Mad Bum
I was blessed to be able to watch Madison Bumgarner's season debut in person and his second outing on TV. I missed his third outing today entirely.
Mad Bum has an exceptional fastball. Not an exceptionally fast one (he was consistently between 91 and 93 in the game I saw live, exceeding 94 only once or twice), but one that seems very hard to hit, perhaps due to his three-quarters delivery.
In that start, he didn't use his secondary pitches as much as I would have liked (since those are the pitches he needs to refine), but against the Dodgers late in spring training, he threw an awesome curve to strike out Juan Pierrre and a fine change up to fan Manny Ramirez on three pitches. Bumgarner allowed just one hit while striking out four in that three-inning outing.
What is perhaps most impressive about Mad Bum is the way he pounds the strike zone for a southpaw power pitcher. He has walked only two batters in 16 innings, and those two were consecutive. Last season he walked a total of 21.
Although Barry Zito might have disproved me today with seven shutout innings, I think Mad Bum could pitch as well as Barry RIGHT NOW, even though Madison is still just 19 and will remain so through two-thirds of the season.
IMO if Madison Bumgarner remains healthy, he will go on to a fabulous career.
0 recs |
50 comments
Comments
C'mon man
Are we seriously going to be subjected to another one of these Giants pitching prospects cyber blowjobs for the next 1.5 to 2 years?
by slurve on Apr 23, 2009 6:27 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Sounds like somebody could use a cyber job himself
Geez, you are a cranky guy.
by samjjones on Apr 23, 2009 9:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
Ha
Hey, at least its Bumgarner – who deserves it – rather than Alderson or Villalona, etc…
by alskor on Apr 23, 2009 11:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Villalona
I think Angel deserves a write up. He is currently hitting .375 with a .583 slugging, while cutting down his k’s, as a 18 year old in High A.
"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-Jonathan Swift
by King Billy Royal on Apr 24, 2009 12:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He didn't deserve it two years ago
when people were constantly pimping for him to be regarded as a top prospect, cyber blowjobs, etc…
Im just about ready to get on the bandwagon now, though.
by alskor on Apr 24, 2009 12:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That wasn' t the issue
You said that Alderson and Villalona don’t deserve praise. Judging by Villalona’s potential and progress this season, you are incorrect.
"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-Jonathan Swift
by King Billy Royal on Apr 24, 2009 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was talking about the hype machine that started for Villalona that we’ve had to hear about for the past two years.
by alskor on Apr 24, 2009 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What's the difference between then and now?
People talked about Villalona because of his youth and upside. He’s doing exactly what they expected. It’s tough to say the excitement was undeserved when that’s the case.
by PissedMick on Apr 24, 2009 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We are two weeks into the season
and he’s still a 1B. Might be a little early to be declaring things deserved or undeserved.
by alskor on Apr 24, 2009 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why?
He still doesn’t walk, and though he may have unlimited power potential, he hasn’t shown it in real games yet. He certainly can be a terrific hitting prospect, but I don’t see the reason to get excited immediately
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on Apr 24, 2009 6:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Angel
Angel Villalona has indeed made strides this season. He has nearly doubled his anemic walk rate, while nearly halving his strikeout rate. It appears to me that he has closed up what appeared to me to be an open stance when I saw him on the screen at www.milb.com a year ago.
What really surprised me about AnVil was his soft hands. He’s actually a pretty good first baseman, although I see that tonight he did commit his second error of the season.
Shortstop Brandon Crawford has perhaps been the Giants’ biggest minor league surprise, batting over .400 and leading the Little Giants with four home runs. Crawford is a local Bay Arean.
Nick Noonan has a .859 OPS, but that is somewhat illusory, as his 18 strikeouts in 50 at bats would indicate.
I would say that thus far for San Jose, Crawford has been the biggest winner, while Noonan has been the biggest loser.
by sharksrog on Apr 24, 2009 2:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So what do Crawford's 19 strikeouts indicate?
