Somewhat routine outing for Lincecum
It took me darn near three hours to access the Giants/Rangers game on mlb.tv after a late Easter brunch. Neither two mlb.tv customer service guys or I could figure out the problem -- but finally it just went away.
Which finally allowed me to watch the game, which showed primarily a continuation of the good things Lincecum has been doing this spring and resulted in a very solid, although not dominating, outing in which only two of the seven hits he yielded was hit hard.
Once of them, a two-run homer by Ben Broussard in the second, was REALLY hit hard. When Tim leaves his fastball up in the zone -- especially against lefthanded power hitters -- they can sometimes hit it a long way. And Broussard certainly did, easily clearing a high center field fence.
Interesting, by my count (and with no speed gun I could misname a pitch here or there) all but one of the hits off Tim came on such fastballs -- up, but not over the hands. The only hit on an offspeed pitch as far as I could tell was a bloop single to left.
Tim continued to start most batters off with strikes, throwing first-pitch strikes to 16 of the 25 batters he faced. While that was down a bit from his other starts that I have logged, it was still nearly 10% higher than the paltry 55% he recorded last season. Incidentally, the Broussard homer came after a first-pitch ball
Tim also continued his trend of lots of ground balls and strikeouts. He fanned seven in his six innings (96 pitches, 59 strikes), two by fastball, three on his curve and two with his change up. Three were called; four were swinging.
He also recorded nine of his other 11 outs by ground ball, with one coming on a fly ball and another on a line drive. The seven hits came on four ground balls, one line drive and two fly balls, one of them (Broussard) hit -- very -- hard.
So Tim's spring remains marked by lots of strikeouts, ground balls and hits -- mostly singles not hit hard. He is still striking out more than a batter per inning, even if we don't include his minor league start in which he fanned eight in five innings. He has yielded only the one home run. His walks have been improving. His strike percentage -- especially on first pitches -- is up.
The only real problems Tim has had this spring have been a somewhat shaky defense and a BABIP against of right around .400 (and actually slightly above it, I believe). Most of the hits Tim has yielded have been up the middle or toward the lines. He hasn't given up much in the alleys. I know I was (somewhat rightly) criticized here for saying the Giants fielders should mostly cheat the middle and the lines (which would open up some L-A-R-G-E holes), but those are the directions most batters hit against Tim.
They have a hard time pulling his fastball, although lefty hitters often hit his curve down the first-base line. A very high percentage of hits against Tim go up the middle. Even most of the homers he yields (and particularly the hardest-hit ones) tend to be close to center field.
Tim's pitching splits haven't really differed much between lefty hitters and righthanders. Righty hitters actually hit for the higher average, but lefties walk more and hit for more power against Tim.
For some, this was probably pretty boring. But I do know a few of you are interested in learning how one of the young pitchers with seemingly a very high potential accomplishes his task.
1 recs |
44
comments
Comments
I really.....
......hate this new website layout. What was broken? Why did we change from the old layout. Whooopee, we get to add avatars. I think that's the only benefit.
by fartballs on Mar 24, 2008 6:49 AM EDT 0 recs
Give it time...
It's just gonna take some getting used to, that's all.
Now raise your goblet of rock. It's a toast to those who rock!
by Dewey Finn on
Mar 24, 2008 8:23 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Maybe
You are just tired of baseball? I didn't skip a beat because the TOPIC interests me. Besides that I guess i like the new format. I think it is more stylish and intersting looking than before.
by casejud on
Mar 24, 2008 10:26 AM EDT
up
0 recs
well
I'm with fartballs...this layout is just annoying.
"The Blue Jays won't win another playoff game until the Yankees and Red Sox are contracted." - Tom Berenger
by PujolsJunkie on
Mar 24, 2008 11:36 AM EDT
up
0 recs
I dont see a difference
But a [new] would be nice. Because right now its impossible to sort the new comments outside of the slight color change.
