Baseball teams change at a glacial pace. I’m not talking about how a team does in a given season…that can change quite dramatically…I’m talking about what a team is: the broad scope of a team’s talents, their strengths and weaknesses. A team that’s good at converting a double play generally stays good at turning the double-play, just as a team with a terrible bullpen can’t make that bullpen a strength, at least not quickly. A team that gets lots of production at second base and no production at DH one year will likely have the same results next year.
You could, if you were motivated and/or properly intoxicated, come up with a hundred reasons for why this is so. I’ll hazard just two: talent disparity and the reserve clause. Talent is unevenly distributed: for every one Joey Votto, there are a hundred Joey Gathrights or Joey Divines. If your team happens to have one of the lesser Joey’s, it’s hard to replace your Joey with Votto Joey.
The reserve clause limits a team’s capacity to change, because it allows teams to hold on to younger talents. This locks teams in: the Red Sox and Yankees have had a strength at second base for many years, because they were savvy enough to draft Dustin Pedroia and Robbie Cano. Other teams haven’t been able to acquire these players because the reserve clause gave their teams control over these players.
That’s a small attempt at a large point: which is that teams don’t change very quickly. It’s up to you if you believe that thesis, or if you think I’m a raving lunatic.
I’ll make one more attempt at convincing you: dynasty teams.
Dynasty teams are the teams that have a pattern of repeated success. The early 1900 Cubs were a dynasty, as were the Braves of the 1990’s. The Big Red Machine. On occasion, the Yankees have put together brief dynasties.
A slightly knowledgeable baseball fan can tell you the strengths of these teams. The early Cubs had Tinkers, Evers, and Chance and excellent pitching. The Big Red Machine had hitters: I don’t know what pitcher on the Reds pops into your mind first, but he probably comes after Bench, Rose, Morgan, Foster, and Sparky. The Braves had that rotation. The most recent Yankee dynasty had a core of Jeter, Rivera, and Posada.
These teams didn’t really change. They changed slightly: the Braves soldiered on after Glavine and then Maddux left, reaching the playoffs in 2004 and 2005, with Smoltz hanging around as a closer. The Braves run lasted fifteen years; there was bound to be some turnover. It happened slowly.
This brings me to the real subject of this article, which I’ve managed to hold off for a beat longer than I should. The San Francisco Giants, currently trying to lay claim as a ‘dynasty’ team, have attempted that claim while completely changing who they are as a team.
This is an astonishing feat for any team, much less a team that has won two championships, and is in strong contention for the playoffs again in 2013. As this is potentially unique in baseball history, I thought I’d chronicle this change, and ask what chance it has on working.
* * *
Here are the Giants as they were constructed in 2010, when they won the World Series. First, the pitching staff:
|
Pos.
|
Name
|
ERA+
|
Pos.
|
Name
|
ERA+
|
|
SP1
|
Cain
|
124
|
CL
|
Wilson
|
217
|
|
SP2
|
Lincecum
|
114
|
RP1
|
Romo
|
180
|
|
SP3
|
Bumgarner
|
131
|
RP2
|
Casilla
|
201
|
|
SP4
|
Zito
|
94
|
RP3
|
Mota
|
91
|
|
SP5
|
J. Sanchez
|
127
|
RP4
|
Affeldt
|
95
|
This is some good pitching. The weak link in the rotation was Barry Zito, while Jonathan Sanchez and twenty-year old Madison Bumgarner turned in surprisingly strong performances at the back end of the rotation. Lincecum had his first slightly ‘off’ season, posting a 3.43 ERA while leading the league in strikeouts for the third straight year. The bullpen was strong: closer Brian Wilson was backed up by the equally effective Romo and Casilla.
The lineup was decidedly less impressive:
|
Pos.
|
Name
|
OPS+
|
|
C
|
Posey
|
133
|
|
1B
|
Huff
|
142
|
|
2B
|
Sanchez
|
102
|
|
SS
|
Uribe
|
102
|
|
3B
|
Sandoval
|
99
|
|
LF
|
Burrell
|
136
|
|
CF
|
Rowand
|
78
|
|
RF
|
Schierholtz
|
85
|
The bright spots were Buster Posey and two thirty-three year old veterans (Huff, Burrell) having surprisingly strong years. Aside from Posey, the Giants lineup didn’t look like the lineup of a perennial contender.
The average baseball fan had a good picture of what the Giants were: they were a team with really good pitching, a good catcher, and a mediocre lineup. The Giants finished 1st in the NL in ERA+, posting a team mark of 117, which had them five points ahead of the Rockies. They finished in a respectable tie for 5th in Adjusted OPS, with a 98 mark.