Through 4/23, Crawford has 19 k’s in 55 abs w/ 7 walks while, Noonan has 19 k’s in 51 abs w/ 5 walks. Crawford is definitely off to a great start, but Noonan is off to a nice start as well. However, they both seem to be about equally strikeout prone. Noonan is also 2+ years younger, though he has more pro experience than Crawford.
Anyway, I don’t see how Noonan could be classified as the biggest loser (of what?). Perhaps you can expand your reasoning.
Also, I think AnVil’s error last night was a throwing error, but he does look much better than expected in the field.
Proud adopted parent of future big league slugger Thomas Neal
Official Sponsor of the 1997 San Francisco Giants
by nostocksjustbonds on Apr 24, 2009 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Noonan
I should indeed make myself clear about my statement that Nick Noonan has been the biggest loser for the SJ Giants.
Nick had a very nice first season in the Giants’ organization. Last year, he skipped a level, which was good. But he also posted something like a 98/23 K/BB ratio, which isn’t.
Nick is considered to be a smart player, and I think the Giants hoped he would improve his plate discipline, particularly since that is one of the things he was known for when he was drafted.
I think his 18 strikeouts in 50 at bats make it appear he hasn’t yet accomplished the change in his approach at the plate the Giants would like to see.
After getting the night off last night, Nick returned to go 0-for-4 tonight, with one strikeout. That gives him seven strikeouts in his last four games. He has fanned at least once in 10 straight games.
Nick has improved his walk rate considerably. But his strikeout rate has gotten worse. He has now fanned 20 times in just 55 at bats. He is hitless in his last three games.
As with Wendell Fairley, Nick has plenty of time to right himself. He was drafted three slots behind Wendell, is playing in one classification higher, has had much more success and is a year younger. Compared to Wendell, he is looking good.
But Nick was considered much more of a prospect than Brandon Crawford, and Brandon has clearly outplayed him thus far. Two weeks ago tonight when I saw him play in person, Nick made two errors. One was on a routine grounder that he seemed to nonchalant. The other came on one of the worst throws I have ever seen. (In Nick’s defense on the throw, he appeared to be trying to hold up on a double play relay throw but instead wound up throwing the ugliest-looking ground ball one could imagine, out beyond the tarp down the right field line.)
I most certainly wouldn’t give up on Nick. Not even close. But while I felt he looked like a disciplined hitter in his rookie season in the minors, his past year plus he has struck out 118 times with only 28 walks in 554 at bats (or close to 600 plate appearances for those who rightly feel that metric would be better). That’s not very good for a player who was considered to be a discpilined hitter when he was draffted.
When he was drafted, Nick was compared to Chase Utley, albeit with less power. Chase was 21 in his first minor league season, which was played in short-season A ball, two levels below where Nick is playing now. But Chase had 18 walks to go with his 23 strikeouts in 153 at bats (175 plate appearances).
Chase wound up his minor league career with 306 strikeouts and 161 walks, a 1.9 ratio. That is quite similar to Nick’s 23/12 ratio (also 1.9) as an 18-year-old in Rookie Ball. Unfortunately, since then Nick’s 118 strikeouts and 28 walks form a ratio off 4.2.
Nick’s still definitely a prospect. But he seems to have considerable work to do. Then again, that’s what the minor leagues are for.
Still, I think a hitter’s ratio of strikeouts to walks and to power is a fairly accurate measuring stick for how he will perform at higher levels. In Nick’s total minor league career, he has 141 strikeouts, 40 walks and 65 extra base hits, 14 of them homers. The extra base hits aren’t too bad, but the strikeouts are high (especially lately) and the walks are low. We’re talking about 774 at bats.
Far more disturbing than Nick’s overall rates is his falloff the past two years in the strikeout and walks areas. He HAS developed more power, and for a young player, his 11 home runs in his last season plus aren’t bad, nor are his 47 extra base hits over 554 at bats.
Perhaps I’m expecting too much, too soon — but I was hoping for far fewer strikeouts from Nick at San Jose. At his present rate, if has the same 499 at bats as last season, his strikeout total for the season would be 182. That’s pretty awful for a guy who was considered to be a good contact hitter when he was drafted.
