How do the Giants do it?

I think saying the playoffs are a crap shoot is oversimplifying it, but I agree with the basic idea that success in the playoffs is dependent on a number of factors beyond your control. thing

Detroit is extremely fortunate to be where they are. First of all, it's not often you can get to the playoffs with the 7th-best record in your league. And when you do, chances are slim that most of the teams better than you will fold, leaving you with a clear path to the World Series.

Yes, the Twins have a long post-season losing streak. But a lot of those games were really close, and had a couple of things gone the Twins way, the results may have been very differently. The margin between victory and defeat is so small once you get to the playoffs in any sport.

Look at Tom Brady. They guy is thought of as one of the best postseason quarterbacks of all time. But when you look closely, he's a Tuck Rule and a couple of missed FG's by Vinatieri away from being the guy who couldn't win the big one.

The best team in baseball changes on a weekly basis. Or are we considering the best team to be the one that ended the season with the most wins? Kind of like how surely everyone considers the best pitcher to be the one with the most wins?

If anyone had ever thought the best team in baseball was the one with the most wins, then there would be no need for a post season.

And they did it again last night with a soft throwing left hander and good outfield defense. Maybe we need more Scott Diamonds?
I still notice how great it is to watch baseball on HD. The slow motion replays of Romo's pitches breaking into the bottom corner of the strike zone, or the replay of Pence's bat shattering while the bat hits the ball 3 times, have been great to see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nicksaviking

The best team in baseball changes on a weekly basis. Or are we considering the best team to be the one that ended the season with the most wins? Kind of like how surely everyone considers the best pitcher to be the one with the most wins?

If anyone had ever thought the best team in baseball was the one with the most wins, then there would be no need for a post season.

---

1) Comparing pitcher wins and team wins does not work. At all.

2) No one is saying that it is always true that the best record = best team, but it is pretty alarming the change in correlation from pre-divisional play in the 60s and since. The best team by record before 1961 tended to win the World Series an awful lot. Now, with each added round of playoffs, the correlation is much, much lower. The fact that more wild card teams have appeared in the World Series since 1995 than teams with the best regular season record is also fairly indicative that a WS win is not truly indicative of being the best team in baseball in that particular season. It's winning a postseason tournament. The team that won 106 games but got beat by the team that won 86 and got hot in October had to endure all the ups and downs of the same 162 game season and won 20 games more, yet they're bypassed in the eyes of many who have a distorted view of the value of the World Series by that team who had 20 less wins. I'm not sure how to truly measure the "best team" in the game, but the assumption that it's the World Series winner every year is just not true.

The Giants are one of the smartest organizations in all of baseball. They get it, to win you have to develop top pitching prospects. They drafted pitching in the first round for consecutive years Matt Cain, Tim Lincecum, Mad Bum, (3 out of 4 years) and when they drafted a hitter, they drafted Buster Posey as well. They traded Wheeler for Beltran, but that would be a sick rotation if Wheeler was in it. The Giants decided to sign Barry Zito because he would put them over the top, he was been terrible up until now, but now he is starting to earn some of the money the giants paid him. Minor League Free agents and waiver wire trades How many of the guys on the team have you herd of, or were on the Giants at the beginning of the year? They pulled a big move to get hunter pence (who is not just a rental, he will contribute in their future) and gave up a top catching spect, compared to giving up a future ace. By the time the Twins pick the 2 top pitchers will be off the board (manaea,Appel) so they will be stuck choosing between stanek or Meadows, and they ultimately will have to go pitcher just because of th slack of the depth they have in the system.

The bad part about your analysis is Cain was in the late first round (think the Twins would trade the player they drafted ahead of Cain that year straight up now?) nor was he taken in consecutive years with the other 3. Many other pitchers were picked before Linecum and Bumgarner, it does come down to scouting. As good as the scouting has been for Tampa, do you think they would take Beckham over Posey again?