* * *
Now we’ll compare the 2010 Giants with the 2012 Giants. We have two World Champs, separated by a lost year. First, the belly-itchers:
|
Pos.
|
Name
|
ERA+
|
|
Name
|
ERA+
|
|
SP1
|
Cain
|
124
|
Cain
|
126
|
|
SP2
|
Lincecum
|
114
|
Lincecum
|
68
|
|
SP3
|
Bumgarner
|
131
|
Bumgarner
|
105
|
|
SP4
|
Zito
|
94
|
Zito
|
85
|
|
SP5
|
J. Sanchez
|
127
|
Vogelsong
|
105
|
|
|
|
|
|
CL
|
Wilson
|
217
|
Casilla
|
125
|
|
RP1
|
Romo
|
180
|
Romo
|
198
|
|
RP2
|
Casilla
|
201
|
Affeldt
|
131
|
|
RP3
|
Mota
|
91
|
Hensley
|
77
|
|
RP4
|
Affeldt
|
95
|
Lopez
|
142
|
There’s little turnover in personnel. Aside from Sanchez being replaced by Vogelsong, the rotation is exactly the same. The Giants lost their closer/transgressive interviewee Brian Wilson, but they found a worthy replacement in Casilla, with Romo serving as the team’s beard stand-in.
On the other hand, the team’s lineup changed dramatically from 2010 to 2012:
|
Pos.
|
Name
|
OPS+
|
Name
|
OPS+
|
|
C
|
Posey
|
133
|
Posey
|
171
|
|
1B
|
Huff
|
142
|
Belt
|
123
|
|
2B
|
Sanchez
|
102
|
Theriot
|
83
|
|
SS
|
Uribe
|
102
|
Crawford
|
86
|
|
3B
|
Sandoval
|
99
|
Sandoval
|
123
|
|
LF
|
Burrell
|
136
|
Melky
|
157
|
|
CF
|
Rowand
|
78
|
Pagan
|
120
|
|
RF
|
Schierholtz
|
85
|
Pence
|
90
|
The most improved positions in the lineup are centerfield (Pagan replacing Rowand), and catcher and third, where Belt and Sandoval improved as hitters.
The result was a team that was, quietly, one of the elite offensive teams in the National League last year, a fact that almost no one seemed to notice. The Giants, a team that posted a 98 OPS+ just two years earlier, posted a 106 team OPS_, good for second in the NL, behind the Cardinals.
|
Year
|
OPS+
|
NL Rank
|
|
2010
|
98
|
5th (t)
|
|
2012
|
106
|
2nd
|
This masked a dramatic drop in the quality of their pitching, which went from being the best in the NL in 2010 to ranking just 10th in 2012:
|
Year
|
ERA+
|
NL Rank
|
|
2010
|
117
|
1st
|
|
2012
|
96
|
10th (t)
|
Which brings us to 2013: currently, the Giants have the best offense in the NL, by a wide margin:
|
Year
|
Rank
|
Team
|
OPS+
|
|
2013
|
1st
|
Giants
|
112
|
|
2013
|
2nd (t)
|
Brewers
|
100
|
|
2013
|
2nd (t)
|
Pirates
|
100
|
Their pitching, however, has been terrible in 2013:
|
Rank
|
Team
|
ERA+
|
|
12th
|
Brewers
|
90
|
|
13th
|
Giants
|
89
|
|
14th
|
Padres
|
87
|
There are fifteen teams in the NL: the Giants pitchers have been better than just two of those fifteen teams.
So the Giants seem an anomaly in the long history of baseball: they’ve managed to win championships while changing dramatically just what kind of team they are.
* * *
As you’re probably aware, most of baseball is just starting to realize this: that the Giants have a really good offense, and some big holes in their pitching. The question, in light of this, is whether or not the Giants will make the necessary adjustments that will help them get in front in the NL West in 2013.
There’ll be tell-tale signs, worth looking out for if you’re a Giants fan. The best prospects in the Giants system are in Single-A, so help is likely to come from outside the organization. When some of the losing teams start looking to shed burdensome contracts, the Giants should be active in trying to acquire a starter or two. If they are, there’s a good chance that they’ll hold off the Rockies and D’Backs.
But….my sense is that the Giants will choose to stay the course with their current crop of pitchers. That’s not because the Giants management is inept, but because it’s really hard to figure out what to do to improve the rotation. The weakness hasn’t been constant; it’s not easy to tell where the patch should go.
Ryan Vogelsong has been terrible this year. But Vogelsong wasn’t terrible in 2011 or 2012, when he posted a 3.05 ERA (and 114 ERA+). He’s had two years of not being terrible that argue for patience. Tim Lincecum was terrible last year, but he’s won two Cy Young Awards, and it’s tough to give up on a pitcher with his pedigree. I wouldn’t give up on Lincecum: if I was a GM I’d be throwing offers to the Giants right now.
Matt Cain will be fine. He’s had one of the strangest careers of any good pitcher in recent memory, but I have every confidence that he’ll be an efficient pitcher going forward. Madison Bumgarner will win a Cy Young Award someday.
Barry Zito has been terrible; up until last year, he was the guy to replace. But Zito’s been solid this year. He’s had two bad outings, and six outings where he’s allowed either 0 or 1 earned runs. Even if you call his April 27th start a dude (6 unearned runs), Zito has been a net positive for the team.
So there’s not an easy fix; short of trading a blue-chip prospect for an elite starter approaching free agency on a losing team (hello, Matt Garza!), the Giants are stuck: there are no solutions who are objectively better than the guys they currently have. The team has to wait it out, and hope that the other teams in the NL are still afraid of a rotation that is something of a circus tiger: they have the stripes and the teeth, but they don’t have the claws anymore.
Dave Fleming is a writer living in Wellington, New Zealand. He welcomes comments, questions, and suggestions here and at dfleming1986@yahoo.com