Remember: baseball guys... baseball...
by Metty5 on
Mar 24, 2008 12:05 PM EDT
up
0 recs
c
just hit "C" and it goes right to the new comments.
why it's "C", I don't know.
I just hate the colors and shiny blinking light type of mentality. Why all websites do that is beyond me.
More drab is easier to read
by Galt on
Mar 24, 2008 1:00 PM EDT
up
0 recs
sharks
to be fair you should list how many hard hit balls that were not hits. Many pitchers will give up weak hits.
I do think Lincecum will give up few hard hit balls but a high number of HR's. Very similar to Felix.
by pedrophile on Mar 24, 2008 9:11 AM EDT 0 recs
Excellent point
You make a good point here, Pedro. MANY hits come on balls that aren't hard hit -- just as some outs come on line shots. While his overall results haven't been particularly good this spring, there are two things I have really liked about his efforts -- one of which relates to your comments here.
Not relating too much to your comment but still important IMO is that Tim has been throwing a much higher percentage of first-pitch strikes this spring. If I were going to point out his biggest weakness in his rookie season, it would be that he threw only 55% first-pitch strikes, which compares very poorly to the 73% first-pitch thrown by master craftsman Greg Maddux. Not only did batters hit Tim a little better when he got behind them on his first pitch, he didn't walk many of the batters to whom he threw first-pitch strikes -- and walked a LOT of batters to whom he immediately got behind.
The other thing I have liked about Tim's pitching this spring that DOES related rather closely to your comments however is that he has been getting even more ground balls than usual. Last season he was a ground ball pitcher, but not a pronounced one. This spring, as I have mentioned in a few of my posts, he has been far more pronounced in keeping balls on the ground.
Yes, that may result in his giving up more hits (some of which will even be weak hits, particularly bouncers up the middle), but it will result in fewer home runs. Felix is a fly ball pitcher, much as is Matt Cain. IMO they each will give up more homers than Tim.
Tim gave up six homers fairly early last season. But IIRC he yielded only six over his last three months or so. Some pretty darn good pitchers, such as Pedro Martinez, have yielded a fairly high number of home runs. Whether Tim wlll become as good as Sir Pedro was remains to be seen. But I will be surprised if Tim yields as many homers.
Incidentally, IIRC Pedro's ERA rise has correlated somewhat with a decrease in his ground ball percentage.
by sharksrog on
Mar 25, 2008 3:17 PM EDT
up
0 recs
pedro
his rise in ERA is most closely related to his total lack of stuff. This isn't a negative.
No-one in the history of the game could pitch like Pedro. The guy goes from uber stuff and super-uber results. The best year ever. And then is pitching in the 80's but has the hitters totally guessing, has an amazing change and great control, and still is nasty and having no problem pitching inside or hitting anyone.
IMO no pitcher in the history of baseball (backwards or forwards) should be compared to Pedro. He is that good.
ps: can you do me a favour? Next writeup on Lincecum can you focus on one thing? I want the focus to be when he gets hitters behind in the count. How many guys k. How many get weak hits, etc. Because the top pitchers don't allow many weak hits, hard hits, etc. when guys are behind. It would be nice to hear what Lincecum is like in those situations.
by pedrophile on
Mar 26, 2008 1:25 AM EDT
up
0 recs
A couple of comments
Until Tim Lincecum came along, Pedro Martinez was my favorite pitcher. That said, I recommened the Giants NOT sign Pedro when he became a free agent, as I was worried about his health. I had called Pedro's arm problem -- which was described after the 2003 postseason as having his shoulder "hanging on by a thread" during the Yankee series, a couple of starts before the problem was announced. Pedro just didn't seem to be Pedro.
And since his phenomenal peak -- which IMO exceeded Sandy Koufax's and perhaps even that of Walter Johnson and Lefty Grove -- he has indeed been a very good but not great pitcher, primarily because of his arm problems.
