The Giants probably won't win 107 games again, but they're still a good team. Of course regression is likely


They are only on a 104 win pace now, in fact


I knew that 107 was a fluke!


Fire Farhan.


Even LA hasn’t put together back to back 100+ win seasons in this window. Turns out it’s pretty hard.


Yeah, maybe if the Angels had better pitching….


To be fair, the Dodgers were on pace for 116 in 2020’s shortened season and then won 106 in 2021. So we did win over 100 in back to back *full* seasons, with 2019 and 2021.


Fair point for back to back full seasons. But either way point stands that it’s extraordinarily rare to see a team do


I feel like it’s becoming less rare. Dodgers did it back to back full seasons, Astros did it from 2017-2019, Yankees did it from 2018-2019, Rays won 96 in 2019, were on pace for 108 in 2020, and won 100 in 2021.


Also they have no money on the books. They can spend more than the Dodgers the only thing is there are no Farhan worthy players to sign


I still can't believe the Dodgers only got Muncy because Farhan wanted him


If there is one thing that I have learned about the Giants this century, it’s not safe to count them out. This is a team that has won the World Series despite not many people thinking they would. They just have that ability to find magic and have a lot of players playing well out of nowhere. That Logan Webb guy is a terrific starting pitcher, one of those guys who the Giants found that has turned into a gem.


>This is a team that has won the World Series despite not many people thinking they would. Dont get me wrong Giants are an easy playoff choice but I dont see how this matters when they have a new coaching staff, front office and only 2 players remaining who won a ring.


Fucking fr. It's a 107 win season. Theyre just supposed to top that like it's easy?


hey man it's an even year


Farhan freaking Zaidi is the reason why regression will not be as bad as predicted or by historical precedent. He treats the team like a fantasy football lineup to optiimize matchups over a marathon season. Other than 2-3 players, everyone in that lineup is platoon-able or able to replaced by a prospect/farm hand. For the first time, Zaidi has quality guys like Ramos to come up and fill in. I also bet the Giants have a great record in “bullpen” games using a similar strategy with their arms. As a Dodgers fan, there’s a similarity between organizations that’s recognizable. Any prediction with the Giants under 93-94 wins would be foolish.


Thanks dodger bro




They’ll be fine


Should’ve been titled, “Giants can’t continue to make media analysts look this bad forever.”


>Let's see: 1) The Giants play, literally, in The House That Steroids Built, and they were NEVER punished for profiting endlessly off Barroid Bonds. Then, 2) they hire a known PED-enabling manager in Bruce Bochy—you know, the guy who managed Ken Caminiti in 1996, etc.—and suddenly won a bunch of a random WS with unpredictable performances from a lot of of washed-up players and a few young pitchers who burned out WAY early. And now, 3) they've been playing above their heads for a manager who, not coincidentally at all, played on the 2004 Boston Red Sox with known PED users Manny Ramirez and David Ortiz. Is it really THAT hard to figure out, people? The Giants have done nothing honestly since signing Bonds and saving the franchise from a move to Florida, and it was all engineered by the PED Puppet Master himself, Bud Selig. But hey, profits. Follow the money. The Giants are literally the biggest cheaters this side of Boston, and no one ever wants to investigate it. Pathetic journalism. oh my god I love this salt. (from the comment section on the article). Pure, unbridled salt with literally no proof whatsoever.


> they've been playing above their heads for a manager who, not coincidentally at all, played on the 2004 Boston Red Sox with known PED users Manny Ramirez and David Ortiz. The best part about this flimsy connection is that the Dodgers also play for a manager who played on the 2004 Red Sox.


And who was a teammate of Barriod himself. My god, we’ve figured it out!


Not to mention that any manager/player that has been around for a while has some connection to PED’s.




Some Intense amounts of malding


What do you mean no proof??! They play in the house that steroids built. Checkmate Barry Truthers


Wow. Thats some tin foil shit right there


Yeah? What about Wilmer Flores , who once stood behind JOSE ALTUVE in line at Starbucks yet didn't say a single thing about the Astros cheating operation?!?!


new copypasta


Shit! This guy figured it all out. We’ve been busted!


Taters gonna tate




Ah yes, as we all know, steroid use is a contagious disease that you can pick up from being in the same stadium as Barry Bonds played in 20 years ago


Probably a Houston fan


Nah, that’s Dodger hate.


Bruce bochy having a steroid user on his team in an era where half the league was on roids makes him a known PED enabler lmao


Regression is an obstacle? That’s a fancy notion but regression is not an obstacle, it’s a highly probable outcome. Has any team averaged 107 or more wins in back to back seasons?


Well to be fair the dodgers in 2019 were 106-56 and there was a shortened in 2020, but in 2021 they won 106 games again. They could have had 3 straight 100 win seasons.


