The 2010 Tim Lincecum thread: No Cy Young Award this year, gets World Series ring instead.
digicat
Posts: 8,551 ✭✭
in Sports Talk
I figured that Tim needed a new thread. The "Tim Lincecum -- the real thing?" thread's primary question has already been answered with back-to-back Cy Young Awards.
Right out of the gates, he's doing his thing:
7 scoreless, no walks, 7 strikeouts, win. Nice way for the G-Men to start the season!
Right out of the gates, he's doing his thing:
7 scoreless, no walks, 7 strikeouts, win. Nice way for the G-Men to start the season!
0
Comments
<< <i>I am fine with Lincecum winning another Cy Young... as long as the Giant's end up behind the Dodgers (AGAIN) in the standings >>
If the McCourts' divorce ends up turning into a fire-sale, maybe you'll see Matt Kemp in orange and black before the season's out.
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
He's an awesome pitcher. He has Hall of Fame stuff.
mathew
drugs of choice
NHL hall of fame rookies
<< <i>After smoking the wacky weed he will have to win the Cy Young award by a wide margin. He will not win a close vote this year. >>
Nah, I don't think that's going to matter one bit.
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
<< <i>Maybe I'm being naive, but I don't think the writers would withhold Cy Young votes for Lincecum for smoking weed - not when there are so many other things being done by athletes that are considered "worse" by the media and the public. >>
Have you looked at how the writers vote??!! It's like they are his supplier of wacky weed!
<< <i>If Tim pitches like he has, Matt Cain duplicates last year and Zito comes back the Giants will be tough this year...... >>
And with their offense, there's sure to be a lot of 2-1 games in the mix.
<< <i>And with their offense, there's sure to be a lot of 2-1 games in the mix. >>
Giants hitters got 5, 3, and 10 runs in the 3 game beat down of the Astros.
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
But that was not the case! Lincecum really knows how to shake off a bad inning and just be dominant.
Lincecum and Halladay are currently tied with 17k each.....
Roy has a powerful lineup to back him up for wins, if the Giants don't score three runs or more Lincecum will have a tough time getting wins.
<< <i>After the first inning, I thought Lincy was going to lose and watch his ERA skyrocket....
But that was not the case! Lincecum really knows how to shake off a bad inning and just be dominant. >>
Looks like Tim was trying to find his location. He threw 22 pitches in that first inning, and 12 were balls. He must have been kinda cold after the 4 hour rain delay (spent playing video games and napping). After the first though, he was dialed in and the Braves couldn't handle him.
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
<< <i>As a Dodger fan today was not so good. >>
I'm sure today was much better for you. F*ing Manny!
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
Does anyone know what he best rookie card would be for a psa set registry?
I don't know newer cards and there seems to be many versions of his 2007 card even within the same manufacture.
Bowman chrome has a few varieties.
and joe mauer also
thanks
1948-76 Topps FB Sets
FB & BB HOF Player sets
1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
Happy Monday Digi.
<< <i>Does anyone know what he best rookie card would be for a psa set registry?
I don't know newer cards and there seems to be many versions of his 2007 card even within the same manufacture.
Bowman chrome has a few varieties. >>
I requested his Bowman Chrome card for the All-Time Giants set.
However, to be quiet honset, I'm tired of the registry rules with regards to modern rookie cards. For me, this is Tim's rookie card:
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
As evidenced by Jonathan Sanchez's 1 run, 10 strikeout LOSS the other night, the hitters take the night off sometimes.
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
<< <i>Timmy's on the hill Friday against the Cards. Hopefully the Giants can score some runs for him.
As evidenced by Jonathan Sanchez's 1 run, 10 strikeout LOSS the other night, the hitters take the night off sometimes. >>
Sorry to say but the Cardinals pitching staff is so deep their number 5 starter tonight will outpitch Mr Lincecum. Watch Mr Garcia put on a show.
<< <i>Sorry to say but the Cardinals pitching staff is so deep their number 5 starter tonight will outpitch Mr Lincecum. Watch Mr Garcia put on a show. >>
We'll see.
Oh, just for clarification, with your statement, are you suggesting that all 5 Cards starters are better than Lincecum, or (and?) the Giants hitters are so weak that they'll make anyone look good?
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
<< <i>I'm saying the Cardinals are on a mission tonight to show that Lincecum stole the Cy Young last year >>
Personally, I was predicting Carpenter 1st, Lincecum 2nd, and Wainwright 3rd in the 09 voting.
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
Now it's Lincecum vs no one named Webb or Santana.
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
<< <i>I'm saying the Cardinals are on a mission tonight to show that Lincecum stole the Cy Young last year >>
Mission: failed.
Cards are now 0-5 vs Lincecum in his career.
Not a great game for Timmy. He never found his rhythm, ended up throwing 120 pitches over 7 innings... but STILL struck out 8 and only gave up 1 run. More guts than stuff tonight, and that was enough.