Career-wise I had hoped he would catch up to the Big Train, but that seems a pipe dream now. Pedro might not even catch up to Roger Clemens among his peers in the career department.
I will be happy to describe how Tim does when he falls behind, if you will be kind enough to define the term for me. I am away from home now, but when I return Saturday night, I could probably tell you how he did when behind the count in his last start. Plus I am hoping to watch tomorrow night's start on mlb.tv, so I can add that in.
When I know your definition (or definitions), I can also break down last season to a degree.
by sharksrog on
Mar 28, 2008 3:45 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Felix is most certainly not a fly ball pitcher
He is one of the most extreme groundballers in the game. This combined with his strikeout tendencies and relatively good control are why he has such an amazing upside as a pitcher.
by patsfan on
Mar 26, 2008 3:28 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I stand corrected
Sir Felix IS a ground ball pitcher. Which raises the question of why he has given up so many home runs. Has he been predictable in fastball counts, gotten some of them up and had them hit out.
Felix must have the highest percentage of fly balls that turn into homers of any good pitcher around. I suspect he will indeed correct that.
by sharksrog on
Mar 28, 2008 3:50 AM EDT
up
0 recs
I'm sure I'm going to sound like a jerk but...
Can we move on from LIncecum? He's not a prospect; he's not a rookie. Daily threads about him belong here as much as daily threads about Felix Hernandez.
I know you love Lincecum; that's swell. It's quite spooky, but whatever.
But eventually, at some point in his career, Lincecum-mania has to move on from MINORleagueball.
When he's been in the majors for 10 years, are there still going to be daily threads about him here? I hope not.
So, please move on.
by Galt on Mar 24, 2008 9:31 AM EDT 0 recs
you suck
If you are trying to get rid of everything that isnt "minor league" related....good luck. Why not try with all the "fantasy" crap first? At least this is interesting.
by TexasHeat on
Mar 24, 2008 10:14 AM EDT
up
0 recs
This is a falacy
The idea that this site is SOLELY supposed to be about mior league baseball players is a falacy...ei: It's false! As long as I have been on this site the vast majority of the discussion has been about PROJECTING MAJOR LEAGUE PERFORMANCE from minor leaguers not purely diuscussion of minor leaguers. So, the idea that one of the most interesting pitchers (who was in the minor leagues just a year ago) shouldn't be talked about is kinda silly. He is EXACTLY the kind of player who interests most of us the most. The primary topic, specifically, on here is...who among all players in the minors are going to be big league stars? To ME once they get to the big leagues is when it REALLY gets interesting.
So Shark, obviously, don't listen to this guy. He's a hater.
by casejud on
Mar 24, 2008 10:24 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Kinda Agree with Galt
I'm not saying that we shouldn't talk about Lincecum - I have no problem with that. And I fully understand that I don't have to click a diary if the topic doesn't interest me. However, having a separate diary for every single spring training start of his is a bit ridiculous. There aren't any other players that we are treating this way, even ones that are still prospects vying for a big league spot. Furthermore, these games are meaningless.
I guess I'd just prefer a daily thread where all prospects, rookies, young players, etc. are discussed. This diary would fit perfectly into something like that...
by Dfarth on
Mar 24, 2008 11:06 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Thats cool
I get ya but, I was mainly quibbling with the idea that we shouldn't talk about this or that onhere because so and so isnt a "minor leaguer" when the #1 basis for John's work AND the perponderance of discussion on here is actually about MAJOR league performance and projecting it. Lincecum discussion may get excessive for some but his development...even step-by -step, is very interesting to many. I find Sharks posts to be more on the general topic of the site than most on here. For instance, am I wrong but does John Sickels have ANY affiliation or interest in fantasy basball? Im just asking. You NEVER hear me bitch about what people post but when people bitch about somebody posting about an extremely exciting prospect who is right on the cusp of developing (or not developing) into a big league star I find it sorta ironic. Personally I think there is room for EVERYBODY who wants to post something informational or interesting but not as much for just bitching
by casejud on
Mar 24, 2008 11:18 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Minor league ball
The idea that this site is SOLELY supposed to be about mior league baseball players is a falacy ... PROJECTING MAJOR LEAGUE PERFORMANCE
If that's the case, why is the site called minorleagueball.com? Maybe it should be changed to projectingmajorleagueperformance.com.