Sooo they averaged 106 wins in those two seasons, which is in fact less than 107


That's hardly regression. They're still very much in the tail of probably outcomes.


Still ~technically~ regression is what he’s getting at I think. It’s pretty much unavoidable


They were on pace for 116 in 2020. Which would put the average in fact above 107


On pace for in 60 games doesn’t really matter considering the 2019 Nats were on pace for missing playoffs at 19-31 after 50 games. It’s too small of a sample size for the on pace for to actually matter, further showing why it’s a Mickey ring


How’s them grapes? …sour?


What's the difference?


1 win


Well the difference was a division title last year


And then they lost to the dodgers in the playoffs....


Sure but the Dodgers had to play in a Wild Card game they almost lost, then had to start the number 2 in game 1 against SF, pretty big difference.


We’re just a bad team that regresses. You can’t explain that. That’s baseball, baby.


Which regresses first, SF winning games or Seattle no longer winning an absurd number of one run games?


Hey, the Mariners have the second best run diff in the AL so far!


Oh we’ve regressed already from winning an absurd number of one run games to winning an absurd number of games normally.


the latter


Idk they seemed pretty good to me


Thank for you for beating up on em


Jeez they really had this one teed up waiting for the Giants to lose their first series of the year. They probably won’t win 107 again, but losing three of four on the road to the most expensive team in the league ain’t why.


And good games. Not like we got blown out every day


538 is really annoying with these hot takes. I mean the headline alone….the dramatic buildup. So ridiculous


the dodgers have the largest payroll in the league.


Something something “bad team that wins a lot of games”. Where have I seen that before?


A 10% regression is stil 96 wins


dramatic ass headline 😭


2019-2021 (and likely 2022) Dodgers seem to have shrugged both principles/laws off. The issue is really whether a team underachieved or underachieved relative to its talent. The Giants seem to have overachieved relative to theirs while winning 107 games. What has to be scary for them is that the Dodgers underachieved in winning ‘only’ 106 games.


Whats stopping the Dodgers from winning 112 games this year?


The Colorado Rockies.


Welcome to the Cron Zon


I’m ready for him today. Rather, my asshole is ready.


April Rockies spooky


Same thing as last year, 19 games vs us


I mean we were 9-10 vs SF last year so it's not like you destroyed us. Add in the NLDS and we were 12-12.


9-10 might not sound like a lot, but if you take it away, the Dodgers played at a 110 game pace


I have a feeling that the Dodgers are gonna do a little better against the Giants this year


You guys are nothing this year


Save it for the trash talk thread friendo


You just like getting downvoted don't you? Why are you tempting the gods with that kind of comment? You know the Giants always play us hard.


I see them getting 93 wins


Is this supposed to be more trash talk because honestly 93 is a pretty good season lol


That is 5 more wins than the World Series champions


Yeah I mean we got 107 last year which was like, out of this world, 93 seems small comparatively but that still could be a playoff team


That's almost a guaranteed playoff team with the new format Edit: since realignment in 94 there's not a single 93+ win team that wouldn't have made the playoffs under the new format.


You guys are such scrubs you'll probably only have a season that would be 1st in most divisions


dude we would be happy with that




They’re 9-5 lmao acting like they’ve barely won any games


never forget there were weekly “Giants bound to regress” posts last year


... did you read the article? That's a point the author acknowledges: > So far, the plan to defeat regression has been working better than history would have predicted. The Giants are 8-5 this season — yes, it’s absurdly early, but that translates to a nearly 100-win pace over 162 games — and they’ve come by that record honestly. Their Pythagorean winning percentage (.685) is better than both their actual 2022 winning percentage (.615) and their Pythagorean mark from last season (.635), while they also boast MLB’s 11th-best BaseRuns expected winning percentage (.563).3 If you didn’t know about the plexiglass principle and the history of similar teams, you would see San Francisco’s start to 2022 as simply a continuation of its 2021 success It's not simply about what's happened to this point but what's likely to happen over the course of a season


If you're wondering whether someone actually read the article after reading their comment the answer is usually no.


What *is* the point of the article? That the best team is baseball last year during the regular season might regress a bit? No kidding, there’s nowhere to go but less wins for them


Blah blah blah Bill James bs. Tf is the plexiglass principle? Who tf reads this shit


Lose a couple of games to the Mets, obviously you’re a trash team


Fair point


That's a 104-win pace, which would still be regression. I expect them to be around 100 wins, which is both a fantastic season and would be a drop of 7 wins from last year.


Not sure I trust their hitting enough to give them 100 wins. Should easily lock up a playoff spot though.


I'll believe it when I see it. Last year showed that nothing needs to make sense.