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
<< <i>Watch Mr Wainright today and let me knwo what you think >>
Wainright's first 7 innings were solid. The 8th, not so much, especially since the Cards got completely shut down by Barry Zito.
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
4-0, 5 earned runs, 43 K's, 1.27 ERA and this amazing stat, 7 walks! Not bad
<< <i>Jimenez from Colorado is the leader at this point though Lincecum is probably second among NL starters at this point. >>
My 2 cents - Timmy owns it unless someone takes it away...and he rightfully won it last year as well. Ubaldo is coming out strong though...same with that Halladay guy.
<< <i>
<< <i>Jimenez from Colorado is the leader at this point though Lincecum is probably second among NL starters at this point. >>
My 2 cents - Timmy owns it unless someone takes it away...and he rightfully won it last year as well. . >>
That is crap, I have yet to hear a rational explanation as to why Lincecum deserved to win last year. Wainright had the better year and was money down the stretch, and what did Lincecum do all through September when the Giants needed him to step up? Look it up and quit being a homer.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Jimenez from Colorado is the leader at this point though Lincecum is probably second among NL starters at this point. >>
My 2 cents - Timmy owns it unless someone takes it away...and he rightfully won it last year as well. . >>
That is crap, I have yet to hear a rational explanation as to why Lincecum deserved to win last year. Wainright had the better year and was money down the stretch, and what did Lincecum do all through September when the Giants needed him to step up? Look it up and quit being a homer. >>
Well then - first I am no homer (Twins fan). Second - I didn't say that Wainwright wasn't a solid #2 selection. Probably should have been #3 behind Vazquez though. Still Timmy had 2 less starts (8 less Innings) and walked 2 more more than Wainwright, while allowing 48 less hits (including 7 less homeruns) while also striking out 49 more batters. I will ignore the slightly better ERA than Timmy had as it is almost negligent. Is that rational enough? As for September Timmy's numbers weren't bad (he could have easily matched wainwright in K's if given the extra start Wainwright had). But should he not get credit for pitching great all 6 months, or does only September count? You basically can't find a statistic that Wainwright bested Lincecum - look it up. Now how about a rational support for Wainwright...and Wins do not count.
<< <i>Wins do count because they are basically the same otherwise. Strikeouts is the most overdone stat in the game, give me a guy who gets ground ball after ground ball on one pitch compared to usign up pitches striking guys out anyday. It's not like Wainright didn't have a plenty of them himself. So when all else is equal how do you decide? Hmm last I checked who won the game is pretty important so yes it should be a tie-breaker. If not for a bullpen giving up 5 runs in his last start he woudl have won 20. Would you still give it to Lincecum with 15 wins compared to Waino's 20? Sorry about the reference of being a homer, that was not proper of me. >>
Wins are hardly indicative of a pitchers ability. Ask Zach Greinke about that (he is winless to date, btw). The pitcher can not influence how much run support they get, or how good of support they get from the relief staff. I guarantee Lincecum would have had more wins pitching for the Cards last year than Wainwright did...maybe just 1, but more none the less. And their numbers are not the same otherwise. That is a huge gap in hits allowed - hence Lincecum allowing around %15 less hitters on base per inning. That is not insignificant. And discounting K's is silly as well - you take the groundball guy (who relies on defense) and I will take the K guy (who could have 8 statues in the field and still get the guy out) and tell me who wins on average. Wainwright did have plenty of K's, but Timmy had a lot more (25% or so). You can't honestly believe that if they were on the same team last year (or this year, or the year before), Wainwright would be more valuable. As great as he is, Lincecum is head and shoulders above him. And no worries on the homer comment - but you might want to check the mirror on that one
<< <i>Even though the Giants ended up losing. Tim didn't hurt his chance for his 3-peat Cy Young quest. >>
No, but by costing him a win, his choking bullpen slightly hurt his chances.