Did anybody listen to Mike and Mike on ESPN radio this morning? Everybody is forgetting one simple thing: luck. Like it or not, once you get into a short series, luck can have an awful lot to do with whether you make it through or not. Greenberg called it "the team of destiny" and "the baseball gods", but a feak play at the right/wrong time can change everything

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by old nurse

The statistics of your fifth starter, long reliever, and last two guys in the bullpen should be meaningless for the playoffs. Team stats are meaningless. The utility guy's stats should be meaningless. You probably did not get there with a third sting catcher.

---

Did you even look at anything before you posted this? Talk about meaningless:

Cueto has a chance to be the NL Cy Young. (Which he did, BTW, in a much worse home park for pitching than anyone on SF) Latos and Bailey were pretty comparable with Vogelsong and Bumgartner too.

Zimmerman and Gio are both outstanding pitchers.

The Cincy bullpen was ridiculous in the regular season.

All that and the fact that SF's fifth starter most of the season (Barry Zito) has pitched well in two key games. I could keep going with this post but I've put more time, effort, and thought into than you earned with that retort. Yeesh.

---

How many innings did Cueto and Strasburg through this postseason? Not that I disagree with you neccesarily, I think luck is obviously a huge factor. SF is lucky that their rotation remained healthy, and I as all those teams have pretty great frontline SP, which is the most important factor. I guess I don't count Lincecum this year as he hasn't been in the rotation all year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jtrinaldi

The Giants are one of the smartest organizations in all of baseball. They get it, to win you have to develop top pitching prospects. They drafted pitching in the first round for consecutive years Matt Cain, Tim Lincecum, Mad Bum, (3 out of 4 years) and when they drafted a hitter, they drafted Buster Posey as well. They traded Wheeler for Beltran, but that would be a sick rotation if Wheeler was in it. The Giants decided to sign Barry Zito because he would put them over the top, he was been terrible up until now, but now he is starting to earn some of the money the giants paid him. Minor League Free agents and waiver wire trades How many of the guys on the team have you herd of, or were on the Giants at the beginning of the year? They pulled a big move to get hunter pence (who is not just a rental, he will contribute in their future) and gave up a top catching spect, compared to giving up a future ace. By the time the Twins pick the 2 top pitchers will be off the board (manaea,Appel) so they will be stuck choosing between stanek or Meadows, and they ultimately will have to go pitcher just because of th slack of the depth they have in the system.

---

Um, it's not like they're doing this with unknowns. They have employed guys for their strengths, and their roster is full of guys who have been miscast by previous teams, but they are certainly not unknown commodities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flpmagikat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by old nurse

The statistics of your fifth starter, long reliever, and last two guys in the bullpen should be meaningless for the playoffs. Team stats are meaningless. The utility guy's stats should be meaningless. You probably did not get there with a third sting catcher.

---

Did you even look at anything before you posted this? Talk about meaningless:

Cueto has a chance to be the NL Cy Young. (Which he did, BTW, in a much worse home park for pitching than anyone on SF) Latos and Bailey were pretty comparable with Vogelsong and Bumgartner too.

Zimmerman and Gio are both outstanding pitchers.

The Cincy bullpen was ridiculous in the regular season.

All that and the fact that SF's fifth starter most of the season (Barry Zito) has pitched well in two key games. I could keep going with this post but I've put more time, effort, and thought into than you earned with that retort. Yeesh.

---

How many innings did Cueto and Strasburg through this postseason? Not that I disagree with you neccesarily, I think luck is obviously a huge factor. SF is lucky that their rotation remained healthy, and I as all those teams have pretty great frontline SP, which is the most important factor. I guess I don't count Lincecum this year as he hasn't been in the rotation all year.

