Outside Topic Giants/Niners 2021 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 Giants/Niners 2021 thread (/thread-21717.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 Giants/Niners 2021 thread (/thread-21717.html)
lex24 - lex24 - 06-26-2021
(06-26-2021, 08:46 AM)Mick Wrote:(06-26-2021, 08:36 AM)lex24 Wrote:(06-26-2021, 06:25 AM)BobK Wrote: Oh no I’ll miss Belt taking the third strike
Belt wars…. The symbol of analytics vs traditionalists. Overrated by the metric guys as they focus more on his OPS - which is skewed a bit as he walks so much ( itself valuable, but not as much in his case as the metric junkies think). Underrated by the traditionalist folks who feel he takes too many pitches and should hit more HR’s.
Thing is, he’s a darn good player. And a key cog. Sure he takes more called thirds then he should. But overall he’s a better than average first baseman. And far better than any replacement the Giants have.
I think the reason for the antipathy towards Belt is that he was declining as a player, with three consecutive seasons of declining OPS in 2017, 2018 and 2019. He achieved his potential with the new batting coaches in 2020 and was having a strong 2021. Those years were his #1 and #2 OPS years in an 11 year career so far.
I’m sure the new batting coaches helped. More importantly he hurt his knee in ‘18. Wasn’t fully healthy till ‘20. Affected him at the plate. Now hurt same knee. Not good.
RE: lex24 - Goose - 06-26-2021
(06-26-2021, 09:11 AM)lex24 Wrote:I don't think the criticism of Belt relates so much to not hitting enough HR but rather what appears to be a lack of aggression. The fact he walks so much is enabled by his willingness to take pitches that are close and may be called strikes. Many of these pitches are hittable. While not swinging at things you can't hit is always advisable, taking a strike so you can try to work a walk isn't so much. Also, against the shift Belt should be able to bunt his way on virtually at will. Generally, even when the Giants need a base runner, he doesn't take advantage. These effects frustrate fans. Go up there to hit the ball. If you can, bunt your way on until they have to play you "honest". Don't be passive.(06-26-2021, 08:46 AM)Mick Wrote:(06-26-2021, 08:36 AM)lex24 Wrote:(06-26-2021, 06:25 AM)BobK Wrote: Oh no I’ll miss Belt taking the third strike
Belt wars…. The symbol of analytics vs traditionalists. Overrated by the metric guys as they focus more on his OPS - which is skewed a bit as he walks so much ( itself valuable, but not as much in his case as the metric junkies think). Underrated by the traditionalist folks who feel he takes too many pitches and should hit more HR’s.
Thing is, he’s a darn good player. And a key cog. Sure he takes more called thirds then he should. But overall he’s a better than average first baseman. And far better than any replacement the Giants have.
I think the reason for the antipathy towards Belt is that he was declining as a player, with three consecutive seasons of declining OPS in 2017, 2018 and 2019. He achieved his potential with the new batting coaches in 2020 and was having a strong 2021. Those years were his #1 and #2 OPS years in an 11 year career so far.
I’m sure the new batting coaches helped. More importantly he hurt his knee in ‘18. Wasn’t fully healthy till ‘20. Affected him at the plate. Now hurt same knee. Not good.
RE: [merged] Giants/Niners 2021 thread - triangle2 - 06-26-2021
In this regard, I've long regarded Belt as a poor man's Darrell Evans. Evans was better defensively, and a fly ball hitter who hit more home runs and fewer doubles than Belt. Plus Evans was much more of a walk machine than Belt. I remember my dad groaning about Evans' refusal to swing at pitches that weren't in his zone.
RE: [merged] Giants/Niners 2021 thread - Phogge - 06-26-2021
For the Giants Evans played many more games at third than he did at first. I am mystified by the post since Belt is known as one of the best at helping out his infielders with scoops.
However I prefer Evans as a hitter.
RE: [merged] Giants/Niners 2021 thread - Mick - 06-26-2021
(06-26-2021, 11:24 AM)triangle2 Wrote: In this regard, I've long regarded Belt as a poor man's Darrell Evans. Evans was better defensively, and a fly ball hitter who hit more home runs and fewer doubles than Belt. Plus Evans was much more of a walk machine than Belt. I remember my dad groaning about Evans' refusal to swing at pitches that weren't in his zone.
When Evans retired, he had the 8th most walks in history. .361 career OPS, despite a .248 batting average. He was the oldest player to lead the A.L. in HRs with 40 at the age of 38. He was terrific in the field, usually among the NL leaders for putouts and assists by third basemen. His Giants teammates called him "Hoover." And in 21 seasons in MLB, he was never -- not once -- on the disabled list. He played in 92% of the SF Giants games.
