What The **** Kurkjian??

[love_that_reefer]

This is LTR being a homer.

On today's episode of Baseball Tonight, Tim Kurkjian previewed the NL West and the SF Giants. He said on more than one occasion that the Giants finished under 100 HRs for the first time since the 1993 Marlins and that they lacked offense. He then went on to point out the Sandoval and Ishikawa have exactly three homers a piece as if that was the most they could do and wouldn't get it done. What the **** man?? Can you not see how they will project over a 162 game season? Do you honestly think these two will hit a combined six homers on the year?? That's ****ing moronic! Then at the end of the show, they showed the records of the West based on simulations and the Giants finished second in the West winning 84 games. Kurkjian then says and I'm paraphrasing, I don't see how a team that can't hit 100 HRs will win 84 games. Really? Kurkjian is a bright guy but he can't see that Ishikawa 27 HRs last year at three levels and that Sandoval hit 23 HRs at three levels last year himself? Not to mention that Sandoval was the Winter League HR Champ? These guys are head and shoulders better than what the Giants had at their respective positions last year. Then there is the huge upgrade they have at short with Renteria compared to Bocock, Vizquel and Burriss.

Look at these stats:
'08 1B- .248/.313/.371, 14 HRs and 72 RBI
'08 3B- .267/.306/.402, 12 HRs and 59 RBI
'08 SS- .228/.295/.281, 1 HR and 36 RBI

Does it take much of a brain to see that the Giants will do far better than that from those positions in '09?? I sure as shit don't think so!! C'mon Kurkjian, you're better than that!! To think the Giants are the exact same team is just retarded!! To quote the same old stat over and over to make a point is even more retarded! Have some foresight dude!! Renteria's name wasn't mentioned once and neither were Ishikawa's or Sandoval's numbers from last year or this spring.

Sorry, just being a Giants fan I had to express my anger.

[GiantsFanatic]

The Giants should use this as bulletin board material throughout the whole season as a motivation tool!!!

[HollywoodLeo]

I think the Giants can win the west.

They have the pitching to do it.

And, despite all his faults, I still think Padres and Giants fans alike underrate Bochy.

[realmofotalk]

Don't forget about Fred Lewis Ultimate 3-hole hitter!!!

[love_that_reefer]

I think the Giants can win the west.

They have the pitching to do it.

And, despite all his faults, I still think Padres and Giants fans alike underrate Bochy.

Yeah, Bochy is a genius for batting guys with OBP's under .300 ahead of Bonds for most of the year. What was I thinking? Bochy is terrible manager and will be the one thing that holds the Giants back from contending.

[love_that_reefer]

Three homeruns today from the Giants!! Eat shit Kurkjian!!!

[bcshorts]

I just don't see how the Giants are going to be contenders this year. Their offense really does have a lot to prove and, until they do, I'm going to plainly state that they are terrible. The pitching is good, but not good enough to carry you far. The Dodgers have the best lineup in the NL and the D'Backs have one of, if not the best, rotations in the NL headlined with Webb and Haren. I see a third place finish this year. When your best power threat is Aaron Rowand and best on base threat is Renteria or Lewis, it's not good. Well, unless it's 2007. In that case, maybe you'll surprise some people. But don't count me among the believers.

[HollywoodLeo]

I just don't see how the Giants are going to be contenders this year. Their offense really does have a lot to prove and, until they do, I'm going to plainly state that they are terrible. The pitching is good, but not good enough to carry you far. The Dodgers have the best lineup in the NL and the D'Backs have one of, if not the best, rotations in the NL headlined with Webb and Haren. I see a third place finish this year. When your best power threat is Aaron Rowand and best on base threat is Renteria or Lewis, it's not good. Well, unless it's 2007. In that case, maybe you'll surprise some people. But don't count me among the believers.

I think you mean the D-Backs have one of, if not the best, 1-2 punches in Webb and Haren because they don't really have much past them.

Meanwhile, the Giants have 3 cy young winners on their staff. (ok, Zito's kind of washed up.)

Any rate, The Giants have the pitching to win the west.

And don't fool yourself into believing you can't win it with pitching and a shaky, power devoid offense because that's what the Padres (And Bruce Bochy) did in 2005 and 2006.

[rockin500]

sorry, but the giants have PLENTY to prove on offense. bringing up the 6 homers just underscores that those guys havent Done anything yet in the show.

that said, if they can piece together enough offense, with their pitching staff they should be able to contend for the NL west title.

