Madison Bumgarner Is Back to October Bumgarner
Madison Bumgarner has been having quite a month of August. He’s posted a 53:4 strikeout-to-walk ratio while allowing only six earned runs in 37.2 innings, and he’s looked almost as unhittable as he did last October, when he relentlessly took the ball for the Giants in high pressure situations during the playoffs. That’s not a coincidence, it turns out, as Bumgarner is currently exhibiting tendencies that are quite similar to the 2014 postseason version of himself.
Before we go down that particular road, let’s have a brief introduction to Bumgarner, 2015 starting pitcher. On these digital pages, we’ve featured an article on how well he hits — which is quite well indeed — but not much else in the way of analysis this season; I will remedy that fact in a brief, limited manner. We could spend an entire article about the minute changes Bumgarner has made in 2015. Instead, here’s a cliffs notes version:
- He’s throwing more fastballs than at any point since 2011.
- He’s basically ditched his changeup, as he’s relied almost strictly on a three-pitch combination of fastball, slider (referred to at times as a cutter), and curveball in 2015. Here is his pitch usage since 2010, his first semi-full season in the majors (courtesy of Brooks Baseball, which calls his slider a cutter):
- Finally, his command improvements from last season have stuck, as he’s posting a career-low walk rate (4.3%) and career-high strikeout rate (27.4%).
These are all good things. By the numbers, Bumgarner is perhaps the best version of himself that he’s ever been, and it shouldn’t be a surprise that he’s posting the best xFIP of his career while challenging his best in ERA and FIP.
That’s why this month has been extra interesting; because, in the midst of one of his best seasons, Bumgarner seems to be up to something. And that something just happens to be intentionally throwing slower.
That sentence is a bit of a setup, as it’s not like Bumgarner is now throwing his fastball 80 miles per hour and lobbing eephus pitches (even though he does occasionally throw a very slow curve). This is a more subtle change with how he throws his breaking pitches, but it’s one that is nonetheless tied to times of high success for the Giants left-hander.
First, take a look at the speed difference between his fastball and slider from May of 2011 up to today:
Notice the peak right before the valley for this year; that was October of last year. He was slowly stretching the speed differential between his fastball and main breaking pitch over the course of the 2014 season, and it all culminated in the fall of 2014, when he was virtually unhittable. To be clear, this is not Bumgarner throwing his fastball harder; this is him taking something off his breaking pitches (even when he was throwing harder during last year’s postseason — because adrenaline — the velocity gain was seen across the board, so that wasn’t the reason for the increased difference). Now, during his starts this August, he’s stretched that gap again, and we’re seeing the same sort of results.
Before we get down to the exact benefits of how this approach is working, we should take a look at the difference between his fastball and curveball:
The difference with the curveball is just as large as with the slider. Again, notice the most recent peak before this season: it’s October of 2014, and he’s currently matching that. The other peak I’ve labeled is August of 2012, which was another very good (but not incredibly great) month for him (2.97 ERA/3.25 FIP). Then again, he was a different pitcher in 2012 (with a lower fastball velocity and a lower rate of curveballs thrown), so we should take that into account.
This leads to how the speed difference actually impacts Bumgarner’s performance. As much as we might like to point at these graphs, yell “he’s Bumgarnering!” and not look back at the amazing explosion that we created and are subsequently walking away from, let’s perform our due diligence. Is the greater speed difference between his fastball and breaking pitches a main driver in his improved performance?
That question can be answered best, in my estimation, by looking at the whiff rates of his various pitches to see if they match up with the increases in speed differences. Let’s take a look at his whiff/swing over time on his three pitches, with the three data points we’ve discussed highlighted (August, 2012; October, 2014; and August, 2015):
The first takeaway is that the slider has above average whiffs in months of greater difference (his career rate from 2011 onward is 23.5% whiffs/swing). It might not be eye-popping, but it’s definitely there. There’s always going to be noise with looking at monthly whiff rates due to the size of the samples, but the curveball is really where we can actually see some noticeable spikes. In months of greatest difference, we see peaks in his curveball whiffs/swing, far above his average rate of 37.6%. The fastball doesn’t seem to respond much to the differences, even though Bumgarner is posting close to a career-high whiff rate on his fastball this August.