by jonk1982 on
Mar 24, 2008 4:47 PM EDT
up
0 recs
re:
Put me in the camp that likes the new layout and enjoys the Lincecum posts. I wish we had more people willing to give this type of report on more players.
by rwperu34 on
Mar 24, 2008 1:45 PM EDT
up
0 recs
OK
hopefully someone will step up and do reports on every start by Tim Wakefield this year.
Three cheers for MINORLEAGUEBALL!
by Galt on
Mar 24, 2008 1:59 PM EDT
up
0 recs
This is baseball blog that focuses on the minors. That doesn't mean you have to ignore the majors. I don't even know why this is an issue considering John himself has been doing the "Not a Rookie" features.
by marcello on
Mar 24, 2008 3:22 PM EDT
up
0 recs
LOL
Hey pal, if you cant tell the difference between Tim Wakefield and tim Lincecum there is no reasoning with you.
Lets see, we all make countless lists about which minor leaguers will make the best big leaguers and JUST when we are starting to find out the truth on the topic some would rather go back to JUST talking about the next crop of minor leaguers.
Tim, Delmon, Gordon, Maybin, Rasmus...they are akll going to be major leaguers now and that is waht we have been discussing all this time. I dont know about you buddy. What the hell does Tim Wakefield have to do with ANYTHING? Except maybe a discussion of 1992's top 100 list (which I doubt he was on and he certainly is one of the top players from that year...lol)
If you are so interested in minor leaguers why dont we EVER discuss them besides in relation to thier major league potential?? Because, I'll tell you why...nobody cares!! Including them! They ALL just want to get to the big leagues.
This is NOT a minor league site. It is more of a major league one.
by casejud on
Mar 24, 2008 5:53 PM EDT
up
0 recs
so then how long?
what's your timeframe? I've asked it three times. Is it their rookie season? Is it their second season? Is it their 5th? 10th? 20th?
And you are completely fooling yourself if you think MINORLEAGUEBALL.COM is actually more a major league one.
That's downright insanity to put it politely.
by Galt on
Mar 24, 2008 6:43 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Galt
Love your contrarian, question authority tendencies.....but honestly, I think it's fair to say that Lincecum is a bit of a special case who's sophomore season warrants a little more attention than normal. He's on of the more controversial prospects to come across in years, a guy who is odd in size, background, and style, and generated much controversy before ever even setting foot on a minor league diamond - basically, we tend to follow formulas in this prospecting "art", and Lincecum was so far outside the box that the typical equations just didn't really work.....and so many people spent a lot of time on this site trying to figure out where to slot him.
Then, he gave us an additional tease by having ridiculous, bug-bunny type of numbers in the minors, but only for so short of a time that nobody was sure whether it was legit or not. And despite the cartoon numbers, he clearly had a couple of weaknesses, and so it all was just enough to pour gas on the fire...is he the next Dwight Gooden, or is he a gimmick pitcher who the league will catch up with once they find out how to exploit his flaws? This is now the question facing us as we head into his second season. Tim Wakefield, he is not.
Lincecum will be especially useful for assessing how much we should hold to our preconceived notions and stereotypes in the future....and so I am especially intersted in seeing how he does as a sophomore, perhaps more than any prospect I can remember...maybe with the exception of Ankiel's post-blowup year.
by siddfynch on
Mar 24, 2008 9:57 PM EDT
up
0 recs
+1
exactly.
but this is all beside the point, to a degree. galt didn't want to talk about lincecum back when he was still a technical prospect either.
by wily mo on
Mar 25, 2008 11:00 AM EDT
up
0 recs
LOL
Not that I mind really..I've been called worse but, exactlt how is calling me insane polite?
