Sunday, May 25, 2003

 

I apologize for my prolonged absence from these pages. I did attempt to post something last night, but Blogger wisely decided to burn it before all of you could see how uninspired it was. I was away from my office for several days this week, attending system administration classes. My brain was thus not stuck on its normal mode of baseball and gaming.

The 2003 Giants are a boon to Alka-Seltzer sales all over the Bay Area. This is a team that can crank out a six-game winning streak multiple times, or lose nine out of eleven. They started 13-1, but they're only 17-17 since then. They built up a seven-game lead in the division, and now it's only a game or two. Who are these guys? Are they a good team that's struggling, or a mediocre team that had a hell of a start? Is this like 2002, where they started quick, muddled through until August, and then slammed it into high gear through the World Series?

Let's have a look at some numbers. First, some relating to the offense. Without Jeff Kent, the offense was supposed to struggle. Has it?

San Francisco Giants team statistics

Statistic           2002  NL Rank       2003  NL Rank

OBP                 .344     2          .347     3

SLG                 .442     1          .430     5

OPS                 .786     1          .777     4

OPS w/RISP          .801     4          .779     5

Runs/game           4.81     6          4.30     8

If you were only to look at the first three columns, you'd say the offense is ever so slightly worse than last year. Really, the numbers are so close, and the 2003 sample size so small, that you have to say there's no significant difference. So how is this year's team scoring half a run per game less than the '02 squad? Ultimately, it's luck. The '03 Giants are doing about as well with runners in scoring position as last year. A 20-point dip in OPS is interesting, but not enough to account for half a run per game, I would think. Over the course of the season, the run totals will improve if the Giants keep hitting this well. So it's not that we miss Jeff Kent, or because Barry Bonds isn't playing as well. The offense is hitting; it's just not getting hits in the right combinations. There's nothing you can do about that. Of course, if Bonds' injured knee lingers, and his performance suffers, all bets are off. (On the other hand, if Neifi Perez gets injured or otherwise forcibly removed from the lineup, the offense can only get better.)

So let's look at the pitching. The Giants have gone with youth in their rotation this year, trading Russ Ortiz for Damien Moss, and effectively swapping Livan Hernandez for Jesse Foppert (not to mention Ryan Jensen for Kurt Ainsworth). Robb Nen's injured, so the bullpen is also supposed to be a huge problem. Here's what the numbers say:

San Francisco Giants team statistics

Statistic           2002  NL Rank       2003  NL Rank

ERA                 3.54     2          3.99     7

WHIP               1.302     4         1.398     9

BB/9                3.27     3          3.94    14 

HR allowed/9        .727     1          .934     6

Here, my friends, is the problem. The Giants are giving up nearly half a run more per game than last year. This isn't just luck, as it is with the offense. They're giving up 28% more home runs, and 20% more walks, than they did last year. In fact, they're nearly the worst in the league in walks allowed. Home runs and walks have nothing to do with luck, and everything to do with the skill of the pitcher. Worse, they directly translate into runs--put a lot of guys on base, let people hit homers, and you're in big trouble. Tomorrow, I'll break down the Giants pitching staff, and we'll see in more detail who's giving up all these extra walks and homers.

For now, we have enough info to see where the Giants stand:

San Francisco Giants team statistics

Statistic           2002  NL Rank       2003  NL Rank

Expected win %      .618     1          .569     7

The expected win percentage is derived using Bill James' "Pythagorean theorem," which is calculated as "Runs scored [squared] / (Runs scored [squared] + runs allowed [squared])." It's an accurate predictor of future performance. Last year, the Angels and Giants had the best expected win percentages, despite being wild cards. This year, the Giants are in the middle of the pack.

To sum up--it's simple. Score half a run less per game, and give up half a run more per game, and you're simply not as good a baseball team. Even if the offense's bad luck turns, the pitching staff is still half a run per game worse. So I tend to believe the .569 record for the year. That will yield 92 wins, and may still be enough to win the division. But probably not.

Tomorrow, we'll break down the pitching staff, and play everybody's favorite "if I were the GM" game.

Jefferson 11:27 AM

|