Buster the new Derek Jeter of baseball for the future?

[markakis8]

Agreed. Pythagorean backs it up:

2010 - 92-70, should have been 94-68 - not lucky at all
2012 - 94-68, should have been 88-74 - much luckier

Aubrey Huff in 2010 was an almost-5 WAR player who finished 7th in MVP voting, so it's kind of ridiculous to say they didn't have an MVP candidate in 2010. To say that their 2012 lineup is much better is an overstatement. Torres, Uribe, and Burrell were all much better than some people seem to remember. 6 sub-.700 OPS hitters in 2012, compared to 3 in 2010. Plus they had a 2-time Cy Young winner in 2010 who was still pitching like one, and a dominant closer who wasn't even on the roster for this World Series. I'd say both their hitting and pitching were better in 2010.

Really, only one way to settle this: Strat-O-Matic replay.

LOL, Pagan, Posey, Pence, Scutaro, Pablo, Melky, Belt all had OPS above .700 - the only one not in the playoffs is Melky. What #'s are you looking at?

 

[ronfromfresno]

Agreed. Pythagorean backs it up:

2010 - 92-70, should have been 94-68 - not lucky at all
2012 - 94-68, should have been 88-74 - much luckier

Aubrey Huff in 2010 was an almost-5 WAR player who finished 7th in MVP voting, so it's kind of ridiculous to say they didn't have an MVP candidate in 2010. To say that their 2012 lineup is much better is an overstatement. Torres, Uribe, and Burrell were all much better than some people seem to remember. 6 sub-.700 OPS hitters in 2012, compared to 3 in 2010. Plus they had a 2-time Cy Young winner in 2010 who was still pitching like one, and a dominant closer who wasn't even on the roster for this World Series. I'd say both their hitting and pitching were better in 2010.

Really, only one way to settle this: Strat-O-Matic replay.

I agree, I just posted this in World Series thread as well, but I still find it hilarious that people think 2010 was some sort of fluke, or that the Giants just had magical luck. In the second half of 2010 the Giants lead the NL in home runs, in September the pitching staff had the 4th lowest ERA in history for a month, they made up 10 games in the standings over the last month and a half. Nothing about that team said they would head into the playoffs and fail, except the pundits who looked at the age of the team and their dismal first half. I agree that this season the Giants were expected to do well compared to 2010. This season the Giants clinched their division early, despite Magic spending all his money for the Dodgers, and won 94 games during the regular season. They went into the playoffs matched up well with the new format and of course they provided Giants fans with "torture" by facing elimination in the first two rounds of the playoffs. I actually felt less confident about this team compared to 2010 because of their lack of power and how the pitching staff had struggled going into October.

 

[markakis8]

Not gonna lie, I wish I was sitting here arguing about whether the Orioles 2012 WS championship was luck or not.

 

[Mamunrud]

One thing's for sure these days in baseball, if you have good pitching and play good defense you can get by not having a power offense. Pitching and defense wins lots of ball games and the Giants play through the whole regular season winning close ball games and nail-biters. Then once the playoffs come along they're accustomed to playing playoff type baseball and can excel at it from the season long battles. That's why you don't see them making critcal errors at key times in pressure type situations, which makes for winning baseball.

 

[Tom Oates]

As I stated in the WS thread - the 2010 Giants and the 2012 Giants are two VERY different teams - particularly their offense. Most of their pitching remains.

This is what I posted in response to people doubting the 2010 Giants and whether they would doubt the 2012 Giants.

This year was not luck, the Giants were one of the best teams in baseball. I'm not surprised they won this year. 2010, the Giants got hot at the right time and it was an anomaly that they won the WS. It was a complete surprise they got past the Braves, let alone the Phillies and the Rangers. Their pitching was good, but let's compare lineups from 2010 and 2012.

2010 World Series:

Andres Torres
Freddy Sanchez
Buster Posey
Pat Burrell
Cody Ross
Aubery Huff
Juan Uribe
Edgar Renteria

2012:

Angel Pagan
Marco Scutaro
Pablo Sandoval
Buster Posey
Hunter Pence
Brandon Belt
Gregor Blanco
Brandon Crawford

One person remains from 2010 - Buster Posey. 2012 lineup is clearly better than 2010, you had four aging players on their way out the door that LUCKILY provided clutch moments for you throughout the playoffs (Sanchez, Burrell, Huff, and Renteria) and a mediocre hitter that became your savior at the right time vs. the Phillies (Cody Ross). Combine that with the great pitching the Giants had and you got yourself a championship.