The good news is twofold: Small sample, and Nick still can’t drink legally.
by sharksrog on Apr 25, 2009 3:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't know how to adjust for this
But Jonathan Mayo discovered a couple of years ago that strikeouts are very elevated for San Jose because of the bad backdrop (or something like that) making it hard for hitters to see the ball. John Bowker was quoted and complained about that problem there.
Yeah, very disappointed about Noonan’s penchant for striking out, but on the other hand, he’s 3-4 years younger than most of the competition, so they have an experience and age advantage on him. As long as he does not seem overmatched, and hitting well otherwise, I didn’t worry much about last year’s rate, and this year’s rate is excessive right now, but as you noted, small samples, and again he is hitting very well when he makes contact.
Adoptive parental unit of Ehire Adrianza.
Godfather of Travis Ishikawa.
"I'm really proud to be on this team." - Nate Schierholtz
"Woo hoo" - Tim "The Kid" Lincecum
"Let's go get them in 2009!" - The Kid
by obsessivegiantscompulsive on May 1, 2009 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sample size, sample size
His walk rate this year is 5.3% of PAs, and last year was 3.6%. That’s a pretty marginal improvement, even before one looks at the amount of PAs being discussed – 56. At last year’s rate, he would have walked 2 times. At this year’s rate – 3 times. We’re talking about a single walk here.
TheSouthWing.com - A Magazine of essays, prose and poems
by OldProspects on Apr 24, 2009 6:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
His strikeouts are better
AnVil’s strikeout rate has improved more than his walk rate. With no strikeouts in a 1-for-3 night this evening, Anvil now has 7.0 at bats per strikeout this season, which represents a very significant improvement over last year’s 3.9 AB/K.
by sharksrog on Apr 25, 2009 3:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also
I in 7 is about the rate you want to see from hitters. When they have a rate at or above that, they tend to be good hitters.
I don’t understand the hate about Villalona, he was only 17 last year but was among the leaders in HR for his league despite a lot of disadvantages in age and experience and culture adjustment. Seems to me he’s matching his hype, as it was his power that was hyped up.
Adoptive parental unit of Ehire Adrianza.
Godfather of Travis Ishikawa.
"I'm really proud to be on this team." - Nate Schierholtz
"Woo hoo" - Tim "The Kid" Lincecum
"Let's go get them in 2009!" - The Kid
by obsessivegiantscompulsive on May 1, 2009 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So
What the hell is wrong with Alderson? Was it his A+ Cal League leading ERA? Or maybe it was the 4 home runs he gave up in 145 IP? Perhaps his 4 to 1 K:BB ratio wasn’t good enough for you? I guess since he only has plus-plus command and 3 plus pitches, he’s destined for the garbage heap.
Oh yeah, and he did all of that as a 19 year old kid pitching against players 3-4 years older than him.
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by WayneCampbell08 on Apr 24, 2009 4:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Plus-plus command?
I like Alderson, but throwing around the term like that really weakens its significance.
by PissedMick on Apr 24, 2009 9:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
Very few pitchers have plus-plus command of anything.
Founder of the Johnny Giavotella fan club.
by doublestix on Apr 24, 2009 9:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My point was not that Alderson or Villalona are bad, or bad prospects – just that they were overhyped a lot and especially on here, where we had to hear about them quite a lot….
It was mostly in jest anyway.
by alskor on Apr 24, 2009 10:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nothing wrong with Alderson
There is nothing wrong with Alderson. After seeing him pitch San Jose’s playoff opener last year, I wrote here that I felt he was little more than a confident change up away from being major league ready. He just doesn’t appear to have the ceiling of Rick Porcello.
Porcello had a poor outing tonight and has now given up a disturbing five homers in 18.0 innings. His 11 strikeouts aren’t lights out by any means. But he has also done some things well as a 20-year-old pitching in the major leagues.
He has averaged 6.0 innings per start, which is more than either Jonathan Sanchez or Barry Zito averaged last season.
He has averaged 14.3 pitches per inning, or about two pitches per inning less than Tim Lincecum during Tim’s career.
