Tonight was ugly. 10-2 loss! Besides Jonathan Sanchez’s meltdown in 2 2/3 innings this proves that the Giants need a long relief pitcher. Every great pitcher implodes at some point. They have to have confidence that the pen can pick them up on days they do not have there best stuff. This has been an issue for the Giants primarily due to the pen being over taxed. To compound the problem the developing position players have lacked consistency with the bat. These concerns make the margin of error so narrow, that almost any fourth or fifthth pitcher is likely to struggle. Wether the fifth starter is Correia or Misch the pen needs more that just one inning, young guns, Lefty vs righty (etc.) match-ups kind of guys. To asaossbate the problem, several of the starting rotation fail to get deep into games. Were would we be without Lincecum? Look at last nights game...Cain won a 1-0 game. The first complete game since (I believe) Noah Lowry in 2006. Giants used five of our twelve pitchers, tonight, just to get through the game. Take out the other starting four (Matt Cain, Tim Lincecum, Barry Zito, and Kevin Correia) Giants used all but three pitcher. Please do not get me wrong, I like the fact the Giants are bringing up young talent to see how they perform at the next level, but but the pen needs some relief.

@Mr. Lomez, Haha, thanks, I do appreciate that. I've seen it both ways but I'd like to be correct when I use it. The XHTML tags are a little funky. I'll see if I can get the preview to jive better with them

Nevermind. I did it correctly. Though, when I "previewed" the post, it didn't remove the blockquote tag. So, I don't know, maybe that's something to look into.

This is a bit of nitpicking, but I figure you'd appreciate the info: From Neyer's Transaction Primer: <blockquote cite="espn.go.com/mlb/s/transanctionsprimer.html">...note that it's not the 'Rule V Draft,' but the Rule 5 draft. It's called the Rule 5 draft because the section of the Official Rules that covers the draft just happens to be Rule 5 in the book." PS - I'm retarded. What's wrong with my html tag?

If Omar gets traded, I'll eat my hat. He's worth less than nothing. I think a team's Expected Wins might actually be better w/ no one at short than with Omar there.

Whoops, read my link wrong, -37 as a team. Good point. Yeah, the OF has been awesome, above average all year by most metrics, but the infield has been the opposite. Bill James Online has the Dewan +/- stuff for individual players, I should pony up the $3 a month to get that data. I'll touch on this point OGC <blockquote cite>About Omar, actually, Burriss hasn’t really shown enough to just be given the starting job, the only reason he was going to get more playing time was because the way Omar was hitting</blockquote cite> 1. If you aren't going to play Burriss semi-regularly then why is he even on the team? Has this year been the worst year ever for bonehead decisions of when to call up players? If you aren't playing Burriss when Omar is batting .100, send him down. Send him anywhere to get playing time. 2. Burriss is no A-Rod but his line of .291/.349/.342 DESTROYS Omar's line of .183/.249/.220 3. Furthermore, if you want to take the approach that Omar is a better defender than Burriss, I'm not sure I'm buying that. His range is obviously decreased. I don't think he's playing D well enough to make up for his horrendous batting. 4. You're expecting Omar to eventually hit, I don't think he will. Pitchers have challenged him all year long and will continue to challenge him. <blockquote cite>Burriss isn’t even outhitting by much what Neifi was hitting before.</blockquote cite> That's a straw man, what Neifi did, or didn't' do while he was here, has nothing to do with Burriss. Different times, different team composition, different everything. Burriss is a better option at short right now for the Giants. Both in the terms of perfomance and the future. I'll bold that word, future, because it's important. I'll disagree that Omar has value, I don't see it. And I think that no amount of playing him before the deadline will help his value.