2012 lineup was a lot more youthful and powerful and they will be around for a couple years. Still have the great pitching (replacing Sanchez with Vogelsong doesn't hurt). There weren't any "wow" moments from any particular player on the Giants in 2012 outside of Pablo hitting 3 home runs, but even then, Pablo is the second best hitter on the Giants - he's no Adam Kennedy.

Plus in 2012, you had MVP candidates each half of the season (Melky in first half, Buster Posey in 2nd half). Having Marco Scutaro hit over .360 the 2nd half didn't hurt and be the NLCS MVP didn't hurt either. Who did you have as an MVP candidate in 2010? Nobody, the Giants offense was terrible almost all year. Posey and Huff had nice seasons but the rest of the squad was mediocre at best - further proving the point that their clutch hitting throughout the entire playoffs was nothing short of magic.

2010 was a magical, lucky year for SF fans. 2012 was more expected. Their lineups are completely different.

I pretty much agree with everything you said. I would add that in 2010, the Giants benefited from a Padres collapse down the stretch. The Padres lost something stupid like 11 games in a row towards the end of the season and the Giants only made the playoffs be default. Granted, once they got their foot in the door, they took full advantage.

 

[sportscardtheory]

The Giants are a team built to win in the playoffs. Much unlike the Yankees who are a team built to win in the regular season.

 

[dp33]

LOL, Pagan, Posey, Pence, Scutaro, Pablo, Melky, Belt all had OPS above .700 - the only one not in the playoffs is Melky. What #'s are you looking at?

From baseball reference. Do you even look this stuff up? Theriot, Crawford, Pence, and Blanco all started significantly in the World Series. In case you don't want to bother:

All players with 200 at-bats, except for Cody Ross, who I added in to match up the player totals. Posey and Sandoval, and Cabrera, better this year - Huff, Sanchez, Uribe, and Torres better in 2010. Defensively is where I would buy the argument that this year's team is better. But that's it.

Posey - .957 vs .862
Belt - .781 vs .891 (Huff)
Theriot - .637 vs .739 (Sanchez)
Crawford - .653 vs .749 (Uribe)
Sandoval - .789 vs .732
Cabrera - .906 vs .872 (Burrell)
Pagan - .778 vs .823 (Torres)
Pence - .671 vs .676 (Schierholtz)

Blanco - .676 vs .659 (Rowand)
Arias - .693 vs .707 (Renteria)
Sanchez - .685 vs .644 (Molina)
Scutaro - .859 (80 points over his previous best) vs .819 (Ross - 12 points over his career best)

As my dad says, any team starting Ryan Theriot at DH should really forfeit their wins. And as Ron said, the Giants were a force at the end of 2010 - not the case this year, aside from Posey. And back to the original point of the thread - if Posey hasn't made out as the new Derek Jeter after the 2012 season he had, it's probably a good bet it isn't going to happen.

 

[markakis8]

Theriot was not a significant starter in the playoffs. he started, what 2 games in the WS b/c of the DH? Scratch that one..didn't their backup catcher hit one game? And what he started a game or two when Scutaro was hurt? That's not a significant starter.

Hunter Pence had an OPS of .743 for the season and drove in over 100 RBIs. You can't just include his time with the Giants. And he has a career OPS of .813 and still 29. He's no slouch of a hitter you make him out to be.

Your 2012 lineup had 6 hitters (of the 8) with an OPS over .700, not 6 hitters under an OPS of .700. And I'm not even a Giants fan.

The point is, as a whole, the 2010 Giants was far less superior as an offense than the 2012 team.

From baseball reference. Do you even look this stuff up? Theriot, Crawford, Pence, and Blanco all started significantly in the World Series. In case you don't want to bother:

All players with 200 at-bats, except for Cody Ross, who I added in to match up the player totals. Posey and Sandoval, and Cabrera, better this year - Huff, Sanchez, Uribe, and Torres better in 2010. Defensively is where I would buy the argument that this year's team is better. But that's it.

Posey - .957 vs .862
Belt - .781 vs .891 (Huff)
Theriot - .637 vs .739 (Sanchez)
Crawford - .653 vs .749 (Uribe)
Sandoval - .789 vs .732
Cabrera - .906 vs .872 (Burrell)
Pagan - .778 vs .823 (Torres)
Pence - .671 vs .676 (Schierholtz)

Blanco - .676 vs .659 (Rowand)
Arias - .693 vs .707 (Renteria)
Sanchez - .685 vs .644 (Molina)
Scutaro - .859 (80 points over his previous best) vs .819 (Ross - 12 points over his career best)

As my dad says, any team starting Ryan Theriot at DH should really forfeit their wins. And as Ron said, the Giants were a force at the end of 2010 - not the case this year, aside from Posey. And back to the original point of the thread - if Posey hasn't made out as the new Derek Jeter after the 2012 season he had, it's probably a good bet it isn't going to happen.