[love_that_reefer]

I just don't see how the Giants are going to be contenders this year. Their offense really does have a lot to prove and, until they do, I'm going to plainly state that they are terrible. The pitching is good, but not good enough to carry you far. The Dodgers have the best lineup in the NL and the D'Backs have one of, if not the best, rotations in the NL headlined with Webb and Haren. I see a third place finish this year. When your best power threat is Aaron Rowand and best on base threat is Renteria or Lewis, it's not good. Well, unless it's 2007. In that case, maybe you'll surprise some people. But don't count me among the believers.

I see your concerns but the team is far improved on offense and its not even close to last year's. Do Sandoval and Ishikawa have something to prove? Of course but all indicators say they will. The pitching is better than that of the Dbacks and I'm sorry you can't see that. Leo is right, there isn;t much behind Webb and Haren and the Giants have guy that match up extremely well with that 1-2 punch. The Dodgers might have the best lineup but they lack pitching which is why they aren't running away with anything. Sandoval and Ishikawa are now our best power threats which is why Kurkjian is an idiot for not seeing the potential and Fred Lewis is a possible 20/20 guy. Our best on base threat is Randy Winn and he's no slouch. I won't count you as a believer since you think the Dbacks have better pitching, something I sure as hell can't believe.

[realmofotalk]

And here is your Travis Ishikawa highlight of the night:

[love_that_reefer]

Did you miss that three run triple he had in his first AB?

[bcshorts]

#1 Brandon Webb, 22-7, 3.30 ERA, 1.20 WHIP, 226.2 IP, 183 K, 65 BB, 51.0 VORP vs.
#1 Tim Lincecum, 18-5, 2.62 ERA, 1.17 WHIP, 227.0 IP, 265 K, 84 BB, 72.3 VORP

There's a lot to discuss here, as certain factors tend to point different ways. First, Brandon Webb's injured shoulder puts a large portion of his season in jeopardy, but after some rest, Webb appears to be good for his next start and, hopefully, will be fine for the rest of the season. I will obviously make the assumption that he can put in 220+ innings (or at least around 200), as he has the past four years. If he can't, there's no point in having this debate in the first place. When it comes to comparing stats, Lincecum has the lead on all the categories, with a noticeably lower lower ERA and a slightly better K/BB ratio, and a huge VORP advantage. However, you certainly have to take into account that last year he pitched a very high number of innings at a very high level for the first time in his career. Although I'm not one that worries about injuries coming the next season, to expect him to put up numbers that amazing once again seems somewhat far-fetched. Compare that to Webb having his worst season, in terms of ERA, since 2005, and I don't see an advantage for Lincecum, other than for fantasy owners who would love his 80 K advantage. Predictions:

ESPN Predictions:
Webb: 18 W, 3.37 ERA, 1.25 WHIP, 219 IP, 173 K, 66 BB
Lincecum: 18 W, 2.95 ERA, 1.15 WHIP, 223 IP, 252 K, 84 BB

Baseball Prospectus Predictions:
Webb: 15 W, 3.39 ERA, 1.25 WHIP, 210 IP, 166 K, 62 BB, 53.1 VORP
Lincecum: 13 W, 3.29 ERA, 1.20 WHIP, 205 IP, 220 K, 78 BB, 47.4 VORP

When looking at the predictions for this season, the numbers seem to be quite a bit more balanced. Lincecum still has the slight advantage, as well he should. His upside is definitely higher than Webb's, which is certainly saying something. Webb appears set to stay around last year's marks, and not challenge for an sub-3.00 ERA this season. I expect the VORP difference comes in the prediction of wins, which seems to be a little low on both of them. I'm not sure that either can approach 20, especially with Webb's injury concerns.

The slight overall edge does to Lincecum, although in a heads up matchup, it's not a big enough difference to give the Giants any kind of advantage over the Diamondbacks.

#2 Dan Haren, 16-8, 3.33 ERA, 1.13 WHIP, 216 IP, 206 K, 40 BB, 53.7 VORP vs.
#2 Randy Johnson, 11-10, 3.91 ERA, 1.24 WHIP, 184 IP, 173 K, 44 BB, 27.2 VORP

Do I really need to say more than Dan Haren vs. Randy Johnson? We have an ace in Dan Haren, pitching in the #2 spot for the D'Backs, against a 45 year old pitcher coming off his best season (by far) since 2005. In 2006, he sported a 5.00 ERA and in 2007 pitched under 60 innings. Even if Johnson can duplicate last year's success, it leaves him well short of Dan Haren. And although Johnson has been in good health so far, counting on him to pitch 180+ innings again seems rather ambitious. Predictions:

ESPN Predictions:
Haren: 15 W, 3.55 ERA, 1.21 WHIP, 208 IP, 185 K, 47 BB
Johnson: 11 W, 3.67 ERA, 1.19 WHIP, 152 IP, 146 K, 41 BB

Baseball Prospectus Predictions:
Haren: 14 W, 3.56 ERA, 1.17 WHIP, 200 IP, 180 K, 43 BB, 46.5 VORP
Johnson: 9 W, 3.78 ERA, 1.28 WHIP, 145 IP, 126 K, 42 BB, 29.7 VORP

The predictions point to Johnson still putting up good numbers, slightly better, even, than last year. But while Johnson maxes out at 150 innings, Haren figures to top 200, which figures to be a little low, as the last time he didn't top 215 was 2004 with the Cardinals.

Haren has a very sizable advantage here, both in terms of potential and less potential risk. Moderate to high advantage. If Johnson can somehow go close to 200 innings, and perform like he did last year, it's only a small advantage to the D'Backs.

#3 Doug Davis, 6 W, 4.32 ERA, 1.53 WHIP, 146 IP, 112 K, 64 BB, 19.4 VORP vs.
#3 Matt Cain, 8 W, 3.76 ERA, 1.36 WHIP, 217.2 IP, 186 K, 91 BB, 43.1 VORP

Well here comes the huge landslide in favor of the Giants. Except, it's not... Davis missed a large amount of time last season due to cancer, which can't exactly be pointed to as a normal injury concern. Even after his successful battle, he posted solid stats that aren't significantly worse than Cain's. Other than a half point difference in ERA (and the innings pitched, obviously), the pitchers are nearly identical.

But perhaps it's best to look at Davis's 2007 season, where he pitched the full time:

13-12, 4.25 ERA, 1.59 WHIP, 192.2 IP, 144 K, 95 BB, 28.7 VORP

There, when Davis's stats are projected over a full season, some of his flaws become more apparent. He still can't get rid of that little league-ish WHIP, and his K/BB takes a huge hit. Now we see where Cain has a much better advantage. Predictions:

ESPN Predictions:
Davis: 8 W, 4.80 ERA, 1.53 WHIP, 165 IP, 125 K, 76 BB
Cain: 11 W, 3.65 ERA, 1.31 WHIP, 202 IP, 177 K, 84 BB

Baseball Prospectus Predictions:
Davis: 9 W, 4.87 ERA, 1.51 WHIP, 150 IP, 111 K, 65 BB, 13.8 VORP
Cain: 12 W, 3.97 ERA, 1.32 WHIP, 200 IP, 176 K, 77 BB, 31.3 VORP

We also see an interesting difference between the innings predicted for the two. For some reason, Davis isn't expected to top 160, which causes a significant hit for his VORP. The predictions also forecast a very significant increase in his ERA, which is interesting because his career ERA is 4.35 and his ERA since 2004 is 4.12. Matt Cain's, in that time (his whole career), is 3.71. So I'm not sure how these predictions foresee a difference of a full run in their ERA's. I understand that some of Davis's underlying numbers, like his WHIP and AVG have increased the last two years, but those can only go so far in explaining this huge increase in ERA.

Bottom line, Cain is a better pitcher, and there is no debate to that. The debate is how much better is he? I think he's a lot closer to a half run better than a run. And I also think Davis will pitch more innings than forecast. Regardless, I see a moderate advantage for the Giants.

#4 Jon Garland, 14-8, 4.90 ERA, 1.51 WHIP, 196.2 IP, 90 K, 59 BB, 11.6 VORP vs.
#4 Barry Zito, 10-17, 5.15 ERA, 1.60 WHIP, 180 IP, 120 K, 102 BB, -1.0 VORP

Well, well, now we get to discuss the Cy Young winner Barry Zito and his negative VORP. And his annually increasing ERA with the Giants. Yeah.. As bad as Jon Garland was last year and as much as his career has hit a wall after the 2006 season with the White Sox, he is a better pitcher than Barry Zito. Not only will he give you 200+ innings every year, he will keep you in ballgames. He has a career 4.47 ERA, and is coming off the worst year in his career. Although one could argue regression, ERA's of 4.23, 4.51, and 3.50 in the three preceding years say that he's just as likely to drop back below his career average as he is to stay above it. Especially when you consider his change from the AL to NL, which should actually move his ERA closer to 4.00 than to 5.00. Meanwhile, Barry Zito has an ERA of 4.83 with the Giants and hasn't reached 200 innings pitched in either season. Predictions:

ESPN Predictions:
Garland: 14 W, 4.97 ERA, 1.50 WHIP, 201 IP, 90 K, 59 BB
Zito: 9 W, 4.85 ERA, 1.51 WHIP, 182 IP, 126 K, 87 BB

Baseball Prospectus Predictions:
Garland: 9 W, 4.89 ERA, 1.46 WHIP, 160 IP, 92 K, 48 BB, 16.0 VORP
Zito: 9 W, 4.63 ERA, 1.46 WHIP, 165 IP, 120 K, 72 BB, 14.2 VORP

Here, the predictions show identical players. However, they are wrong. I'm a numbers guy as much as anyone I know, but nothing, outside of Garland's decreasing K rate, support anything near this type of career regression. Zito would have to take a huge step back in the opposite direction, something that doesn't seem too likely. The only hope he has is a sub-4.00 ERA last September, something he decided not to build on with his 5.12 ERA in the spring and giving up 4 runs in 4 IP in his first start this year. Although Garland's spring stats are no better, his first start of 7 IP, 3 ER, and a W point in the right direction.

Garland is better than Zito. At worse, Zito makes a slight comeback and Garland stays about where he was last year, making this a push. But as it stands, a slight advantage goes to the D'Backs. And it could be better, if Garland regains some of his old low-4.00 ERA form.

#5 Max Scherzer, 0-4, 3.05 ERA, 1.23 WHIP, 56 IP, 66 K, 21 BB, 12.1 VORP vs.
#5 Jonathan Sanchez, 9-12, 5.01 ERA, 1.45 WHIP, 158 IP, 157 K, 75 BB, 10.9 VORP

This is an interesting matchup, where young and upcoming pitcher Max Scherzer faces what has, thus far, been a ML dud. Sanchez holds a career 5.18 ERA over 250 IP, yet is the #5 starter for the best pitching staff in the NL. He does, however, have a lot of potential that shouldn't be given up on yet. He threw up a 3.97 ERA before the All-Star break, but fell apart after. But I'll still take the young(er) guy with (more) ace upside who sported a 3.05 ERA in brief action last year. I could go into his ridiculous minor league stats, but I think you already know where I'm going. Predictions:

ESPN Predictions:
Scherzer: 10 W, 3.74 ERA, 1.26 WHIP, 154 IP, 164 K, 66 BB
Sanchez: 6 W, 4.16 ERA, 1.42 WHIP, 132 IP, 135 K, 63 BB

Baseball Prospectus Projections:
Scherzer: 10 W, 3.93 ERA, 1.30 WHIP, 155 IP, 162 K, 64 BB, 30.2 VORP
Sanchez: 7 W, 4.24 ERA, 1.37 WHIP, 135 IP, 128 K, 59 BB, 17.8 VORP

Scherzer has a nice advantage in these projections, which are being rather nice to Sanchez. He could definitely make that breakthrough this season, but Scherzer just has so much more potential. He has better numbers all around, both in career stats and projections. Don't get me wrong, it's not going to be a smooth ride, but Scherzer is a much, much better option in your rotation.

Again, Arizona has a moderate advantage. Sanchez could make it a lot closer if he can approach the 4.00 ERA mark, but that would involve a lot of things going right. A lot less has to happen for Scherzer to get there.

Bottom Line:
#1 - Giants, slight
#2 - D'Backs, moderate
#3 - Giants, moderate
#4 - D'Backs, slight
#5 - D'Backs, moderate

Predicted VORP Advantage:
#1 - D'Backs, 5.7
#2 - D'Backs, 16.8
#3 - Giants, 17.5
#4 - D'Backs, 1.8
#5 - D'Backs, 12.4
Total - D'Backs, 19.2 (3.8 avg.)

So there you go, that's how I can see that the D'Backs have a better rotation than the Giants. Sorry if I don't go along with the media hype, sorry if I rely on more than my eyes (that's for you, Steve Phillips) to evaluate players, and sorry if this isn't what you want to see.

The D'Backs staff has a lot less risk and at least the same potential. I could also evaluate the spot starters, but the D'Backs have a solid advantage there with Yusmeiro Petit over Noah Lowry.

The best argument for the Giants is for Sanchez and Scherzer to be equal, and it's a decently valid one. If Sanchez can perform equally to Scherzer, the D'Backs advantage becomes minuscule. But, if I were a betting man, I'd throw my money on Scherzer and the D'Backs. And I'm a betting man.

[realmofotalk]

Matt Cain is a landslide advantage over Doug Davis, who has had a relatively generous ERA despite his tendency to pitch to contact.

[HollywoodLeo]

Some pitchers just throw the ball. You can see it in their eyes, they just throw it. But Davis pitches.