Again, I hear almost ZERO discussion of minor leaguers on here exept in relation to how good they are going to be in the majors so a player is interesting to me until right about the exact moment that the jury is in on whether he's going to be a good major leaguer or a bust. Tim is just starting to answer all the discussion we've had about him. I'd say maybe at the end of this season it'll be safe to pencil him in as an established, good starter...probably much better than that.
by casejud on
Mar 25, 2008 1:00 AM EDT
up
0 recs
I understand -- but I don't get it
I understand your point Galt. I just don't get it.
Yes, I am more enamored of Tim Lincecum than I have been of any Giant since Willie Mays. I also think Tim has a decent chance to be a better Giants prospect than anyone since Willie.
Your point that it seems out of line to post about every one of his starts is a good one. I have never intended to post about all of his starts -- and indeed didn't post about many of them last season beyond his debut.
I posted this spring in part because I wanted to post about what at least appeared to be a BAD outing on his part, since I am the guy who usually praises him. I found that while there were some such as you who no doubt wonder if it isn't a little weird that one man can feel so excited by another and really don't care to sort through all the "Timmy" posts, some out there actually enjoyed reading one of the more detailed analyses around. of some of this exciting prospect's work.
To be honest, I read only a small percentage of the topics here. Sure, I wish I were interested in each and every one -- but I'm not. But I really don't find it too difficult -- even with the new format -- to scroll through the topics and decide which ones I want to pursue.
And if you DO want to learn more about Tim Lincecum, you could do worse than to read the stuff I post about him. There aren't too many who know more about Tim than I do -- and darn few that have worked harder to learn about him than I. As a Giants fan, I don't have much else to get excited about. :)
by sharksrog on
Mar 25, 2008 3:28 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Non-prospects
Careful, Galt. I made a similar comment about Mark Prior -- noting that he is no longer a minor-leaguer -- and I got slammed hard with a couple of posters resorting to personal attacks, saying I must not be a homeowner or something silly that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
by jonk1982 on
Mar 24, 2008 4:45 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Honestly
This site is better off without people taking it upon themselves to dictate what is or isn't appropriate for discussion on this site. I think SB Nation has that responsiblity. If people do not like the topic/diary, ignore it rather than blowing the whistle and causing negative attention.
Now raise your goblet of rock. It's a toast to those who rock!
by Dewey Finn on
Mar 24, 2008 5:08 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Also
I hope you didn't take my comment of calling you the "Fanpost Police" personally. It was not my intention to hurt your feelings. I was just disappointed to see someone come at me telling me that my post did not fit the code of this site.
Now raise your goblet of rock. It's a toast to those who rock!
by Dewey Finn on
Mar 24, 2008 5:18 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I think you're taking this too seriously
but I do have to agree that the title is ludicrous - "Somewhat routine outing for Lincecum"? What're we going have next - "Delmon Young wearing his usual hat," "Phil Hughes throws a fastball for a strike"? I have no problem with regular diaries on young players like Lincecum, but can we at least save it for when he does something not routine?
by OldProspects on
Mar 24, 2008 8:37 PM EDT
up
1 recs
Are you going to ask John to get rid of his posts on major league players?
The site may be called minorleagueball.com, but that's less cumbersome than actually titling it by the subject matter that this site goes by, which is minor league players and and, to a lesser extent, young or early career major league players.
by andwoo on
Mar 24, 2008 10:06 PM EDT
up
0 recs
"There aren't any other players that we are treating this way"
There can be only one.
by samjjones on Mar 24, 2008 11:13 AM EDT 0 recs
My vote
Like the Lincecum posts....dislike the new layout. On my browser, as I type this, fully 1/2 of the page is not used....higher up, that 1/2 is devoted to enough side crap that the overall effect is very busy. The main thread here feels cramped. Once I click on the link, I'd like to be able to just read what I came for, and use the full screen capability of my machine. It's like I magically downgraded from a 15 to an 8 inch computer, with the added detraction of distractions that are nearly the same size and bleed too easily with the main text.
