*** Official *** 2012 MLB Season Thread!!

[SP33Demon]

The Giants have decided to take it as a personal affront to their manhood to lose at home. So we may never see it happen again.

 

[jalaram]

Wait, Alburquerque's first name is Al? So he goes by Al Al?

I still think the best name is Angel Pagan.

 

[Perknose]

I still think the best name is Angel Pagan.

Best evah:

 

[rcpratt]

Oh well, if you're gonna lose, might as well REALLY lose. Don't think Panda will be having any more 3 HR games this series.

 

[Squisher]

The curse of the long layoff.

 

[gorobei]

are the giants still underestimated because of the west coast thing(fewer games broadcast on the east coast thus less familiarity with the players and less pundit commentary) or are they now a contender team after 2010 ws?

i dont really follow baseball that much, but given the heavier statistics collection of the game i am fascinated by the handicapping everyone does at the start of the season.

 

[AMDZen]

are the giants still underestimated because of the west coast thing(fewer games broadcast on the east coast thus less familiarity with the players and less pundit commentary) or are they now a contender team after 2010 ws?

i dont really follow baseball that much, but given the heavier statistics collection of the game i am fascinated by the handicapping everyone does at the start of the season.

Yep. You see the same thing happen in hockey. Every year in fact.

NJ Devil fans actually thought they stood a chance against LA because nobody had even seen LA play a single game.

East coast bias is everywhere, in sports its very clear, but never as clear as it is with hockey.

 

[zinfamous]

are the giants still underestimated because of the west coast thing(fewer games broadcast on the east coast thus less familiarity with the players and less pundit commentary) or are they now a contender team after 2010 ws?

i dont really follow baseball that much, but given the heavier statistics collection of the game i am fascinated by the handicapping everyone does at the start of the season.

it would be difficult to underestimate a team with the likely MVP, a solid starting corps, and a recent 2-time CY Young dominating pitcher coming out of the bullpen to shut your ass down every other night...

But I guess people can do that. :\

that being said, the game is very streaky. A lot of post-season magic happens because of hot teams, as confounding as they may be. Look at Oakland, look at the Marlins in 2004, look at the Giants over the last 2 weeks...

 

[AMDZen]

The Giants just did this a couple years ago so many should be wiser of them now, however that first time people were clueless as to their lineup and their pitching prowess.

Its not just hot streaks and such, its Bruce Bochy

 

[rcpratt]

Yep. You see the same thing happen in hockey. Every year in fact.

NJ Devil fans actually thought they stood a chance against LA because nobody had even seen LA play a single game.

East coast bias is everywhere, in sports its very clear, but never as clear as it is with hockey.

Meh. The playoffs, in all sports, are designed for entertainment. The primary focus is not crowning the best team.

I don't think SFG were the best in the NL. I don't think the Tigers were the best in the AL. I don't think the LA Kings were even close to the best in the NHL last season. I don't think the Devils were the best in the East.

Small sample sizes have much more impact that any perceived or not perceived geographical bias.

 

[AMDZen]

The Devils weren't even close to the best team in the east. But its which team is hot at the right time. However, LA deserved to be there, they had all the talent and put it together at the right time.

 

[rcpratt]

The Devils weren't even close to the best team in the east. But its which team is hot at the right time. However, LA deserved to be there, they had all the talent and put it together at the right time.

Sure. I'm not saying anybody did or didn't deserve anything...just that the system isn't set up for the best team to always win.

As a Midwesterner, I don't really even think that the Giants have any lack of visibility. Cain, Vogelsong, Posey, Bumgardner, Sandoval, Zito, Lincecum...they're a team full of well-known stars. Plenty of ESPN coverage, plenty of hype. I don't think the average fan watches much baseball during the regular season other than their own team. Obviously the Tigers have been seen as the favorite, but I think that has absolutely nothing to do with geography.

Of course, this is funny, because when any Midwest team is playing an East Coast team, you hear the same complaints.

 

[gorobei]

....
Small sample sizes have much more impact that any perceived or not perceived geographical bias.

given that baseball plays the most games per season and the detailed level of breakdown per player (sabean style metrics) of statistics, it would seem to be the largest sampled size possible. mind you we are kind of talking about perceived strength as seen by general populace following the sport, and less about any purely objective analysis by some science study.

my point was that a lot of talk back in 2010 was 'giants coming out of nowhere', so is this year the same or should people who follow have been expecting this?

 

[Sid59]

What happens if they call-off the game tonite due to weather? Do they continue the regular scheduled games? Double header? Push games by a day?

 

[rcpratt]

What happens if they call-off the game tonite due to weather? Do they continue the regular scheduled games? Double header? Push games by a day?

There's an off day tomorrow.