<< <i>
<< <i>Even though the Giants ended up losing. Tim didn't hurt his chance for his 3-peat Cy Young quest. >>
No, but by costing him a win, his choking bullpen slightly hurt his chances. >>
And hence, the overvaluing of wins is yet again validated. He was brilliant and got the no-decision.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Even though the Giants ended up losing. Tim didn't hurt his chance for his 3-peat Cy Young quest. >>
No, but by costing him a win, his choking bullpen slightly hurt his chances. >>
And hence, the overvaluing of wins is yet again validated. He was brilliant and got the no-decision. >>
He should have finished it off then he would have no complaints. That's part of what robs starters of wins is they don't go deep enough. Finish your game and you have no bullpen to blame. Reminds me of 2005 when Carpenter won the Cy and people were saying all year how Clemens should get it because his ERA was 1 point somehting and he couldn't control his win total. Problem was he was only pitching 5 innings a game that year and was never around to get the win like Carpenter was. Too many pitchers cry about their records being bad because of the bullpen, well man up and finish the game yourself. Of course Lincecum can't do that cause he has to use up his pitch count because he wants to strike everybody out. There is some truth in there. Your challenge is to find it
<< <i>He should have finished it off then he would have no complaints. That's part of what robs starters of wins is they don't go deep enough. Finish your game and you have no bullpen to blame. Reminds me of 2005 when Carpenter won the Cy and people were saying all year how Clemens should get it because his ERA was 1 point somehting and he couldn't control his win total. Problem was he was only pitching 5 innings a game that year and was never around to get the win like Carpenter was. Too many pitchers cry about their records being bad because of the bullpen, well man up and finish the game yourself. Of course Lincecum can't do that cause he has to use up his pitch count because he wants to strike everybody out. There is some truth in there. Your challenge is to find it
Wainwright today - 6 IP, 8 baserunners allowed, 3 earned runs, 4 k's, gets the W behind 8 runs scored in his 6 IP
Lincecum yesterday - 8 and a third IP, 4 baserunners allowed, 2 earned runs, 11 k's, bullpen blows 3 run lead with 1 out and a guy on first (after he got 4 runs of support in his 8+ IP).
So who is better at trying to close out the game? You can't believe Lincecum did not got shorted a W, but Wainwright really 'earned' his...can you? BTW - Lincecum topped Wainright in Complete Games the last 2 years as well.
<< <i>
<< <i>He should have finished it off then he would have no complaints. That's part of what robs starters of wins is they don't go deep enough. Finish your game and you have no bullpen to blame. Reminds me of 2005 when Carpenter won the Cy and people were saying all year how Clemens should get it because his ERA was 1 point somehting and he couldn't control his win total. Problem was he was only pitching 5 innings a game that year and was never around to get the win like Carpenter was. Too many pitchers cry about their records being bad because of the bullpen, well man up and finish the game yourself. Of course Lincecum can't do that cause he has to use up his pitch count because he wants to strike everybody out. There is some truth in there. Your challenge is to find it
Wainwright today - 6 IP, 8 baserunners allowed, 3 earned runs, 4 k's, gets the W behind 8 runs scored in his 6 IP
Lincecum yesterday - 8 and a third IP, 4 baserunners allowed, 2 earned runs, 11 k's, bullpen blows 3 run lead with 1 out and a guy on first (after he got 4 runs of support in his 8+ IP).
So who is better at trying to close out the game? You can't believe Lincecum did not got shorted a W, but Wainwright really 'earned' his...can you? BTW - Lincecum topped Wainright in Complete Games the last 2 years as well. >>
Wainright got taken out because of the 6 run lead, he had only thrown 78 pitches. My point is if you can't finish a game then you cant cry about a win getting away form you with the bullpen. Their bullpen did not blow a 3 run lead they blew a 2 run lead because the run is charged to Lincecum. If he hadn't struck out so many and run his pitch count to 106 he would have been more likely left in to finsh the game.
<< <i>Their bullpen did not blow a 3 run lead they blew a 2 run lead because the run is charged to Lincecum. >>
So if a closer comes in with a 1-run lead with a runner on first and two out, if he gives up a couple of hits to tie the game he hasn't blown it? By your logic it would seem not since the run is charged to the departed starter even though the closer couldn't get a single out.
<< <i>
<< <i>Their bullpen did not blow a 3 run lead they blew a 2 run lead because the run is charged to Lincecum. >>
So if a closer comes in with a 1-run lead with a runner on first and two out, if he gives up a couple of hits to tie the game he hasn't blown it? By your logic it would seem not since the run is charged to the departed starter even though the closer couldn't get a single out. >>
Statistically yes he gets a blown save but it's the starters fault that runner is on base so if it scores he cant complain to anyone but himself is what i'm saying.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Their bullpen did not blow a 3 run lead they blew a 2 run lead because the run is charged to Lincecum. >>
So if a closer comes in with a 1-run lead with a runner on first and two out, if he gives up a couple of hits to tie the game he hasn't blown it? By your logic it would seem not since the run is charged to the departed starter even though the closer couldn't get a single out. >>
Statistically yes he gets a blown save but it's the starters fault that runner is on base so if it scores he cant complain to anyone but himself is what i'm saying. >>
I understand the runner is charged to the SP, but seriously - why can't a starter allow 1 run all game, and reasonably expect his BP to protect a 3 run lead with 2 outs and a guy on 1st. As for Timmy striking out too many, are you serious? You want him to pitch to contact? How does that work for Derek Lowe? That is 11 outs where that batter did not have a chance to get to first base, much less score. And it's not like he pitched 6 innings...he got 25/27 outs, which is better than 95-99% of the average starters do on a daily basis. His K's do not keep him from being among league leaders in innings pitched. Trying to cut down his K's to allow for more potential base runners is asinine.