His secrets to longevity?
1) 8 hours+ of sleep every night.
2) No weightlifting during the season.
3) Limit daily BP swings to 10 max after age 30.
4) Run 3-5 miles a day, six days per week in a serene location. (he was U.S. Marines Reserve during Vietnam).
Evans said he read Ted Williams' "The Science of Hitting" at least 10 times. Bill James called Darrell Evans the "most underrated player in history." First player to hit 40 HRs in a year in both leagues, 414 HRs pre-steroids, Evans also had far fewer strikeouts than Belt. Evans' grandfather (maternal) Dave Salazar played for the SF Seals. And he hit the longest ball I'd ever seen, way up in the 3rd deck at the stick.
And lastly, he and his wife saw a UFO in summer of 1982. Hovered over his neighbor's house, appeared like a flying wing, triangular, green and redlights on the sides and white on the back.
He was a the same country club in the east bay with my uncle Eric, who said that Darrell was a terrific guy, a gentleman and fun to be around.
RE: [merged] Giants/Niners 2021 thread - lex24 - 06-26-2021
(06-26-2021, 11:24 AM)triangle2 Wrote: In this regard, I've long regarded Belt as a poor man's Darrell Evans. Evans was better defensively, and a fly ball hitter who hit more home runs and fewer doubles than Belt. Plus Evans was much more of a walk machine than Belt. I remember my dad groaning about Evans' refusal to swing at pitches that weren't in his zone.
Pretty good comparison
Evans .248/361,431/792
Belt. 263/357/456/812.
Belt is a better first baseman. But as Phogge said, Evans played third a lot. Biggest difference is HR’s. Evans 414 in 21 years. Belt 149 in 10 1/2.
And if they moved the right field foul pole 5 feet, Evans would have about 600. Dead pull hitter. Which don’t exist anymore.
RE: lex24 - Mick - 06-27-2021
(06-25-2021, 08:08 AM)Goose Wrote:(06-25-2021, 07:41 AM)Mick Wrote: And just for fun...the A's have the 2nd best record in the AL. Are you ready for another Bay Bridge series?I think we will get another important data point about the Giants from this series. For some reason, the Giants always seem to under perform against the As. The don't show as well as they do against other teams for unknown reasons. If they don't do well in this series, it doesn't mean they are a "flash in the pan", but it would mean they aren't a "juggernaut". OTOH, if they do play well, I would be much more willing to believe they are "for real".
Giants have now won two straight over the A's, 6-5 in extra innings in which their #2 starter faced our #3/#4 starter (by record) and 2-0 in which their #3 starter faced our #3/4 starter (both Cueto and Wood have 6-3 records). The A's didn't face either Gausman or DeSclefani. Of course, a week ago, the A's had won nine of their last ten and had the second best record in MLB. Now, they've lost six of their last eight. And today, their #4 starter Cole Irvin (5-7) face newly-minted SF starter Sammy Long (1-0).
I think the Giants are for real at 50-26. They have a 4.5 game lead over the Dodgers, second-largest divisional lead of the six divisions. If they go 43-43 in their remaining 86 games, they'll have won 93 games. I think the Giants are for real.
I wish Slater were for real. Happily, Duggar has come a very long way at .325/.397/.571./.969, tops on the Giants. Crawford is #4 in RBIs.
RE: lex24 - Goose - 06-27-2021
(06-27-2021, 08:16 AM)Mick Wrote: I think the Giants are for real at 50-26. They have a 4.5 game lead over the Dodgers, second-largest divisional lead of the six divisions. If they go 43-43 in their remaining 86 games, they'll have won 93 games. I think the Giants are for real.I agree that they are "for real". As in all seasons, the next game is always the most important of the season, but the Giants have shown they have "enough" to win it all. We may all wonder how that happened, giving the somewhat less than great expectations for this team.
Quote:I wish Slater were for real. Happily, Duggar has come a very long way at .325/.397/.571./.969, tops on the Giants. Crawford is #4 in RBIs.It seems that this year giants players are serially "for real". They do nothing for a while, and just as one hot hitter regresses to the mean, another one goes two sigma above it. Hopefully Slater will be part of that patter at some point.
0-19 - teejers1 - 06-29-2021
0-19! [Had to add this due to moderator's Great Wisdom in dumping separate thread to this 25 page on - it's so tough on readers here, given all the threads everywhere].
That is Giants' BA against the Dodgers in the last 2 games with RISP. Not surprisingly, 2 Ls.
0-19 is freaking TERRIBLE. Just as hitting is contagious, so is gagging at the plate. And while I get that runs scored is a strong metric for evaluating offenses, does any team score less with (a) runners on 2B with no outs, and/or (b) runner on third with less than 2 outs? I'm sure there are lots of them out there, but the Giants strike me as not good in that regard.