 

[rcpratt]

given that baseball plays the most games per season and the detailed level of breakdown per player (sabean style metrics) of statistics, it would seem to be the largest sampled size possible. mind you we are kind of talking about perceived strength as seen by general populace following the sport, and less about any purely objective analysis by some science study.

my point was that a lot of talk back in 2010 was 'giants coming out of nowhere', so is this year the same or should people who follow have been expecting this?

Sure, baseball's regular season is more telling than any other sport's, I would say. But once you're into the playoffs, you're right back to small sample sizes.

I'm pretty sure the Giants were the NL West favorite, or at least not a distant second (Dodgers?).

 

[Squisher]

What happens if they call-off the game tonite due to weather? Do they continue the regular scheduled games? Double header? Push games by a day?

weather.com shows it clear and 60F tonight.

 

[Slew Foot]

when going to see Fister vs Bumgarner in San Francisco make sure youre going to a baseball game.

 

[SP33Demon]

given that baseball plays the most games per season and the detailed level of breakdown per player (sabean style metrics) of statistics, it would seem to be the largest sampled size possible. mind you we are kind of talking about perceived strength as seen by general populace following the sport, and less about any purely objective analysis by some science study.

my point was that a lot of talk back in 2010 was 'giants coming out of nowhere', so is this year the same or should people who follow have been expecting this?

I think many expected SF (or LA) to win the west because they had the pitching to do it, so I'd say that SF was the favorite especially considering nobody at the time knew that Lincecum would have such a bad 2012 dropoff. However, there was still the perception of how their offense would perform since Posey was just coming back from a devastating injury year and Ku Fu Panda (Sandoval) is so streaky (hitting and weight wise lol), and the 2011 rental of Beltran was a bust... so it was hard to say. Nobody also could have predicted that Melky Cabrera's monster year was fueled by steroids, let alone that he would get caught. So no, I don't think SF came out of nowhere, most pundits expected them to win the division because of that rotation.

Statistics/sabremetrics are the great thing about baseball, so many numbers and new formulas (or metrics) being created every year to try to perform better inferential and descriptive analysis. However, like others have said, they don't really apply so much to the playoffs in small sample sizes. For example, nobody expected Scutaro's torrent rise to stardom in the NLCS, let alone Posey's cold bat or Verlander's bad game last night. Over many games the superstars will add more value but in the short term it could be anyone that emerges as the hero. That's part of the fun of the playoffs, unless it's your team choking (like the Nationals lol).

 

[oogabooga]

2011 rental of Beltran had little to do with how the Giants would fare in 2012. It was confusing why they didn't even make an offer, but that's how it went. The NL West was definitely SF's to lose, with I believe Arizona being considered the 2nd best team. The Dodgers played exceptionally well given expectations and made a strong push for the west, then the wild card most of the year. They did run out of steam near the end, but were in it most of the season.

SF has been considered a contender, a very strong bullpen, strong defense, and while the starting pitching isn't light out ala 2010, it's been good enough - and on occasion brilliant when it has been needed. Their offense has been suspect, though it's been coming through for them right now.

I would laugh if anyone had predicted Scutaro's amazing performance, even he doesn't seem to understand it right now.

Playoffs are designed to break hearts - any team can win 4 out of 7 against another team (or even more so 3 out of 5, 1 out of 1).

 

[Baked]

Its not just hot streaks and such, its Bruce Bochy

You can have the best roster, but if you don't know how to manage, you'll lose. Just ask Yankees and Bosox.

 

[Perknose]

when going to see Fister vs Bumgarner in San Francisco make sure youre going to a baseball game.

You can tell Fister is a pitcher just by his name!

 

[drebo]

You can have the best roster, but if you don't know how to manage, you'll lose. Just ask Yankees and Bosox.

Yeah, Clueless Joe needs to go.

Keep the bosox where they are, though.

 

[manly]

Oh well, if you're gonna lose, might as well REALLY lose. Don't think Panda will be having any more 3 HR games this series.

Or in the rest of his career, for that matter.

Sure, baseball's regular season is more telling than any other sport's, I would say. But once you're into the playoffs, you're right back to small sample sizes.

I'm pretty sure the Giants were the NL West favorite, or at least not a distant second (Dodgers?).

Definitely not the Dodgers going into the season. All they had was Clayton Kershaw and Matt Kemp and a bunch of "other" guys. Andre Ethier is solid but now overpaid after new management shoveled a fat extension to him in June.

And contrary to local opinion at the time, I thought the blockbuster deal with the Red Sox was a disaster because of the inclusion of Carl Crawford. I have no idea how it played in Beantown, but their fans should've been dancing in the streets.

 

[Squisher]

Verlander $20,000,000/yr.

Fister $500,000/yr.