When the Giants Come to Town, It's Bye-Bye Baby

12.20.2007
The Marvin Lament

A New Republic writer just barely into his twenties writes that the biggest blow of the Mitchell Report was reading Marvin Benard’s name. (Thanks for the link, Laz.) It’s a nostalgic look back at Marvin’s game-winning home run the night of July 2, 2000: a great game, indeed. I was there in the 1–3–8 with the future Mrs. Malo, who turned to me after the home run and said, “Wow, are all baseball games this exciting?”

I understand we all have youthful illusions and heroes, but come on. Really? It’s such a gut-punch to learn Benard was juicing? You had no idea? The bigger question: Why does it hurt so much to find out that any athlete is juicing? Am I just too cynical?

A couple other links to edify and delight:

* SI.com’s Jon Weisman has unscientifically ranked all NL rotations. The good news: The Giants are 6th, with all five current starters listed as average to above-average. The bad news: The Dodgers, D-Backs and Padres are all ranked above them, and beyond the Giants’ five there’s little depth. See if you agree with what Weisman admits is very subjective methodology.

* There’s an ongoing discussion at the McChronic about the 2008 Giants’ outfield not being as bad as you think. Come join the fun. The jist is that an outfield with Roberts/Davis in LF, Rowand in CF and Winn in RF will be much improved defensively, and that the offensive production won’t be as dire as everyone predicts. To be true, however, Roberts and Winn must be healthy and play close to their career bests. 
Also on the Network:



[December 20, 2007 8:39 PM]  |  link  |  reply
obsessivegiantscompulsive said

Dodgers better than our rotation? How is that not surprising? Weisman is a Dodger blog writer, Dodger Thoughts, from what I gather from the article.

I'm mostly in agreement with most of the assessments, but how does Micah Owings rate as an above average pitcher? I like him, but given his overall numbers, he should really be in the "above to above-average" category.

Also, why don't Pat Misch get a point when he gave a whole motley crew of pitchers 1 point for the rotations above us? Give him 1 point and we are now tied with Atlanta and San Diego.

Lastly, and most importantly to me, he gives credit for the depth of the starting rotation when I think it would be more accurate to compare eatch team's Top 6, maybe 7, pitchers. If he did that, I think the Giants would probably move up even more. Most teams won't, for example, use all the up and comings, like the Dodgers 4 points there.

I've been saying all along that the OF is OK, particularly now with Rowand. He's a bit above, Roberts is a bit below (but good for what we need him, which is leadoff), and Winn is about average (kind of a baseball version of the three bears and Goldilocks :^).

I don't think you need to qualify that way, you bias the reader by saying "their career bests" when it is just as accuarate to say what they have been doing, on average, for the past 3-4 seasons (which also has been their best, particularly for Roberts).

The key for Winn is to avoid another 2006 and just do what he had been doing every year other than in 2005-2006. And yes, the key for Roberts is to avoid the DL, he has been a relatively brittle player, I've been following him since his Padres days and even then there was questions about him being healthy. But the positive there, for those who are enamored with Rajai Davis, is that Davis would get a chance to play full-time if Roberts is out.

It is our corner IF that is the worry of the team, has been since the last out was made in the 2007 seasons, before Rowand was signed, heck, all through the 2007 season even.