I ran a couple linear regression models for the whiff rates and speed differences between each pitch, and though we get “significant” (or very close to significant) p values associated with the relationship (.05 for the curve, .06 for the slider), the r-squared values were very low, as we might expect. There’s a lot of variation in baseball, and it’s not too much of a surprise that speed differences between different pitches can’t explain the entirety of why a pitcher is effective.
What we do see, however, is a big uptick in how effective his curveball becomes when he stretches this speed difference. In the months that we’ve highlighted, when the speed difference has been greatest, most of his strikeouts have come via the curve. Last October, 46.7% of his strikeouts came on his curveball; this August, it’s been 36.5%. Maybe that’s why he’s throwing the pitch more than he ever has, and maybe that’s why he’s slowing the curve down, hoping to improve its effectiveness at getting swings and misses.
This isn’t the only reason behind Bumgarner’s hot streaks. When you have impeccable control, command over three plus pitches, and swing-and-miss stuff, you’re going to go on runs in which you’re almost untouchable. But, as we see, there are things that even established pitchers do to try and make themselves even better. During one of Bumgarner’s best years, he’s slowing some things down, and it’s working — all without an appreciable change in pitch movement. Not many pitchers can say they intentionally do that.
Owen Watson writes for FanGraphs and The Hardball Times. Follow him on Twitter @ohwatson.




He carried a post season, now he’s gonna carry a season to the play offs. Pretty sick.
Well, right now Fangraphs puts the Giants at 10%, with 7% being the division and 3% being the WC. If he does dominate the rest of the way, and the Giants make the playoffs (especially as division winners) I could see a Madison Bumgarner MVP push. He’ll have the late push and furious team comeback. His offensive abilities will allow some voters to forego “no pitchers allowed” rules (which are super dumb), and he’ll have over 20 wins and lead the league. Yeah, it will probably be undeserved, but I could see it.
Anything to stop bryce harper from winning MVP.
Yeah, god forbid the guy who deserves it wins, that would just be the worst
Yeah, Harper should win it, or maybe Greinke, depending on how heavily you factor FIP over ERA.
Kershaw could be in the mix, as far as deserving it, but he has no chance of actually winning.
Good piece, Mr. Watson. My thing with MadBum is that I think we just have small sample size October success propping up his standing as a pitcher. MadBum is a good, above-average pitcher. He certainly is no “star” by the numbers. I bet there are many people out there who would say they would take MadBum over Kershaw or Arrieta in the playoffs. This is, of course, completely ridiculous, reliant on short sample size, and against the weight of the evidence.
I think this feeds into a larger conversation about post-season success and successful franchises. If you asked most people, they would probably say the two best franchises of the last several years are the Giants and Cardinals, but this is all an illusion. These teams have a knack for having decent to bad players getting hot at the right time. This, of course, is not sustainable. The Giants and the Cardinals are not in the top rung of franchises if you look at the whole picture instead of just fluky October success. We need to be looking at organizations that are in it for the long haul (say, next 5 -10 years of sustained excellence), and there are only two organizations who we will still be talking about in 5 years as great organizations – the Dodgers and Cubs.
How is a franchise with the most regular season wins over the last 10 years (Cards) fluky?
Let’s look at the last ten years:
2006 – 83 wins
2007 – 78 wins
2008 – 86 wins
2009 – 91 wins
2010 – 86 wins
2011 – 90 wins
2012 – 88 wins
2013 – 97 wins (this was largely driven by sequencing luck in the form of insane BABIP for the whole team with RISP)
2014 – 90 wins (much worse by run differential)
2015 – ?? (driven, you guessed it, by sequencing luck – this time insanely low BABIPs against with RISP)
Conclusion: Mediocre team at best gets lucky in the post-season for a few years and people think the franchise has been much more successful than it really has been.
