was the one that ended the 2012 season:

striking

out looking on an 89 MPH "fastball" down the middle. His frisbee slider was so unhittable that year that a meatball could complement it.

WS2012 Gm4: Romo fans Cabrera to seal Series win

10/28/12: Sergio Romo strikes out Miguel Cabrera to finish off the Game 4 victory and 2012 World Series title for the GiantsCheck out http://MLB.com/video fo...

3

2

18

12) Anyway I guess I was prompted to write this post today because the rumor is that Posey -- the thread of continuity for the Giants' decade -- is going to announce his retirement, firmly ending the era.

1

3

15

13) But the truth is that I'm more optimistic about the 2020's Giants than I was about the 2010's. It's hard to argue that they didn't get lucky to achieve what they have. But even in the past few years, we've seen the promise of what the Giants can become under Farhan Zaidi.

2

2

18

14) They're a huge budget team which is being run, for the first time in a while, with a strong analytical bent. It's amazing to think back on how revolutionary Moneyball seemed when Michael Lewis wrote it. Today, it's hard to miss.

2

3

19

15) The teams most associated with analytics in baseball have massively outperformed their budgets: collectively the

,

,

, and

-- and the

and

under Epstein -- have been represented in each of the last 6 world series.

2

3

17

16) And the

are starting to show the signs of an organization that has discovered numbers. --Their player development weirdly outperforms (think of their pitching staff this year!) --You've never heard of any of their outfielders, but they had the 3rd best in baseball

3

2

19

17) (The Giants had 6 different players produce 1+ WAR in the outfield last year! Their LF platoon of Ruf, Slater, and Wade outperformed nearly every team.)

13

2

16

18) I used to want to become a GM for a baseball team. There are, I think, a set of things you could implement that would be worth more to the team than any single player in the league.

7:24 AM · Nov 4, 2021Twitter Web App

Replying to

19) But as I look on it now, I worry that being a baseball GM is getting too commoditized. I'm sure that's a gross oversimplification. But, slowly, team after team has realized the gains from common sense changes, and the competitive advantage gets smaller.

1

2

15

20) I think there's one last frontier for in-game baseball strategy that could be worth a huge amount, although the league might rulemake away much of its advantage this offseason. It's based on the following claims:

4

2

15

21) a) Pitchers get tired the more they pitch in a day b) (a) isn't just a reflection of yearly usage: pitchers are in fact decently refreshed after taking a day off c) pitchers get worse the 2nd/3rd/etc. time they face a batter, because the batter gets used to their stuff

11

2

18

22) d) pitchers suck at hitting (no offence Greinke/Bumgarner!) e) there are substantial gains to getting platooon advantage if you can be nimble with your pitchers We've started to see some of these play out with "openers". But what's the final form?

28

2

17

23) Well, (a) and (b) imply that you only want a pitcher to throw a few innings in a game. (c) implies that you only want a pitcher to throw a few innings. (d) implies that you want to pinch hit for your pitchers.... every few innings. (e) implies that you want to...

28

3

14

24) They actually all imply the same thing: especially in the NL, I think pitchers should almost *never* go through the order more than once. You should pinch hit for them *every time* they bat.

9

4

27

25) Wins from pinch hitting: 4.6 (based off of wOBA) Wins from pitcher fatigue/times through order: 3 Platoon wins: idk, another 1-2? Overall I think this is worth ~5-10 wins for the average NL team (at least as long as there's no DH).

31

3

48