---

He never mentioned Strasburg. He mentioned Gio and Zimmerman from the Nats, both guys who made 32 starts. Neither completed 200 innings, but both were over 190. Cueto led the league in starts this year and threw nearly 220 innings, but he was injured in the postseason. Lincecum also never left the rotation, tying Cueto for the lead league in games started, though he only tossed 186 innings in the same amount of starts. Just some facts for your argument, some you stated correctly, some not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flpmagikat

How many innings did Cueto and Strasburg through this postseason? Not that I disagree with you neccesarily, I think luck is obviously a huge factor. SF is lucky that their rotation remained healthy, and I as all those teams have pretty great frontline SP, which is the most important factor. I guess I don't count Lincecum this year as he hasn't been in the rotation all year.

---

Stras was shut down and Cueto had an untimely injury.....your point? The point I was annoyed by was the suggestion that team stats don't matter because only your top guys pitch in the postseason and SF has clearly the best top guys. 1) Their top guys are comparable with two teams that were eliminated earlier than them. If not teams eliminated earlier were better and 2) Not just your top guys pitch as Barry Zito has demonstrated this postseason. So it's a ridiculous argument that none of your points do anything to support.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flpmagikat

How many innings did Cueto and Strasburg through this postseason? Not that I disagree with you neccesarily, I think luck is obviously a huge factor. SF is lucky that their rotation remained healthy, and I as all those teams have pretty great frontline SP, which is the most important factor. I guess I don't count Lincecum this year as he hasn't been in the rotation all year.

---

Stras was shut down and Cueto had an untimely injury.....your point? The point I was annoyed by was the suggestion that team stats don't matter because only your top guys pitch in the postseason and SF has clearly the best top guys. 1) Their top guys are comparable with two teams that were eliminated earlier than them. If not teams eliminated earlier were better and 2) Not just your top guys pitch as Barry Zito has demonstrated this postseason. So it's a ridiculous argument that none of your points do anything to support.

---

Well I guess my point is that while they all have great rotations, both of the Reds and Nats best starters didn't pitch in the playoffs. When you take those guys out of the picture, I'd say SF probably does have the best rotation in the playoffs. So of course team stats matter, and the effect a guy like Cueto or Strasburg has on those stats is substantial and worth noting. Are you saying that because guys like Zimmerman, Gio, Latos, are all good pitchers as well that losing their top starters doesn't matter?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by biggentleben

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flpmagikat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by old nurse

The statistics of your fifth starter, long reliever, and last two guys in the bullpen should be meaningless for the playoffs. Team stats are meaningless. The utility guy's stats should be meaningless. You probably did not get there with a third sting catcher.

---

Did you even look at anything before you posted this? Talk about meaningless:

Cueto has a chance to be the NL Cy Young. (Which he did, BTW, in a much worse home park for pitching than anyone on SF) Latos and Bailey were pretty comparable with Vogelsong and Bumgartner too.

Zimmerman and Gio are both outstanding pitchers.

The Cincy bullpen was ridiculous in the regular season.

All that and the fact that SF's fifth starter most of the season (Barry Zito) has pitched well in two key games. I could keep going with this post but I've put more time, effort, and thought into than you earned with that retort. Yeesh.

---

How many innings did Cueto and Strasburg through this postseason? Not that I disagree with you neccesarily, I think luck is obviously a huge factor. SF is lucky that their rotation remained healthy, and I as all those teams have pretty great frontline SP, which is the most important factor. I guess I don't count Lincecum this year as he hasn't been in the rotation all year.

---

He never mentioned Strasburg. He mentioned Gio and Zimmerman from the Nats, both guys who made 32 starts. Neither completed 200 innings, but both were over 190. Cueto led the league in starts this year and threw nearly 220 innings, but he was injured in the postseason. Lincecum also never left the rotation, tying Cueto for the lead league in games started, though he only tossed 186 innings in the same amount of starts. Just some facts for your argument, some you stated correctly, some not.