His 1.17 WHIP is better than Tim’s, primarily due to Rick’s walking only three batters in his 18 innings.
Rick’s 27 ground outs compared to 16 air outs makes him much more a ground ball pitcher than any Giants pitcher and indicates his horrendous home run rate may be a bit of an abberation.
His 4.50 ERA isn’t great, but it’s actually pretty good for a 20-year-old pitching in the majors. At 22, Tim LIncecum’s ERA was 4.00.
Nothing wrong with Tim Alderson. He looks as if he will have a successful career. But his ceiling doesn’t look all that much different from Rick Porcello’s floor.
by sharksrog on Apr 25, 2009 3:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like 'em...
Since I didn’t get MadBum in my draft last season, I won’t be checking his stats or keeping up on him more than any other minor leaguer. So, these help me keep up with the times. I wish more organizational fans would make similar posts about prospects in their favorite team’s system. No one ever posts about the Cardinals or Orioles or Diamondbacks. These help us keep up with prospects, and this is a minor league blogsite. I mean, I prefer these than the continual Athletic, Met, and Ranger ones. I think if more people did this, it would be great.
And no, I am in no way volunteering to do these myself. I mainly just come here to keep up on minor leaguers in general, not just Cub and Mariner prospects.
"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile
by Boxkutter on Apr 23, 2009 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I took Parker instead
I still think his secondary stuff will end up better than Bum. Regardless – they’ll both be studs. But its starting to look like I made the wrong choice.
(this was before they both pitched at all)
Remember: baseball guys... baseball...
by Metty5 on Apr 23, 2009 12:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Parker
has looked outstanding so far this year.
by smoooooth on Apr 23, 2009 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Clarify -
I am happy I picked Parker- but the “prospectors” would say I made the wrong choice
Remember: baseball guys... baseball...
by Metty5 on Apr 23, 2009 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I got what you meant
my comment was a general comment on Parker’s domination since you mentioned him. Parker is one of my favorite pitchers and I think he has a great chance to jump into the top 5 pitching prospects for next year.
by smoooooth on Apr 23, 2009 2:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No offense
No offense, Slurve, but it you’re not interested in first-hand prospect reports, you’re probably visiting the wrong web site.
I don’t know nearly as much about Madison Bumgarner as I did about Tim Lincecum when Tim played for San Jose as Mad Bum is doing now, but if you paid attention to what I wrote about Tim even before he pitched in the major leagues, you knew more about last year’s NL Cy Young Award winner than 99% of all baseball fans — even than a high percentage of GIANTS fans.
One thing you would notice if you read my posts about Tim at the various sites I visit is that I point out the bad as well as the good.
For instance, I haven’t seen ANYONE else write about Tim’s June 1, 2008 start — the one in which he yielded only one run, but struck out a career low 2 batters, yielded a career high 8 line drives and gave up his second-highest total of 10 fly balls. No problem showed up for two more starts, but then Tim yielded four or more earned runs for the first two times on the season, reaching that total in three of the next five starts and in four of his next seven.
A very consistent as well as a very good pitcher last year, Tim wound up yielding four or more earned runs only six times on the season.
I can understand how you might feel the way you do, but your comment about “cyber blow jobs” was totally out of line. Why not just pay attention and learn? Isn’t that why we are here?
by sharksrog on Apr 24, 2009 2:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
don’t take slurve seriously rog, he’s some strange mix of a clown and a troll.
Adoptive Parent of Francisco Peguero. He can throw, he can run, he can hit(fastballs), and he's Dominican. What else do you need to know?
by haverecords on Apr 24, 2009 6:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
don't worry about it man
i enjoy your posts.
Founder of the Johnny Giavotella fan club.
by doublestix on Apr 24, 2009 10:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I can appreciate
first-hand reports. I can also differentiate between reporting and unabashed fanboy exuberance. I’ve been a big Lincecum proponent myself here and other places – I’m certainly not one of people who hated on Lincecum just go against the grain like we saw a few years ago. At the same time, the amount of cyber-knobbing was out of control for a while on this site – there’s no denying that, so no that’s not at all out of line – what were there – 19 or so CONSECUTIVE Lincecum diaries posted here at one point?