Fun fact – since 2006 the “mediocre” Cardinals rank third in wins.
Mark, where would they rank if you scaled 2013 and 2015 down to around 90 wins each, which is the level they actually performed at based on expected outcomes?
I am actually curious where they would rank. I’m guessing middle of the pack, which is fine. By no means am I saying they’ve been one of the worst teams in baseball during that span.
BigDaddyCool – where would everybody rank if you changed everything for every team?
Actually bdhudson, that’s an interesting idea. Maybe Dave or Jeff could do a five year study analyzing who has had the most total BaseRuns wins? Be interested in the results to see who has had the most/least luck.
“Mark, where would they rank if you scaled 2013 and 2015 down to around 90 wins each, which is the level they actually performed at based on expected outcomes?”
Excellent question. By pythag they’re +2 this year, and -4 in 2013. So by pythag they’d gain 2 wins. It’s almost like the Cardinals are a good organization or something.
Mark, pythag is not as good as BaseRuns. Try BaseRuns.
Why do Jeff or Dave have to do it? You’re the one interested in the idea…
Uhh… Last time I checked the requirement for being a “star” wasn’t “be better than Clayton Kershaw”. I think we can count on one hand the pitchers that, contract/control aside, a team wouldn’t swap straight up for Bumgarner.
He’s pretty gosh-darn good.
Pitchers I’d rather have than MadBum going forward:
Kershaw, Grienke, Arrieta, Lester, Price, Felix, Fernandez, Kluber, Harvey, DeGrom, Syderguard (apologies for spelling that one), Scherzer, Cole, etc. I could probably thing of a few more, too.
certainly Sale, as well. Apologies, I don’t follow the AL as much as the NL, or I could prob give you more.
Can I ask you a question: do you think age matters for baseball players?
Lester? Lester has been better ONCE in the last 5 years, and Madbum has been considerably better this year. Plus, Madbum is 5 years younger. This choice is awful.
Even on your list of 13 guys, there are some obvious ridiculous inclusions. Then of course you say etc. but there are at most only a small handful of other guys. Bumgarner is conservatively a top 15 pitcher right now and a top 15 pitcher going forward. You don’t get to define “star” and a top 15 pitcher is a star. Sorry, if you don’t like it, invent your own language and post in it (on another site, please).
In case you’re wondering specifically which of these are dumb, at the very least Lester (5 years older, worse right now, especially if you factor in hitting) and DeGrom (older than MadBum, has literally never been a better player since the day Bumgarner debuted with the Giants, likely before that too).
Schertzer (age) and Fernandez (100 IP last two years) are pretty dicey too.
In think you’re underselling deGrom here. Since he debuted last year, he’s been every bit as good as Bumgarner, if not better.
Better ERA (deGrom’s worst ERA, last year, is better than Bumgarner’s best). Better FIP, and just a hair behind in xFIP.
I could see why someone would take Bumgarner, but it’s certainly not ‘dumb’ to take deGrom.
The problem with DeGrom, and most people forget, is that he’s actually older than Bumgarner… Sure, he could be better in the future, but you’d be making that assertion in spite of a track record that is clearly advantaged towards Bumgarner.
TKDC, seems like the only definite name you’re saying isn’t better is Lester. Keep in mind though that Lester has played in the AL for all of his career before this year, which is a much tougher league to pitch in.
DeGrom, Scherzer, and Fernandez are all clearly better if you go by the numbers. Pick any good pitching stat you like and I assure you it will show those three are better than MadBum on a rate basis.
That goes both ways though. As a converted SS, he has significantly less mileage on his arm than most pitchers his age, and (I think) he’s throwing even harder this year than he did in 2014.
Bumgarner has thrown almost 1,500 innings including the minors. deGrom has thrown about 625. I don’t think it’s dumb to take either one of them over the other.
Bumgarner had a higher WAR last year, has higher WAR this year, and then if you factor in October (just normally, not as if it is super duper important) and of course since we’re talking about just who’s better you can’t forget offense, and Bumgarner is definitely better.
Also, the age/mileage issue cuts both ways. Maybe more innings on Bumgarner matter (he also has a longer track record of health), but late bloomers are also generally not the longest tenured stars (though you could argue he was misidentified as a position player, but you’d have to ask “why?”)
I don’t see a reason to think a 27-year old is likely to improve more than a 26-year old because he’s in his second year. I don’t think aging curves work that way. The most likely outcome is that both pitchers are at about their bests right now, and Bumgarner is better.
You do realize that deGrom wasn’t called up until mid-May last year, right? Bumgarner had slightly higher WAR, in about 75 more innings. And this year is essentially a wash, with Bumgarner at 0.3 more WAR due to one additional start. It’s not dumb to suggest deGrom might be better, since he *has* been better since being called up last year.
Actually, Bumgarner was significantly better in the second half last year than the first, when he was pitching in the big leagues while DeGrom was in triple AAA, and he had a pretty bad April. Then there were the 52.2 innings he threw in the postseason while giving up six earned runs and with a K/BB ratio of 45/6. Then there’s the offense – he’s really good at that, too. By no measure is it close to accurate to say DeGrom has been better since he was called up last year.
Since deGrom’s debut (5/15/2014) his ERA is 0.48 better than Bumgarner, his FIP is 0.08 better, and his xFIP is 0.08 is worse. Ignoring the large ERA gap, they’ve been pretty indistinguishable.
If you want to take Bumgarner going forward because of his bat, that’s fine. But as I’ve said before, it’s not dumb for someone to prefer deGrom (especially if someone puts some value into preventing actual runs, and not just peripherals).
This is nothing against Bumgarner – he’s a terrific pitcher! My whole point is that you’re underselling deGrom. It’s not an ‘obvious ridiculous inclusion’ for him to be on the list.
How did you get those numbers? Just curious. I have no idea how to get specific in-season splits like that.
Also, are you ignoring Bumgarner’s 51.2 innings in the post season? I mean, ignoring them seems just as silly as ignoring everything but them.
It did take a while to figure it out, and WAR wasn’t included as an option, but I had to go to the Game Log for each player and set the beginning/end date. It didn’t take October into account (I don’t think so anyway – maybe there was a checkbox to include post-season).
And again, this is more about saying that deGrom is damn good rather than taking anything away from Bumgarner.
A lot of these comparisons have this fundamental problem: When perfectly healthy, Bumgarner is probably ranked #10-15 in pitchers. But that’s the thing: there’s no pitcher I trust to stay healthy based on track record than Bumgarner (and a lot, like Fernandez, are really scary).
The Giants aren’t going to be good in 5 years? This is their line up from yesterday with ages:
Aoki 33
Duffy 23
Belt 27
Posey 28
Byrd (old but Hunter Pence will come back and be reliable)
Crawford 28
Tomlinson (25, but this will return to Panik who is 24)
Blanco (32)
add in that their best pitcher is 26, Heston is 27 and bullpens/old outfielders will be replaced by a team with a top 6 budget (san francisco isn’t exactly a poor city). Giants are gonna be winning every even year for a while buddy.
Exactly two of those players have shown they are actually good and not having a fluky/unsustainable year – Posey and MadBum. Belt, Duffy, Crawford… Heston (you’ve got to be kidding if you that that one’s sustainable – he has 5th starter stuff)… call me when these guys do it for more than a partial season.
Brandon Belt’s career wRC+ in almost 2000 PAs is 128. I’d say that’s good.
Scott, this is just another example of a personal attack instead of refuting anything that I said. Use facts next time, please.
I found him, guys!
Your beloved Cubs, who you’ve bequeathed greatest team of the next 5-10 years, is enjoying its first decent season in a very long time on the back of a lot of performances by guys that have not “shown they are actually good and not having a fluky/unsustainable year.”
Bryant? One year, unsustainable BABIP. who cares? Rizzo? Lower career wRC+ than Brandon Belt so he must suck, right? Fowler? Way to inconsistent, right? Russell? Another flash in the pan. Schwarber? 185 plate appearances, are you serious?
Call me when your team has a half dozen guys with 3-4 straight years with over 5 WAR. Until then, they suck balls.
Definitely not what bequeathed means.
wishful thinking
I think I understand where you’re coming from. I’m picking up what you’re putting down. So I’d like to engage with this argument on the same level as you.
*clears throat*
KISS THE RIIIIINNNNNNNNNNNNGZZZZZZZZZ
Why are you guys arguing with a Dodger fan?? Of course he hates anything Giants. BDC can make any argument he wants, but three World Series champions in five years isn’t luck. (or have the Yankees just been Lucky all those years?)
I wonder if having a knack for doing well throughout a 10-year period is something that just happens or not? I do think they haven’t had the most talent in any of those years, but it doesn’t make the accomplishments for either team negligible. I do think the fact that the cardinals have maintained such a high of wins (even if propped up by some unrepeatable numbers) is a testament to a franchise that is better than many others. I would never venture to say they’re the best because that’s ridiculous, but sustained success is laudable. I think the fact that they’ve maintained at least mediocrity for so long is an accomplishment itself. I do wonder over the past 10 years who you think this “top rung of franchises” includes though.
Also, I recognize their value for measuring true talent and their measure for predicting outcomes, but for wins that are already in the ledger, you cant take those away. They have the most regular season wins making them successful. If you wanted to say they weren’t the most talented, that is a fair argument with which I would agree.
So… can we officially stop talking about October hangover effects for pitchers?
these BigDaddyCool comments are so ill, just wish he would tell us to google stuff
“this is all an illusion”
If you would like to refute any of my assertions above with actual arguments, feel free to do so. I don’t know what exactly this comment is suppose to add.
I find very few, if any, people here actually address my arguments. Mostly, it’s just personal attacks and wanting me banned from expressing my views and opinions because they don’t like them/are fans of a particular team.
because your a Cubs homer whose “arguments” are opinions saying “The Cubs are a dynasty” “The Cubs will be one of only 2 good teams over the next 5 years” “Madbums October record is small sample, and id take Arrieta over him”
I bet Cameron, Sullivan, etc. would all take Arrieta over MadBum. Go ahead, ask them in their chats.
not trying to refute anything here — i am a huge fan of your comments, and the constitution
The San Francisco Giants are like gum on your shoe that just won’t go away. Madison Bumgarner is the reason that gum is so sticky.
I wear the dislikes of my posts as a badge of honor, because I know that none of you can refute my actual opinions and analysis. This is all a matter of groupthink. You guys should really pick up the book and give it a read. You guys basically try to bully independent thinkers with good ideas into submission to only agree with one perspective. This is very Orwellian. Very forget the facts and analysis, we have come together as a cohesive unit and declared that this is the only truth because that’s what we want to believe.
You guys call me a Cubs’ homer, and I do like my Cubs. I grew up in the North Side and I run a successful business there. But if you read my contributions to this blog you would also see that I readily praise other great franchises. I think the Dodgers are great. The Yankees and Mets are on the right track. Love what the Astros are doing.
The real homers I must surmise from my time hear consists of three teams: Giants, Cardinals, and Pirates. Each of these fan bases has reasons for there homerism. For the Cardinals, luck and unsustainability has driven the fans to think they truly are a super team ordained from some higher power and destined to be the best and great. For the Giants, they have won three championships in the last five years, despite never been the best team or even one of the best in any given year (this is just a fact. If you disagree, go look at the numbers). This is bound to produce feelings of superiority. For the Pirates, they are the new darling riding shifting and pitch framing and some sequencing luck the last few years, despite a deficit in talented players.
People here need to look at the facts and judge what I say. I assure you my assertions will hold true.
“I assure you my assertions will hold true.”
this sentence is AMAZING
Right up there with ‘when I wish upon a star’.
tl:dr version:
Whhhhhhaaaaahhhhhhh
Interpretation of your response: “I can’t refute any of BDC’s actual arguments so I am going to just launch a personal attack calling him a whiner.”
Sound about right?
I just read through the whole thread, and counted a half-dozen sound refutations of your argument, none of which you responded to. The idea that the Cardinals have been unsustainably lucky for a decade is ludicrous. The notion of Lester, a breaking-down Felix, an inconsistent Harvey, a season of DeGrom, and some of the other pitchers you named all being more desirable than a 26-year old Bumgarner on an insanely team-friendly deal is goofy. The insinuation that Brandon Belt hasn’t established himself ( c. 2,000 PAs and a 128 wRC+ notwithstanding) is just plain ignorant — and you followed that particular fly in your rhetorical ointment with a complaint that you had been personally attacked.
Theo and the Cubs have done a great job putting together an organization that looks poised for its first long run of success in a very long time. That could change — many said the same thing at the dawn of Wood / Prior — but really, success in baseball is about amassing enough talented players to play the roulette wheel in the postseason. There’s only so much you can control. Baseball doesn’t reduce to predictive stats, as much as you’d like it to. The Giants have won three championships in five years because they were good enough to be in a position to win them if things broke right. That doesn’t invalidate their success. It does, however, invalidate your arguments.
Graham – do you have any hard evidence of this: “The idea that the Cardinals have been unsustainably lucky for a decade is ludicrous”
“The notion of Lester, a breaking-down Felix, an inconsistent Harvey, a season of DeGrom, and some of the other pitchers you named all being more desirable than a 26-year old Bumgarner on an insanely team-friendly deal is goofy.”
This sounds like Giant homer talk. All of those guys posted better years by any measure last season than MadBum (expect Harvey, of course, who was injured but who significantly outperforms MadBum when healthy)
“It does, however, invalidate your arguments.”
I’m really not seeing this, Graham. Again, a good book on luck, randomness and regression to the mean might help. May I suggest “The Book” by Tom Tango, et al?
Sorry, Graham, don’t mean to be a pest, but I am a sucker for hard evidence over rhetoric.
You are a fantastic troll. That’s the only takeaway from this utter nonsense.
You complain about no focusing on the facts and analysis then you say this:
“I assure you my assertions will hold true.”
Gee, really? Teams don’t win three World Series in five years on just luck. When the Dodgers first hired Farhan Zaidi as their GM he said this.
“I think any time a team has that kind of success, you really have to study them hard and see what lessons there are to learn, I’m sure that’s something we’ll look at. It’s a fair question. I don’t think you can win three World Series in five years just by being lucky. I think that’s maybe stating the obvious.”
I disagree that the Giants have never been the best team. I would argue that the 2010 Giants have a strong argument as being the best team in the NL.
2010 Summary
Phillies 97-65 W-L
Giants 92-70 W-L
Expected Record
Phillies 95-67 W-L
Giants 94-68 W-L
The Giants had the second best record and the second best run differential in the National League. The Giants were a pitching dominant team leading the National League in ERA and ERA+. The Giants and Phillies split six regular season games and the Giants won the NLCS 4-2. Given their head-to-head record and their expected records it’s seems obvious to me that the Giants and Phillies were essentially equal in quality in 2010.
Instead of just dismissing the Giants AND Cardinals perhaps we can look deeper at their success and try to figure out why? That is what Farhan Zaidi is talking about. Let’s look at the process. Both teams are strong in player development for example. Look at all the home grown talent both teams have.
Luck and random chance are part of life. It is without doubt that over a large enough sample you will have teams getting lucky on multiple fronts for several years at a time. Now, the human brain naturally wants to find patterns and explanations. Therefore, it is a common response to want to chalk the Giants and Cardinals success up to something meaningful that we haven’t been able to figure out and quantify yet. While this is could be a possible it is much more likely that it is just random chance favoring certain teams over a period of time and will go away eventually.
A good book I would recommend “The Drunkard’s Walk: How Randomness Rules Our Lives” by Leonard Mlodinow. I am very well read and can recommend multiple books on various topics of interest if anyone wants some more advice and recommendations, I will be happy to provide free of charge of course. I do charge for my advice in a business setting but of course I would never solicit business on another website such as Fangraphs that is so gracious as to allow open and free discussion.
I think I’ll pass on your advice and recommedations. Thanks anyway.
Leave me out of this.
Thanks.
“Sorry, Graham, don’t mean to be a pest, but I am a sucker for hard evidence over rhetoric.”
You simultaneously ignored the evidence presented to you by Adam C and presented a rebuttal using rhetoric instead of evidence, which directly contradicts your statement above. Almost every single argument of yours uses luck, unsustainability, or randomness as evidence. This is not significant evidence. Baseball is a game that EMBRACES luck as a main reason why it is so great. If you can’t accept that, then perhaps you should lobby to the MLB to use phythagorean records in standings instead. (If you look at current pythag-standings, you would notice the Cubs lead the league in “luck” with +6.5 wins over their phythag-record, and have an adjusted ranking of 7th in the NL.)
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/standings/index.php?standings_sort=pct1&dispgroup=league&submit=Go
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/standings/index.php?standings_sort=d1&dispgroup=all&submit=Go
On Bumgarner: In the very first post you made in this discussion you wrote about Bumgarner’s postseason success being a SSS against the weight of evidence. You are correct in that one month of playoff baseball is a SSS. But somehow you fail to realize Bumgarner has 1,100 innings of sustained success to back it up. Bumgarner maybe is not a superstar, but he is absolutely a star player.
Hey Guys! My torch as most annoying Cubs fan ever has finally been passed on!!!
Bartman was actually a very good, nice man who was not annoying at all. Witnessing the vilification of Bartman was disgusting. Bartman coached a youth baseball team and was an upstanding member of the community. He also loved his Cubs and just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, and took the fall for some bad baseball during that game. I remember watching this and being very sad for my city that I love.
Please provide hard evidence that you actually love Chicago. I don’t want your rhetoric.
Okay, fine I will play your game. You said, “I know that none of you can refute my actual opinions and analysis.” You also said, “Exactly two of those players have shown they are actually good and not having a fluky/unsustainable year – Posey and MadBum.”
Brandon Belt:
2012: 119 wRC+, 1.7 WAR
2013: 141 wRC+, 4.4 WAR
2014: 117 wRC+, 0.9 WAR (injury-shortened 61-game season)
2015: 139 wRC+, 4.1 WAR
Brandon Crawford:
2012: 10.0 UZR/150, 2.0 WAR
2013: 4.2 UZR/150, 2.3 WAR
2014: 1.2 UZR/150, 3.1 WAR
2015: 10.3 UZR/150, 4.3 WAR
What you said is wrong. End of story. Not even an opinion. Just a fact.
Looks to me like Belt follows up good years with bad years. Doesn’t sound consistent to me. As for Crawford, I don’t consider 2-3 WAR players “good,” so nothing I said there was inaccurate.