 

[ronfromfresno]

Some one sent me this yesterday, seems to fit this thread

 

[James52411]

It drives me nuts that anyone would say that a championship is "lucky." These games are played out on the field, and if the most statistically dominant team fails to win, it isn't due to luck. It's due to the fact that they were outperformed on the field. The goal of a playoff series is to win the series. If the dominant team wins three games 20-0 and the underdog wins 4 games 4-3, the underdog accomplished the only goal of a playoff series and thus was not lucky. The Giants won their division, and then defeated every team they played in the playoffs. Their pitching is excellent and they field the ball well. They have enough hitting to win. They aren't lucky, they're good, and they achieved victory on the field.

 

[sportscardtheory]

San Francisco Giants

Team OPS

2010 .729 7th in N.L.
2012 .724 6th in N.L.

Team ERA

2010 3.36 1st in N.L.
2012 3.68 5th in N.L.

 

[jbhofmann]

San Francisco Giants OPS

2010 .729 7th in N.L.
2012 .724 6th in N.L.

What was their luck quotient for each year?

 

[markakis8]

What was their luck quotient for each year?

:lol:

Maybe I just hold the players of 2012 in higher regard than 2010. Ever since he was an Oriole, I was never a fan of Aubrey Huff. That guy only hustled when he wanted to. And he would have a great offensive season (like 2008 with the Orioles and 2010 with the Giants) and then not show up the next year (like 2009 with the Orioles and 2011-12 with the Giants).

Call me whatever, but I would take Pagan over Torres, Pence of Burrell or Ross, Scutaro over Sanchez, Crawford over Renteria, Pablo over Uribe, and Belt over Huff. And I'm talking 2012 vs 2010 of each player.

 

[sportscardtheory]

What was their luck quotient for each year?

The 2012 Giants did lead the N.L. in Clutch pitching AND in Clutch hitting. That's pretty crazy.

 

[morgoth]

Well played.

There is no way in the world a catcher can get hurt again and miss significant time................

 

[brouthercard]

Buster will be LUCKY if he is even featured in a shampoo commercial, ala Mauer.

He is not a transcendent personality or player.

Will Clark had more die hard fans than Posey at the same time of their careers, and he never won the WS with the Giants.

Clark was an old school tough guy player, with a cult following.

Buster looks like someone you beat up in high school, and has the whiniest name in the entire sport. "OOooh, mommy, I want a buster posey doll for christmas, can you get me the one in the pink dress?", lol.

The day Buster becomes the face of baseball is the day the WNBA finals achieves higher ratings than the world series.

Would this even be a serious question when the Giants miss the playoffs next year?

 

[Austin]

Make this thread again when Posey starts banging supermodels, actresses and singers and can generate his own celebrity flow chart. Then we'll talk.

 

[sportscardtheory]

Buster will be LUCKY if he is even featured in a shampoo commercial, ala Mauer.

He is not a transcendent personality or player.

Will Clark had more die hard fans than Posey at the same time of their careers, and he never won the WS with the Giants.

Clark was an old school tough guy player, with a cult following.

Buster looks like someone you beat up in high school, and has the whiniest name in the entire sport. "OOooh, mommy, I want a buster posey doll for christmas, can you get me the one in the pink dress?", lol.

The day Buster becomes the face of baseball is the day the WNBA finals achieves higher ratings than the world series.

Would this even be a serious question when the Giants miss the playoffs next year?

Even though I agree that Posey will not become the "face" of baseball ala Derek Jeter, I have to say that this post is completely overboard and childish.

 

[Brewer Andy]

Even though I agree that Posey will not become the "face" of baseball ala Derek Jeter, I have to say that this post is completely overboard and childish.

In presentation maybe, but he's also completely right. I mentioned it earlier, not being a Giants fan I have little interest in following a player with a name and face like that unless he's a world-beater. People have prejudices. Mostly because its baseball, and although I take my baseball seriously, I'm not afraid to have fun with it either so in this case, so do I

 

[sportscardtheory]

In presentation maybe, but he's also completely right. I mentioned it earlier, not being a Giants fan I have little interest in following a player with a name and face like that unless he's a world-beater. People have prejudices. Mostly because its baseball, and although I take my baseball seriously, I'm not afraid to have fun with it either so in this case, so do I

So you are admitting that you like baseball players based on whether they look manly enough for you? That's kind of weird. Kind of like acting like the name Buster is anything more than a name.