Giants are a different (and less good) team without Belt. Little concerned about pre-All Star Game swoon.
Yes, the D-Backs are up next, but the Dodgers just beat the Giants' two best pitchers, and the rotation after them is pretty pedestrian (i.e., beatable by any opponent). And then the Cardinals.
And then the All Star Break.
Danger, Will Robinson! Danger!
RE: 0-19 - Goose - 06-30-2021
(06-29-2021, 10:20 PM)teejers1 Wrote: Danger, Will Robinson! Danger!Could be. The Giants had been on a real hot streak. They were playing 0.800+ ball. Nobody is that good,least of all the Giants. They were due to take some losses. The question is, how will they respond? It may well be they won't sweep Arizona. That isn't the issue. If they can weather the storm of a slump and then get back on track, they are still a playoff team. If they can't and play 0.400 ball for a month, well...
RE: [merged] Giants/Niners 2021 thread - lex24 - 06-30-2021
Facing Bauer and especially Buehler is no picknick. Course maybe Bauer is on borrowed time. Important to take 3 out of 4 from Arizona. Schedule heats up in July.
Question- is Slater still on the roster? Seriously what does it say when Kapler uses his .170 back up catcher to pinch hit twice in key situations instead of Slater? I think he’s headed for Sac as soon as Jaylin Davis comes off the 60.
RE: [merged] Giants/Niners 2021 thread - BostonCard - 06-30-2021
The Giants still have the best record in MLB. The question is whether there will be some reversion to the mean (seems inevitable) or whether the Gaints success to date has been smoke and mirrors.
BC
RE: [merged] Giants/Niners 2021 thread - Phogge - 06-30-2021
Slater’s swing is a mess. He needs to play every day and not take so many pitches. I am more for trading for a bat than a starter.
RE: [merged] Giants/Niners 2021 thread - qwerty49 - 06-30-2021
Many of us remember the inevitable “June swoon.” Let’s hope yesterday was the end of it. After all, July starts tomorrow!
RE: [merged] Giants/Niners 2021 thread - Giants - 06-30-2021
(06-30-2021, 10:33 AM)qwerty49 Wrote: Many of us remember the inevitable “June swoon.” Let’s hope yesterday was the end of it. After all, July starts tomorrow!
SF was 16-9 for the month of June. If that is a swoon, I would welcome a swoon every month.
The June Swoon is nothing more than something an alliterative sports writer concocted.
RE: [merged] Giants/Niners 2021 thread - lex24 - 06-30-2021
(06-30-2021, 08:21 AM)Phogge Wrote: Slater’s swing is a mess. He needs to play every day and not take so many pitches. I am more for trading for a bat than a starter.
I am also. But I think it’s harder to find bats on the market. They get locked up with long term contracts more than pitchers.
Going to be an interesting deadline.
(06-30-2021, 10:55 AM)Giants Wrote:(06-30-2021, 10:33 AM)qwerty49 Wrote: Many of us remember the inevitable “June swoon.” Let’s hope yesterday was the end of it. After all, July starts tomorrow!
SF was 16-9 for the month of June. If that is a swoon, I would welcome a swoon every month.
The June Swoon is nothing more than something an alliterative sports writer concocted.
I’m guessing Bob Stevens.
RE: [merged] Giants/Niners 2021 thread - BobK - 06-30-2021
Some of us are old enough to recall the June swoons in the 60s.
RE: [merged] Giants/Niners 2021 thread - Phogge - 06-30-2021
Lex called it. Art Rosenbaum first wrote of it as it pertained to the Giants but he credited Bobby Stevens with the origination. However the phrase predates the Giants as it was used to describe the summer stock slump. I'm sure that since there are so many captains of industry and finance on this board somebody probably heard the phrase in the canyons of Wall Street.
RE: [merged] Giants/Niners 2021 thread - Giants - 06-30-2021
(06-30-2021, 05:23 PM)BobK Wrote: Some of us are old enough to recall the June swoons in the 60s.
A bit of history (through 2014). Feel free to draw your own conclusions……..
https://www.mccoveychronicles.com/2014/6/27/5850118/san-francisco-giants-june-swoon
RE: [merged] Giants/Niners 2021 thread - Phogge - 07-01-2021
Rosenbaum wrote the editorial in 1962. The New York Times is full of horseshit. The first Swoon was in 1960 when the heavily pennant favored Giants tanked and Bill Rigney was fired on June 17. I was in HS and Bobbb was learning how to rope and tie on the freshman rodeo team at Cal Poly. We both remember the references to the Swoon no matter what the Times says.