“The year is 2046, the Giants have won 100+ games 25 years in a row, but because we can’t explain their jump in 2021 we will once again project them for a .500 season.” Last year was a weekly exercise of “they’re not for real” that I’m kinda done trying to make sense of it. This year I’m rooting for the Dodgers to break the all time wins record - not because it would be historic or cool, but because that’s probably what it will take to win the division by 1 game.


factor in eybs while you're at it


Losing their HOF catcher / cleanup hitter = regression.


From the article: > One of the oldest maxims in sabermetrics is the plexiglass principle — the notion (as popularized by Bill James) that teams that improve drastically from one season to the next tend to fall back the following year. That truism goes hand in hand with the so-called Law of Competitive Balance — which states that teams with exceptionally good (or bad) records get pulled back toward .500 in the future with ruthless inevitability. And at the most basic level, the 2022 Giants are on the negative side of both precepts, to a historically extreme degree. > For one thing, teams with at least 107 wins are incredibly rare — there have been only 17 in MLB history — and their win totals tended to decline by a shade over 13 percent in the following season. Similarly, AL and NL teams since 1901 that improved their records by at least 25 wins (per 162 games) year over year1 gave back more than a quarter of their improvement the next year, on average. The Giants fit into both regression-heavy categories, plus another one — they were below .500 not just the season before their big breakout, but also the season before that (and before that… and before that).


Does this factor in the coaching system they've put in place and things like their improved approach for batting practice? It seems like it's just going off traditional systems, but I think it's possible SF unlocked a new approach that's slowly creeping across the league as a whole, but until it actually does they'll have an advantage that leads to "over performance".


this is basically exactly what Farhan says in the article.


I mean, I think the Giants won't regress that much but they were +4 against their pythagorean wins. last season and the Dodgers were -3.


This is a team by committee imo. They will do well despite their difficult division. Where their issues lie is not having the game breaking player. It’ll be hard for them to win in the playoffs I think. But we’ve said that before. People need to chill though. They’re hardly hitting right now, pretty sure the team batting average before yesterdays game was .217. That won’t do much, yet they’re 9-5. The injuries are piling up already too and they kept rolling through that last year too. They’re a good organization that gets the most out of all their players. Plain and simple.


We are fucking 9 and 5. I really don’t understand what we did to be so hated by the media


>I really don’t understand what we did to be so hated by the media Not be the dodgers


Regression is kinda one of this buzzwords that people parrot. Like no shit they’re gonna regress from 107 wins. Chances are they’re gonna be competing with the dodgers in October


Nice flair, OP.


What I thought too lmao.


I totally expect career years up and down the roster again. That 141 OPS+ of Brandon Crawford looks soooo repeatable.


Causation cancels regression.


10-5, two game win streak, 7-3 in last 10 games. Yeah, definitely regressing. They're regressing to get like one less win this season.


Is this satire? They faced a super team (Mets), and it's April. I hardly think one series is cause for concern. Hell, they'll probably go toe-to-toe with the Dodgers again this year, because that's what brothers do: annoy the shit out of each other.


Counterpoint: EYBS?


Pen devils have been trying to discredit this team for as long as I can remember. Just give it up man, badman Bonds and the steroid era are long gone.


They had outlier career years from a ton of aging vets, I’m sure they’ll be able to replicate that


Posey is hitless so far this year, though.


Terrible He should just retire at this point


He's stubborn and he's hurting the Giants.




Call it the Lindor Effect for you guys.


Cant really make this joke when he’s off to a hot start this season lol


That’s my point—he underperformed so badly last year that he was bound to regress in a positive way and help the Mets do the same.


> regress in a positive way Uh, what?


"Regression", technically, is merely moving from an outlier outcome to the statistical average. "Positive regression" is moving from a negative outlier.


Regression between seasons must be a foreign concept for you since the Mets like to do their regression in the middle of the season




>regression Other teams will probably do what they have done since the beginning of the game, and adapt to innovation. That's why the Giants will "regress". The Giants didn't win 107 games last year on pure luck. They made structural changes to the front office, minor league systems, coaching staff, player development, and team ethos. There was a point last year where the Sacramento AAA lineup were all players capable of big league play. Several vets on the team had long injury stretches and we never lost momentum. The Giants never had a true closer last year. They didn't have a superstar besides Posey, who was physically deteriorating all year. The entire narrative was that it was fluke. Absolute brainlet mentality and it's the same reasons we've had two teams whining about running up the score already.


Good to see baseball writers are still butt hurt about being wrong about the giants and rooting for them to fall off. No way this would ever get published about any other team with a 10-5 start coming off a 107 win season


They can't keep up with the Dodgers and they lost posey. The dodgers after winning 106 games, only got better and Cody Bellinger is playing better baseball again.


they downvoted him because he spoke the truth


They downvoted him because he said the second most ridiculous thing here with the initial article being the first. The Giants, at worst, will be 1.5 GB at the end of today. The Dodgers are likely to win the the division, but it’s still April. It’s simply too early to claim that a team can’t keep up with another.


What else is new?