So to answer you first line, I am most definitely interested in first hand UN-BIASED reporting. I’m not at all interested in fanboy oo-ing and ah-ing every 5th day. I’m not going to say I haven’t learned anything from you in the past, at the same time, I was aware of much of it already and the stuff I did learn was obtained only after sifting through multiple paragraphs of superlatives that were for the most part noise.
by slurve on Apr 25, 2009 6:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not a slider, not a curve
Slurve, I post elsewhere besides this spot, but if you have read all I have posted about Tim Lincecum, you have probably learned as much about Tim — both positive AND negative — from me as you have learned from any non-professional source.
To the best of my knowledge, I saw live more of Tim’s minor league career than anyone aside from Tim himself. The only possible exception I can think of is the Giants’ Dick Tidrow, who I believe was as excited about Tim as I was.
And just how far did I lead you wrong regarding Tim?
We’re talking about the reigning Cy Young Award winner, a pitcher who after a slow start that had many worrying about overuse, has bounced back with only one run combined in back-to-back eight-inning outings in which he struck out a combined 25 batters while walking only one.
We’re talking about the best strikeout starting pitcher in baseball today, the guy who in his last 38 outings has struck out an even 300 batters. The guy who struck out more batters in a single season than any Giants pitcher since Christy Mathewson, 105 years prior, when Christy struck out two more batters than the 265 Tim fanned in 2008.
Do you realize that over Tim’s last 23 starts, he has averaged 12.01 strikeouts per nine innings? The only pitchers who have struck out more per nine innings over a full season are Randy Johnson (who I beileve is pitching as we speak), Pedro Martinez and Kerry Wood. So far this season Tim has struck out 12.95 batters per nine innings, which if he were magically able to continue at that same pace would be the third-best rate ever over a full season. And that is with two starts to begin the season that were bad enough to have many worrying that his arm was burning out.
Two winters ago I suggested to John that he make Tim his #1 pitching prospect. Tim has most certainly justified my faith in him.
Now, would you like to know some negatives about him?
. He allows far to many hitters leading off the inning to reach base.
. He doesn’t throw nearly enough first strikes.
. While his control is improving, it is only average at this point.
. While he has finally made an effort to improve this season, his ability to hold runners on base in his first two seasons may have been the worst of any starting pitcher in baseball.
. While he is plenty athletic, he is off-balance on his follow through and thus isn’t in good fielding position. While he has yet to make an error, his fielding to date has been just OK, in part due to his inability to hold runners on. The follow-through leaves him vulnerable to line drives back through the middle, and he was hit by one just last night. Last season he left a game after being struck on the knee, and four summers ago he was hit in the head while pitching in the Cape Cod League.
. Because of his less-than-stellar control and the sharp downward break on his secondary pitches, Tim is one of the worst starters when it comes to wild pitches.
. While he is improving in this regard, Tim can lose the plate for a few batters. His pitches per inning aren’t excessive, but he often isn’t able to pitch as deeply into games as one would ideally desire, without throwing a high number of pitches.
. Twice already this season, he has allowed opposing pitchers to drive in runs against him.
While when I post, I am usually writing more in the style of a columnist than when I actually do sports reporting, I think you’re off-base when you call my posts biased.
If I were to express my opinions on Tim and didn’t come up with a highly favorable review, then I WOULD be biased.
And if you didn’t learn a few things you didn’t know about Tim Lincecum before reading this, you weren’t paying attention. Both positive and negative.
Thus far I haven’t led John wrong. And I’m not likely to lead you astray, either. If you don’t feel that you learn from what I post here, just skip over it.
To complain about something one can easily ignore seems quite ignorant to me. Instead of complaining about how I am biased toward Tim, why don’t you post the necessary negatives to put the picture in proper focus?
It’s a lot easier to complain than to perform something positive, isn’t it?
by sharksrog on Apr 25, 2009 9:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Swing and a miss
This isn’t all about you sharks – hence the reference to the 19 consecutive diaries.
by slurve on Apr 26, 2009 4:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks
Thanks for the positive contribution. Regardless of who posts what, I thought it was about the prospects and ex-prospects. If you look at the very first post on this thread, you will see the remark and the poster who got this thing off-track.