Actually, according to the link, the Giants as a team is -37, not just the infield. Not sure how to grab the infield breakout, perhaps that is also -37, which is possible, the infield vs. outfield breakout shows the OF being above average in RZR and OOZ, heck, based on that the infield is probably worse than -37. Wow, both Rowand and Winn are near the top in RZR and Lewis is good. And they are good in OOZ too. Can't find individual +/- though. Most team's #5 starters stinks but the Giants have stunk particularly badly this season. Given Correia nice end string of 2007 starts, I am giving Correia the benefit of the doubt for this season thus far, perhaps he was hurting before he was finally DLed, nobody knows how long he was struggling with that before succumbing. Frankly, it is not like the list of suspects are all that compelling to start them over Correia, for now, he has his 2007 starts to refer to as evidence that he can work it out, the question is will he. About Omar, actually, Burriss hasn't really shown enough to just be given the starting job, the only reason he was going to get more playing time was because the way Omar was hitting, we would have been better off batting a midget there instead and get a bunch of walks, heck, even a statue could have done close to what Omar did. However, if Omar can hit, he can easily post an OPS above what Burriss has done so far, Burriss isn't even outhitting by much what Neifi was hitting before. Plus, the Giants are hoping to trade off players. Omar is untradeable off the bench. That's why Omar is still starting until August 1st. And in business, it will cost the other team more if you want to hold onto what you got than if you are eager to get rid of him. So if he's showing a return to past goodness, you need to sell him a bit, say he's getting more play going forward, to try to get more out of the other side when negotiating. Normal business behavior, though I have no idea if that is what Bochy was thinking when he said what he said. Still, net effect is you are telling other teams he's valuable to us, so give us more if you want him. Else you end up with very little. And any savings we can get on his contract would help to sign our draft picks.

Ah crap a sandwich! I see I forget to add all 4 of Corriea’s Jul starts so that makes his monthly pitch count 369 in 4 starts. To Zito’s 216 in 2 starts. Still shows the issues but not as nicely. Just to underline things farther Cain has had only one start with under 90 pitches this season.

I am moderately worried about Corriea. I too think he is not healed up. The whole stamina thing. He has not managed 100 pitches since July 2nd. Since he returned he has a pair of 103 pitch outings and one 99 pitch outing. Zito darn near throws more pitches in 2 games then Corriea has this month. Ok I am exaggerating a bit ( Corriea 221 pitches in July while Zito has 216 in his last 2 starts). I am cool with the Misch/Hammond/Palmer beast if that what needs doing. It’s too bad now Zito and Corriea follow each other or I might lean towards dropping a position player and bringing Misch up and tell one of Corriea or Misch you get the 2-3 innings in between when those 2 Starters fold tell you get Corriea get his stamina back.

There was a point near the beginning of the season, right before he got hurt, actually, where I was actually excited about Correia. I think it's clear by this time he's a fifth starter, if that. I was concerned about the 12 hits initially, but your analysis put that concern to rest, especially with "The Giants infield is bad at turning balls hit into play into outs." (It should make me laugh, but it was funny!) I had also not considered the possibility that he's still hurt... That said, I wouldn't mind seeing somewhat of a rotating cast of fifth starters. Not sure how palatable that really is--that is, if they do decide to bump Correia, how many guys can they sub in there before the season's over and feel like they've got a legitimate look? I'd be interested to see any of the first three guys you mentioned in your list. cj <a href="http://www.lamourproject.com" target="_blank">www.lamourproject.com

Correia: I'm with you 100%. Also not a big Correia guy, but give him another start or 2 (or 3) to see if he can work it out. Whadda we got to lose? -37 outs>!>>!?? And last in OOZ?? And that's WITH Omar Vizquel getting the bulk of the playing time at short! So plug in Burriss or whomever and that number gets even worse. Holy crap! I'm totally torn about Omar. He was due to have some regression back up to way below average from abysmal/historically bad, so I can see why Bochy would give him a few more starts. And I still get a thrill from watching him pick it clean out there. OTOH, we need to evaluate the kids, so... like I said, I'm torn. Ack. War series sweep of the Nats!!

I'll start this one off, put me down as "slightly worried". I was never huge on Correia as the 5th stater, even with his fantastic finish to '07, but he probably deserves a few more shots. I do worry that he's still dealing with the oblique. Misch has been bumpy in Fresno, but I'm still a fan of him for the 5th starter spot. He was mainly unlucky with the HR in the majors. For discussion sake, if Correia is bumped, here's my list of preferable guys to start in his place. 1. Steve Hammond - Call him the new toy, but I'd like to see what he could do. Might be able to cut it in the majors in a 5th starter role. 2. Pat Misch - Probably very similar to Hammond, lefties that need to "hit their spots" to succeed. I like his pitchability and stuff. 3. Matt Palmer - Decent season in Fresno but a organizational soldier. I did his MLE's and it translated to a 4.50 ERA, which is respectable for your 5th starter. 4. Victor Santos - Purely a "everyone else is injured" starting option. No upside here. Notice that Brad Hennessey didn't make my list.