---

Right he didn't mention him, but when discussing the cumulative stats of those three teams, the top guys figure pretty heavily. Washington "lost" Strasburg, Cincinnati lost Cueto, SF didn't lose Cain. I guess my point was that I agree that luck is a big factor, and SF is lucky that their starters remained healthy and active(and that Zito has continued to pitch well in the postseason)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by old nurse

The bad part about your analysis is Cain was in the late first round (think the Twins would trade the player they drafted ahead of Cain that year straight up now?) nor was he taken in consecutive years with the other 3. Many other pitchers were picked before Linecum and Bumgarner, it does come down to scouting. As good as the scouting has been for Tampa, do you think they would take Beckham over Posey again?

---

The Twins picked Denard Span with the 20th pick that year, Cain was chosen 25th.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flpmagikat

Well I guess my point is that while they all have great rotations, both of the Reds and Nats best starters didn't pitch in the playoffs. When you take those guys out of the picture, I'd say SF probably does have the best rotation in the playoffs. So of course team stats matter, and the effect a guy like Cueto or Strasburg has on those stats is substantial and worth noting. Are you saying that because guys like Zimmerman, Gio, Latos, are all good pitchers as well that losing their top starters doesn't matter?

---

Except that Cincy BEAT the Giants top starters. It was the backend of the rotation that helped lead them saving that series and then Cain finished it off.

I'm saying it's not as simple as saying "best pitching wins", because that clearly isn't how it plays out. And dismissing team stats as a way to maintain that argument makes no sense. Stl beat a team with better pitching. Hell, they beat another team in the wildcard with better team starting pitching. (Again, a case were the top rotation guys did not pitch the key games)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flpmagikat

Well I guess my point is that while they all have great rotations, both of the Reds and Nats best starters didn't pitch in the playoffs. When you take those guys out of the picture, I'd say SF probably does have the best rotation in the playoffs. So of course team stats matter, and the effect a guy like Cueto or Strasburg has on those stats is substantial and worth noting. Are you saying that because guys like Zimmerman, Gio, Latos, are all good pitchers as well that losing their top starters doesn't matter?

---

Except that Cincy BEAT the Giants top starters. It was the backend of the rotation that helped lead them saving that series and then Cain finished it off.

I'm saying it's not as simple as saying "best pitching wins", because that clearly isn't how it plays out. And dismissing team stats as a way to maintain that argument makes no sense. Stl beat a team with better pitching. Hell, they beat another team in the wildcard with better team starting pitching. (Again, a case were the top rotation guys did not pitch the key games)

---

Fair enough. I guess when I look at the team pitching stats for the regular season, the giants would be fourth out of the 5 nl teams in the post season. Atlanta lost, and the reds and nats lost their top starters. I guess my only point was the team with the best pitching overall is having the most sucess. Some luck, but I dont think thats a fluke(not that you implied that)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flpmagikat

Fair enough. I guess when I look at the team pitching stats for the regular season, the giants would be fourth out of the 5 nl teams in the post season. Atlanta lost, and the reds and nats lost their top starters. I guess my only point was the team with the best pitching overall is having the most sucess. Some luck, but I dont think thats a fluke(not that you implied that)

---

When you look at overall pitching staff for the regular season, you miss a lot. Brandon Beachy wasn't walking onto the Braves roster, Strasburg wasn't walking onto the Nats roster. In playoff rosters, the Giants had the best combination of starters and bullpen arms of any team in the NL. What's stepped up drastically for the Giants was their defense once they got Belt in at first and Blanco in left.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by biggentleben

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flpmagikat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by old nurse

The statistics of your fifth starter, long reliever, and last two guys in the bullpen should be meaningless for the playoffs. Team stats are meaningless. The utility guy's stats should be meaningless. You probably did not get there with a third sting catcher.

---

Did you even look at anything before you posted this? Talk about meaningless:

Cueto has a chance to be the NL Cy Young. (Which he did, BTW, in a much worse home park for pitching than anyone on SF) Latos and Bailey were pretty comparable with Vogelsong and Bumgartner too.