I had never previously read the term “cyber blow job,” and I hope I never see it again.
by sharksrog on Apr 26, 2009 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just want to say
Thank you for the great reporting on Lincecum and all the Giants prospects. I certainly enjoy your writing and information greatly. I read a lot about the Giants but I always learn something new reading your stuff, you do great research and analysis!
If he has a problem with too much Lincecum, he showed that he has no idea what info is good or what is fluff, or just doesn’t read much period, if he takes you on about writing about Lincecum or any other Giants prospect. He’s certainly acting like a newbie, than someone who visits here regularly, else he would attack the other 18 diaries on Lincecum that are fluff, instead of your post.
And if he don’t want to hear first hand observation information on one of the top pitching prospects in the majors (most lists put him second only to Price), then he isn’t that interested in following prospects.
Adoptive parental unit of Ehire Adrianza.
Godfather of Travis Ishikawa.
"I'm really proud to be on this team." - Nate Schierholtz
"Woo hoo" - Tim "The Kid" Lincecum
"Let's go get them in 2009!" - The Kid
by obsessivegiantscompulsive on May 1, 2009 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
how much does it cost?
are cyber blowjobs more or less expensive than the real things?
by joltinjoe on Apr 23, 2009 9:44 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Don't know
I don’t know about the cost, but I don’t think the pleasure is quite the same. :)
by sharksrog on Apr 24, 2009 2:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Age and workload
Why bring him up now, even if Zito didn’t have the stupidest contract ever given to a pitcher? If you keep him in the minors he can continue to refine himself without any pressure, and his pitch and inning counts are easily monitored. The Giants don’t look like they’re going to really contend this year anyway, so why bring him up now and put unnecessary mileage on his arm while starting his clock earlier? Keep him down, unleash him next year.
by Fanon on Apr 23, 2009 9:50 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
re:
I don’t think Rog was advocating promoting MadBum yet, it seems he just thinks that MadBum could do just as well as Zito is right now.
"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile
by Boxkutter on Apr 23, 2009 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
By shutting down the Padres
Zito reinforced my belief that he’s a Triple-A pitcher at this point in his career.
by Fanon on Apr 23, 2009 3:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Very well
Barry Zito pitched quite well yesterday. Perhaps he realized it could easily have been he, rather than Jonathan Sanchez, who was skipped in the rotation due to the Giants’ two days off this week.
The Giants actually got phenomenal starts this time around from EACH of their five starters, beginning with Sanchez last Friday night. I believe that between the five starters, the two runs off Matt Cain Tuesday night were the only runs allowed in that string.
During that period, Sanchez got himself straightened out after a rough first outing, Lincecum pitched perhaps the best game of his career, Randy Johnson yielded only a single hit over seven innings, Zito pitched a like number of shutout innings, and Cain showed that if he is given some runs, he can actually win.
The Giants were said by some to have perhaps the best rotation in the NL. Up until last Friday, that wasn’t even CLOSE to being the case. Since that time, it certainly has been.
Oh, wait. I forgot to even mention Madison Bumgarner. :)
by sharksrog on Apr 24, 2009 2:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hitting a bit
The Padres are actually hitting a bit this season, averaging 4.4 runs per game. That’s a full run per game more than the Giants are scoring. And aside from that seven innings against Barry, the average is more like 4.8 runs per game.
I’m not quite sure who is doing the hitting, but apparently someone is.
by sharksrog on Apr 25, 2009 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Speaking of Mad Bum..
Here’s a thread from MCC where I posted a few pictures from the 4/22 game including some of Mad Bum.
http://www.mccoveychronicles.com/2009/4/22/849572/4-22-san-jose-giants
The Basil Fawlty Moderating Strategy:
"We could run a nice blog here if we didn't have all these members getting in the way."
Kevin Frandsen should be with the big team.
by WalrusMan on Apr 25, 2009 3:52 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

by 









