“What they did was get a lot of clutch hits,” Winn said. “I think that’s what we’re going to have to do.”

Now there's a plan.

Problem solved! And here I was worried and all such.

The key is to save up your hits when you really need them.

The Giants should stop hitting when they're up or down by several runs, and start hitting when the game is close. Then they will win more baseball games.

The Giants should stop hitting when they're up or down by several runs, and start hitting when the game is close. Then they will win more baseball games.

Exactly. And when runners are on base, the third base coach should give the "home run" sign more often.

You know, it's that kind of negative energy that has caused the Giants' problems to begin with. If you guys would start thinking positively, I'm sure things would turn around.

Indeed, Randy Winn said in a later inteview that "thinking positive" was Plan B to the clutch hitting thing.

Ummmm...it's not insignificant that Rowand went from playing half his games in Philly to half his games in San Fran. What is the AT&T;Park Adjustment for a player's "robust production-ness"?

it's not insignificant that Rowand went from playing half his games in Philly to half his games in San Fran. What is the AT&T;Park Adjustment for a player's "robust production-ness"?

It certainly isn't as home run-friendly as Citizens Bank Park, but AT&T;hasn't played as a pitchers' park for the past several years now. It's a neutral-to-slightly-favoring-the-hitter environment.

What is the AT&T;Park Adjustment for a player's "robust production-ness"?

In Winnshares Clutch Hits System...about 8.

Rowand had years in Philly and Chicago where he hit .280 with little pop as well. I think the wishcast was that he was "injured" those years.

Ummmm...it's not insignificant that Rowand went from playing half his games in Philly to half his games in San Fran. What is the AT&T;Park Adjustment for a player's "robust production-ness"?

His OPS+ went down like 30 points. But it wasn't a year out of line with many of his other years...his OPS+ is kind of flaky year-to-year.

I predict that Rowand's stats will rebound when he has his next contract year.

I think the wishcast was that he was "injured" those years.

To be fair, Rowand was struggling with a ribcage injury for much of 2008. But I think the most sensible thing to conclude is that he's a rather injury-prone player, and this impacts his capacity to consistently perform at his top level.

You have to recall how bad the Giants hitting was last year to realize they should actually be much better offensively this year.

Even though Rowand was injured, I wouldn't look for too much more offense from him this year. As Steve points out, he tends to run into things. Molina and Winn figure to be about the same.

But the following players should provide significant upgrades:

Pablo Sandoval at third should get 600 AB. Last year he only got 145 AB with a 118 OPS+. Nobody probably remembers that Jose Castillo got 374 AB last year with an OPS+ of 74. That's a big upgrade.

At short, the Giants got 343 horrific AB from Brian Bocock and Omar Vizquel with an OPS+ of about 30. Hideous. Even if Edgar Renteria rebounds only slightly from his OPS+ 84 year, he'll be a big big upgrade.

At 1B the Giants had John Bowker and Rich Aurilia mostly, who combined for an OPS+ of about 90. Early returns from Travis Ishikawa are positive.

Fred Lewis can reasonably be expected to be better. He suffered through most of the second half with severe foot pain. Nate Schierholz holds promise of significant production as a fourth outfielder.

Don't know how this translates into runs/wins, but the Giants pitching should be better because their bullpen is better and Cain/Sanchez/Wilson can be expected to improve with experience.

This is a significantly better team.

There's not really anything wrong with the Winn quote. He didn't say the Giants would get clutch hits or that it was a team of clutch hitters and this was all part of a plan. He (apparently) compared them to a team that's not going to score any more than they give up and so, to win, they're gonna have to do well at clutch hitting -- which is essentially true if you're gonna win while playing 500 Pythagorean ball. (You could "clutch pitch" too.) In short, his assessment of the team seems right in line with most of our assessments of the team though he probably does have more faith in the clutchiness of his teammates than we do.

This is a significantly better team.

If everything goes well, yes. The issue is that for very few teams does everything go well. Almost every team encounters some manner of unexpected slumps/injuries.

And you're apparently expecting a whole lot more out of Ishikawa than I am, as well as more confidence that Sandoval will be able to handle 3B full time than I have.

To be fair, Rowand was struggling with a ribcage injury for much of 2008. But I think the most sensible thing to conclude is that he's a rather injury-prone player, and this impacts his capacity to consistently perform at his top level.

I am not saying he's not injury prone, or that he wasn't injured, I am just saying no one has even demonstrated the CORRELATION let alone CAUSATION of him being healthy and hitting .300+ with power (his walk rate doesn't change much)

You have to recall how bad the Giants hitting was last year to realize they should actually be much better offensively this year.

Maybe, but, with the exception of Rowand and Vizquel, you could argue that the Giants played rather better than reasonable expectations last year. Alot of guys continued their late-career renaissance (Molina, Winn) and the core of the squad was pretty healthy. They also outperformed their pythag record by about 5 games last season, so they could improve quite a bit with it actually showing in the standings.

You have to recall how bad the Giants hitting was last year to realize they should actually be much better offensively this year.

Molina had a 98, his career mark is 88, 2007 he hit 86, but he hit 108 & 100 in 2005 & 2006.
Bowker put up an 83... Ishikawa can probably match that (unfortunately for SF I'm not so sure he can top it)
Durham put up a 109, Velez a 73, Burriss an 81, - Durham is/was that good of a hitter but he's gone, Velez is probably a little better than a 73- he can probably reach 80, Burris- well 81 was likely over his head, he's probably a 70- Denker might have been able to hit 90-100- but they released him (or lost him somehow)
Jose Castillo hit 73, Sandoval will beat that- even if he only draws 15 BBS in 600 PAs he will still beat that.
Vizquel hit a 45, Renteria will beat THAT- however the defensive drop off from Viz to Rent may be disorienting for the pitching staff.
Fred Lewis had a 105, he's good bet to match that, unfortunately he's not likely to ever top it by much.
Rowand had a 94, He'll hit anywhere from 80 to 130.
Winn had a 105, his career is 102, in recent years he's been as high as 128, and as low as 84.
Aurillia had a 93, who gets his PAs? Frandsen? He could post a 90... Schierholz? ditto.

This is still a depressing lineup, aside from Sandoval I see no real upside here, a bunch of guys who may hit 100 but likely won't. And Sandoval is no sure thing he could just as easily crater...

Denker might have been able to hit 90-100- but they released him (or lost him somehow)

Which utterly baffles me, until I remember that Brian Sabean has been certifiably insane since the autumn of 2003.

Aurillia had a 93, who gets his PAs?

He's ba-ack.

viennese oyster

My college buddies and I obsessed on imagining all the girls who wouldn't be caught dead with us assuming that position. I haven't thought of it much since. Must be maturity or something.