Zimmerman and Gio are both outstanding pitchers.

The Cincy bullpen was ridiculous in the regular season.

All that and the fact that SF's fifth starter most of the season (Barry Zito) has pitched well in two key games. I could keep going with this post but I've put more time, effort, and thought into than you earned with that retort. Yeesh.

---

How many innings did Cueto and Strasburg through this postseason? Not that I disagree with you neccesarily, I think luck is obviously a huge factor. SF is lucky that their rotation remained healthy, and I as all those teams have pretty great frontline SP, which is the most important factor. I guess I don't count Lincecum this year as he hasn't been in the rotation all year.

---

He never mentioned Strasburg. He mentioned Gio and Zimmerman from the Nats, both guys who made 32 starts. Neither completed 200 innings, but both were over 190. Cueto led the league in starts this year and threw nearly 220 innings, but he was injured in the postseason. Lincecum also never left the rotation, tying Cueto for the lead league in games started, though he only tossed 186 innings in the same amount of starts. Just some facts for your argument, some you stated correctly, some not.

---

Cueto, Gio and Zimmerman were not fifth starters. If you are using your long relief guy in the playoffs you are probably out of the game unless the starter got injured. What winning team was using their last guys on the bench of the bullpen. The 5th starter throughout the season is meaningful, in the playoffs not so. The 4/5 guys in the bullpen can be meaningful during the season (note Jeff Gray did post 6 wins). Are you really going to be using them in the playoffs if the game is in doubt? The San Fransisco starting rotation is the anomaly in baseball, not the norm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by old nurse

Cueto, Gio and Zimmerman were not fifth starters. If you are using your long relief guy in the playoffs you are probably out of the game unless the starter got injured. What winning team was using their last guys on the bench of the bullpen. The 5th starter throughout the season is meaningful, in the playoffs not so. The 4/5 guys in the bullpen can be meaningful during the season (note Jeff Gray did post 6 wins). Are you really going to be using them in the playoffs if the game is in doubt? The San Fransisco starting rotation is the anomaly in baseball, not the norm.

---

So....you're going to continue this absurd notion? And to do it you cite the number of wins Jeff friggin Gray had? The Twins team ERA with Gray: 4.77. Team ERA without Gray: 4.73. Give me a frickin break.

Fifth starters and mop-up guys aren't dramatically affecting season team stats any more than they are in the playoffs. The fact is, Cincy's key bullpen guys and best starters were as good (and I would argue better) than San Fran. Washington was better than St. Louis in both of these departments as well and lost.

And we're only using this year, if you want to open up the last 5-10 years I could further bury this notion. SF is here for the same reason STL has won several titles the last few years with inferior overall talent to other playoff teams - they've had some guys catch fire, they've caught some enormous breaks, and they have some nice talent guiding them. But the idea that "best pitching staff = world series" is just stupid. Nothing about Barry Zito winning two huge games, a guy in Vogelsong that no one around here would call an "ace" has been dominant this postseason, and that their inept offense would score enough to help them win against good pitching has anything to do with how good you think Matt Cain and Bum are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by biggentleben

When you look at overall pitching staff for the regular season, you miss a lot. Brandon Beachy wasn't walking onto the Braves roster, Strasburg wasn't walking onto the Nats roster. In playoff rosters, the Giants had the best combination of starters and bullpen arms of any team in the NL. What's stepped up drastically for the Giants was their defense once they got Belt in at first and Blanco in left.

---

Cincy had the best combination. They had the league's best bullpen and comparable starters. Cueto-Latos-Bailey were absolutely comparable to Cain-Bum-Vogelsong. And the bullpen was a clear Cincy advantage. When Cueto went down it hurt, but what might have happened if St. Louis didn't beat a superior Washington pitching staff? I could easily point to multiple teams from the last few years that won over superior pitching teams. Not to mention your Atlanta example back when they used to say "pitching gets you to the postseason, hitting wins it"