No, We Sucked Worse

by Andrew on Apr 1, 2008 2:07 PM PDT Comment 6 comments

The Giants lineup was everything that had been prognosticated last night, failing to mount anything resembling an offense despite a less than dominant performance from Brad Penny. Gotta say, it couldn’t have happened to a better team. Then again, do we have the right to talk? After all, just five years ago, we assembled a lineup that was similarly anemic. But, did we suck harder than the Giants do this year? So, in the tradition of “my dad could get his ass kicked by yours” I wanted to see just which team’s general manager was more myopic when he saw their lineup and said “yep, this’ll get us to the playoffs”. Nothing too scientific here (compared to the usual assortment of acronyms I throw out there), I’m just going to use the combined OPS+ of the eight starters from both teams. The Giants would get killed in a matchup of just straight OPS since AT&T Park is one of the most pitcher friendly in baseball, OPS+ corrects for this. The Giants OPS+ numbers are derived from their ZIPS projections and their park factors from 2005-2007. The 2003 Dodgers starters were determined by whoever Baseball Reference said the starters were.

	OPS+
Bengie Molina	80
Rich Aurilia	83
Ray Durham	81
Jose Castillo	77
Brian Bocock	34
Dave Roberts	84
Aaron Rowand	98
Randy Winn	97
Total	635

Paul LoDuca	91
Fred McGriff	99
Alex Cora	67
Adrian Beltre	88
Cesar Izturis	60
Jeromy Burnitz	69
Dave Roberts	73
Shawn Green	116
Total	663

I was going to also put the 2003 Tigers on here, but Dmitri Young’s 144 OPS+ that year quickly takes them out of the running. As a comparison to how low these numbers are, Barry Bonds had an OPS+ of 268 in 2002, 42% of the entire Giants’ lineup this year.

As of right now, this current Giants team is probably the most pathetic offense assembled in recent memory, but that’s going to stop once the Giants install some waiver bait like Ramon Martinez at short instead of Brain Bocock. Once they do that, their offense will at least be able to match the show the 2003 Dodgers put on. Of course, without a rotation that pulled a good season out of Kaz Ishii and a bullpen where Tom Martin retired 95% of his inherited runners, the 88 wins that team put up is well out of the Giants reach.

Update>>April Fools Day tends to be the worst day on the Internet, but Grant from McCovey Chronicles managed to actually pull off a subtle April Fools joke.

0 recs | Comment 6 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

RE

Based on how they did in 2003 I see your point but headed into 2003 the Dodger team had some upside that the 2008 Giants don't have.

While McGriff was at the tail end of his career it was not unreasonable to still expect a better then average season. In 2002 he had posted a 125 OPS+.

2003 was also the year we first learned about Shawn Greens shoulder problems. The year before he had posted an OPS+ of 154.

Adrian Beltre could just as easily had the breakout season in 2003 instead of 2004.

We had a young dynamic double play combo that may not have been much with the bat but was lights out defensively and that saved numerous runs. Not sure what the +/- on Izzy and Cora was in 2003 but I think it was quite high. Durham won't be helping the Giants in that area, nor will an antique Vizquel.

Brian Jordan was penciled in as the starting LF, not Jeromy Burnitz and Jordan provided a 112 OPS+ coming off of a 118 OPS+ in 2002.

So no, I don't think our GM was nearly as myopic as Brian Sabean. If Green, Jordan, and McGriff don't get hurt who knows, we might have been NL Champs with the pitching and defense we had.

by Phil Gurnee on Apr 1, 2008 2:43 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Re

Pretty much entirely true, that's what happens when I try to get slightly descriptive in my writing.

Omar Vizqual still is good defensively though. And heck, you're forgetting young spark plugs Brian Bocock and Jose Castillo. Talk tabout upside.

The big man for True Blue LA

by Andrew on Apr 1, 2008 2:45 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Re

Would a team of Dodger rookies and reserves be better then what they put out yesterday?
1st - Sweeney
2nd - Abreu
SS - Hu
3rd - LaRoche
RF - D Young
CF - Pierre
LF - Repko
C - Ellis

by Phil Gurnee on Apr 1, 2008 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Re

Easily.

The big man for True Blue LA

by Andrew on Apr 1, 2008 2:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That Was Probably The Best Pitching Staff

That the Dodgers assembled since I became a fan of the team, but they blew it by putting out the most anemic offense ever. If they had had even a decent offense, the Dodgers might've just been able to plow through the playoffs.

by Tango and Cash on Apr 1, 2008 3:45 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

luck

The 2003 Dodgers had a bad offense, for sure, but they were both pretty unlucky on offense and pretty lucky in pitching/defense. I don't think Evans or anyone else deserves full credit for the pitching staff's success.

by fifth of on Apr 1, 2008 8:00 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs