IGD: Padres @ Giants (1 Jun 08)

Randy WolfPadres (23-34) @ Giants (23-33)
Randy Wolf vs Tim Lincecum
1:05 p.m. PT
Channel 4SD
AM 1090, FM 105.7, XM 184

Padres look to sweep in San Francisco on Sunday. It’d be nice if someone other than Lincecum were standing in their way.

Tagged as: , , ,

119 Responses »

  1. #97@Kevin: Where does he say he doesn’t like the host? I know you are a Hoffman super fan and can’t stand to see people post negative things about him, but relax a little. All he said was Geoff is a Hoffman defender. People can disagree and still like each other. I like you even though we disagree about Rivera being in a different league than Hoffman (and technically he is, the American League :) ).

  2. Good news – Leblanc starting to pitch much better at Portland ! He has another good outing today, giving up 1 run in 6 innings of work with 8 K’s.

  3. #100@Richard D.: Your previous post, just like No. 100 is pretty condesending. Everyone knows you think Hoffman is done. The implication is that you think everyone else is stupid because they don’t agree with you. I am no more a Hoffman superfan than others are Hoffman haters.

    The thing that is most disconcerting is not whether Hoffman is done or not done or the entrenched political debate that then ensues, but the general ripping of Hoffman in what may be his last season.

    I don’t remember any beloved player who has basically played his entire career with one team, even those who played poorly at the end, being ripped by his home base. Not Yaz, Bench, Gwynn, Ripken, Brett, etc. Maybe Hoffman isn’t on that level, but he is the second most beloved player in franchise history. Bench, I remember, was a joke.

    Maybe I am going only by this blog, but even if Hoffman is the worst pitcher in the league, the criticism seems over the top.

  4. Okay, I’m not usually around in these post Trevor Blowing it IGDs. But I assume the conversation always goes the same way. There’s people who say he doesn’t have his stuff anymore, and people who say, “well what about those games a week ago when he did!”

    Here’s my thought… put him in in a save situation. If it looks like he’s not on his game that night… Take him out!!! Can’t the managers tell when he doesn’t have his usual stuff, OR the other team just happens to be in the groove of picking him up? I feel like I can. After a couple batters the writing’s on the wall.

    I say, accept that he’s not what he used to be, but that still has value, and use him according to his current value. Don’t keep playing him based on the value he used to have.

  5. #87@Zagz:
    “but except for the tired “small sample size” argument, they have nothing to back up the opinion that he isn’t.”

    Sample size isn’t a “tired argument”. It isn’t an argument at all. It’s a very important consideration in the accurate use of statistics. An inappropriate sample size, in my opinion, is the most common method of using statistics to mislead.

    It is up to you to explain what an adequate sample size is, and why, if you’re going to say that.

  6. #105@Melvin Nieves: When it comes to Hoffman it is a tired argument. The guy only pitches 60 innings in a year, so you are right where do you draw the line at sample size? Thats exactly why it’s a tired argument, because 60 innings in itself is a small amount, and the people who use sample size to defend Hoffman will never say when it isn’t a small sample size anymore.

  7. #103@Kevin: Thank You

  8. It is what it is….a loss….with all the drama that makes us tick.

    Hoffy is in the twilight, somedays he has it and somedays he doesn’t. Kevin says it well — that the beloved players in our town have never been talked about so poorly as Hoffman. If T Gwynn was striking out and just sucking all around, we’d politely be stating that he should hang it up. With Hoffman it’s somehow venemously different.

    I think his role — with the game on the line — separates and focuses the blowback he absorbs when blowing a save. I mean, the WHOLE game is on the line and if he blows it — all anger is directed towards him. Gotta acknowledge the sack it must take to go out there with the game on the line knowing eventually you’ll fail.

    I’ve been boo’ed off the stage a the Velvet by 1 drunk guy back in ’97 (?) so I can’t imagine 35,000 angry Padre fans.

    Having said all this, I stick by my statement that we may need a new closer next year.

  9. #34@Tom Waits: Understood. I realize that Gerut doesn’t strike out a lot but he also does not walk much either. He was sporting a .311 OBP entering today’s game.

  10. Matty V and Mark Grant have gone on and on about Omar Vizquel being a lock to be a first-ballot Hall of Famer. When Alan Trammell was a Padres coach and was on the ballot for the first time, Matt and Mark insisted that he would be a Hall of Famer. I do not recall that they were as insistent about the first ballot for Tram as they were this weekend for Omar.

    Well, Tram got very little support the first year and not much since. The former Kearny Komet had a much better career than Vizquel, so why do the boys in the booth rate Omar so highly? Both were great players, so this is not a put down, but there are levels of the game. Who would you have rather had a shortstop for a career?

    ballparkfrank in vegas

  11. #110@Frank Barning: I agree.

    Unfortunately, I think will get in eventually.

    But I don’t think he should.

    The perception is that he is this generation’s Ozzie Smith, a great fielding, flashy shortstop. But Ozzie is the best fielding shortstop ever. Omar is severely overrated.

  12. #110@Frank Barning: I think it’s a combination of Vizquel’s (possibly overblown) defensive reputation with the “steroids era” backlash, which some seem to believe makes his otherwise substandard offense more palatable. He seems pretty comparable to Ozzie offensively, but I don’t think he’s considered a peer defensively. Still, he is considered a great defensive SS and so seems likely to be elected at some point. But I agree with you, I was surprised by their talk of him as a lock, a first ballot guy, etc.

    I’d take Trammell in a heartbeat and find it a travesty he’s not in the HOF.

  13. #112@Pat: The perception among those who vote on the Hall is that he is a Hall of Famer. Which is silly.

  14. Trammell is a lot better than a few SS already in the HOF. If Rabbit Maranville can be in the HOF, Trammell should be in. I wouldn’t mind his exclusion if it was just the HOF was being held to a higher standard, but he certainly deserves to be in more than some of the people there.

  15. #9@Turbine Dude: If an HR is sometimes call’d a “tater”, then an avitar of a baseball that’s been crushed for HR can/should be called an “avatater” … makes sense to me … you didn’t misspell it … you invented a new word … well done! :-)

    #111@Kevin: I’ve never had the sense that Omar is at all overrated … neither from my observations of him … nor reports from friends who have seen him play *many* times … nor media reports. My favorite Omar play was a couple of years ago when he took a throw from the 2B-man, knew he couldn’t complete a DP at 1st, so he wheeled and fired to 3B and got the runner who had rounded too far … it was amazing … even more amazing when I learned that, because the batter was fast (Kenny Lofton, iirc), he’d alerted the 3B-man in advance that he might do that! If Ozzie is a HOFer, then it doesn’t seem possible for it to be “silly” for Omar to be an HOFer …

  16. #115@LynchMob: Well, Omar has won 11 Gold Glove awards, but in my view and the view of others, that’s because he makes all the flashy plays. But the stats don’t back up the laurels.

    In Bill James’ Win Shares book, almost every player in history is given a defensive grade. Ozzie receives an A+. Omar gets a B-. Dave Concepcion and Mark Belanger, for example, also got an A+.

    Maybe win shares don’t mean everything, but that’s sort of damning.

    Rob Neyer wrote about this the other week and explained why Vizquel is not a Hall of Famer, even though most writers think he is:


    Among his points: Omar received MVP votes one time in his career. He was 16th in 1999.

    From Neyer: “I promise that you will not find a post-World War II Hall of Famer who fared nearly that poorly in MVP balloting.”

    In a way, the case for Omar is insulting to Ozzie. Omar’s case is basically: He was a flashy shorstop, the best fielding shortstop of his era, and Ozzie was a flashy shortstop, the best fielding shortstop of his era.

    The reality is: The thing that made Ozzie great is he was the best fielding shorstop of ALL TIME. He made the flashy plays and every other play and had an incredible arm.

    Omar wasn’t even the best defensive shorstop of his era.

  17. In better news, USD is 1 win away from a Super Regional appearance.

  18. #113@Kevin: I understand your perspective, but I’d need to see it presented more factually. With all due respect to Bill James, a grade of B- versus A+ for some other SS does not convince me. James is amazing, but he’s not infallible. I just took a look through a spreadsheet I have of UZR for 2003 through the first 1/3 of 2007. Omar is one of the best SS during that timeframe, according to UZR, and those were his age 36 through 40 seasons! I’m going to need some convincing his defense is overrated.

    And if you don’t like the comparison to Ozzie, there are plenty of other good field-no hit SS in the Hall. Aparicio, whose most career games record Omar just broke, Joe Tinker, Rabbit Maranville, Dave Bancroft, Pee Wee Reese, and Phil Rizzuto are all average to poor at the plate.

  19. #118@Pat: Two or three of the shortstops you named shouldn’t be in the Hall of Fame. Pee Wee Reese was average to above average at the plate.

    The “If, Then” argument for the Hall of Fame should not be used. There are always going to be bad selections in the Hall — from Tinkers to Tony Perez to Ruzzuto. It doesn’t mean those mistakes should be compounded.

    Again, if Omar is so great, according to sportswriters, then why did they give him MVP votes just once.