Belt was extremely unlucky with injuries last year. You can’t control those. He is having a solid year this year. Crawford is probably the best ss in baseball this year btw
BigDaddyCool I’m sorry to say, but your own subjective interpretation of WAR doesn’t count. Using Fangraphs’ interpretation of WAR, Brandon Crawford (4.3 WAR) is firmly in the territory for “Good Player” and this season has preformed as an “All-Star”. Again, by using Fangraphs’ interpretation of wRC+, Brandon Belt has had “great” seasons in 2013 & 2015, with an “Above average” 2014. So yes your post is inaccurate.
http://www.fangraphs.com/library/misc/war/
http://www.fangraphs.com/library/offense/wrc/
Now please, stop making up baseless responses to other statistically sound posts. You can’t subjectively change the definition of terms so they fit your liking. That’s not the way science works, understand? If you cannot use statistical evidence to support your reasoning, you don’t deserve a response from anybody here.
Sorry, but I have no desire to continue discussing anything with someone who calls an injury-shortened season “inconsistent.”
Agreed, and bumgarner is a top 5 pitcher. He has 14 career playoff games, thats not a small sample size at considering that many great pitchers have had less in their careers. He is better than many on that other guys list. Plus the Giants homegrown team is far more impressive
Have you actually played baseball? It’s full of “luck” every game, but over a 162 game schedule those “lucky” occurrences even out and bad teams are bad and good teams are good.
Does he have the sniffles again like he did last year? He sure did have wipe his nose with his pitching hand a lot.
As a big Giants fan who watches almost all their games, I can say he has been blowing snot rockets non-stop since he came up. There’s actually a twitter account that tweets every time he does one. Check them out today since Bum is pitching today and you will see.
https://twitter.com/Fawn_Liebowitz
The best part is fawn liebowitz
Lets not underrate longevity and consistency as well as sample size. As a big Giants fan and Bumgarner Fan (My family won an auction in 2011 to throw a bullpen with him and Affeldt and they were really cool and nice guys) I have been a little disappointed he hasn’t jump into the top tier elite pitchers for any given season yet. Given how good he was so young I really thought he’d progress even faster than he has. However, thats probably not the fairest thing and it ignores who consistent he’s been. While he hasn’t been a top 5 pitcher in any given season yet (maybe he can excel up to it this year with how hes pitching and batting recently) he has been consistently 10-15 over the last few years. Thats saying something. Thats impressive. While in a given season there are a number of guys better than him a lot of those pitchers don’t stay in those slots and fall off the list while Bumgarner remains in that solid 10-15 slot. Look at guys like Yu Darvish, Jeff Samardzija, Jordan Zimmerman, Annibal Sanchez, Garret Richards & Mat Latos. Those guys were all better than Bumgarner in certain seasons but have now fallen well behind him. They hang around for a year or 2 being better than him but then fall behind him. I doubt anybody would take those guys over Bumgarner right now even though they were better than him in certain seasons. Remember that with the guys who you may consider ahead of him right now for this season. Im sure people thought Yu Darvish would stay ahead of him in the same way people think/thought Harvey & Fernandez would stay ahead of him after their initial hot starts in the majors but look what happened. Staying healthy and track record matter a lot and not just who has better stats in the season at hand.
Hilarious. Just don’t worry guys this guy is just angry his team is so good but still 10 games back from the division. Forget the fact that during their big run they were overperforming their Baseruns just like the Cards and Pirates. (+6 for Cubs and pirates and Cardinals). He should concentrate on seeing how his team stacks up against the pirates in the Wild Card game at this point. Cubs have a heck of a team but its a crap shoot and the Pirates are a very good team. Arrieta versus Cole quite possibly will be very interesting to watch. I would not start Lester while he’s pitched well sooner or later someone is going to try and take advantage of his inability to hold runners in the wild card game.
Thank you highrent, this guy is very jealous of 3 in5
I’m sure everyone who read this comment section yesterday (except for the Master Expert) was happy to see another stellar performance by Bumgarner. Hell, I’d bet even Dodgers fans were happy because they still won the game.