Change is always tough to swallow, but this one is failing the 7-day digestion test.
by siddfynch on Mar 24, 2008 2:55 PM EDT 0 recs
completely
agree
"The Blue Jays won't win another playoff game until the Yankees and Red Sox are contracted." - Tom Berenger
by PujolsJunkie on
Mar 24, 2008 4:34 PM EDT
up
0 recs
+1
The beauty of the old site was its simplicity. It was simple to follow a thread and keep a nice dialog going. I have very limited time during the day to access the site, but I was able to diget everything in about 10 minutes. Now its like work, as I can barely tell what is a "reply" and what is a new thread.
Change just for the sake of change is dumb.
by fartballs on
Mar 24, 2008 5:16 PM EDT
up
0 recs
All this change
... and I still can't block out Bravesin07's posts from my eyes and making my head explode.
by Flynn Blake on
Mar 24, 2008 7:55 PM EDT
up
0 recs
IDEA!
Maybe for the next upgrade, we could customize our settings so that posts by prescribed users would show up in a different color....then we'd be able to flit past those posts by people whose missives always seem to make us want to get up and kick the dog.
Much as I love this site and all the posters, there's one guy I'd use the Hyperspace Button on if I could.
by siddfynch on
Mar 24, 2008 9:45 PM EDT
up
0 recs
Come on
This is just gratuitous. You don't like his posts, don't read them - there's no reason to get mean
by OldProspects on
Mar 25, 2008 10:04 AM EDT
up
0 recs
Thank you sharksrog
While it's questionable whether Tim Lincecum, now with around 150 major-league innings under his belt, should still be profiled so often on minorleagueball.com, I really did enjoy this write-up. Thanks, sharksrog.
by jonk1982 on Mar 24, 2008 4:49 PM EDT 0 recs
its not questionable
150 innings is just scratching the surface of a kid as a big leaguer and likely more important than ALL the time Tim spent in the minors, which isnt much.
by casejud on
Mar 24, 2008 5:55 PM EDT
up
0 recs
I just kind of get excited
I just kind of get excited about Tim. With him, even his "routine" starts help me learn about him.
I will say to Galt and others that if you chart the starts of a pitcher and would like to share your findings with us, please do so. Whether we choose to read them or not is up to us -- but it is likely we will learn a good deal if we do.
And I think part of the fun with prospects is following them and seeing how they turn out. Yes, Tim has now probably established himself as a good major league pitcher -- but he also may have merely scratched the surface on his ultimate level of success. And how many players and particularly pitchers have there been who began their careers as shooting stars, only to flame out?
I can tell you that if for instance someone were to give detailed reports of Francisco Liriano's starts, I would read them. One of the things I like to do is compare Tim's pitching with that of other successful pitchers. The more I know about those other pitchers, the better my comparison can be.
Particularly with regard to spring training efforts (which admittedly are less meaningful than regular season outings), there often isn't much available beyond the box score.
I can promise you that I can tell you far more about a Tim Lincecum start than the box score will. If every one of us here were that interested in a single pitcher and posted his findings, think how much we all could learn.
I don't have the time to follow other pitchers as I follow Tim. But I do have the time to read about pitchers I am interested in if someone else does the work and then posts their insights.
What I'm saying, Galt, is if you take the time to analyze a start of ANY pitcher, I will take the time to read your analysis if you bring it to my attention.
Suffice it say that unless there were ten's of thousands reading his site, it would take them far less time to scroll right on by my comments than it takes me to prepare them.
To be honest, Galt, I feel you are merely being selfish and petty here.
by sharksrog on Mar 25, 2008 3:42 PM EDT 0 recs








