Three Stars Not Yet Aligning

It seems like a lot of people consider the Giants' recent success a fluke, or unsustainable, or not indicative of the team's mediocre ability. In their eyes, it took the miracle of 25 bad-to-slightly-above-average players riding a simultaneous hot streak through October. For them, there is no doubt that San Francisco will return to earth this season, and not continue to play at such a competitive level. 

But what if they have it all wrong? What if the Giants are underperforming?

Consider the three most important franchise players: Buster Posey, Pablo Sandoval, and Tim Lincecum. All three, at their best, are elite athletes who represent the pinnacle of their respective positions. But the Giants have never, I repeat, never, had all three playing like superstars at the same time. In 2008, his first full year, Lincecum won his first of two Cy Young awards and performed at a consistently elite level for the first time, so we shall start there. 

I know some of these stats are not as accurate as some others, but they are the classic metrics. ROOKIE OTY means Rookie of the Year, and AS means All-Star.

	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012
Tim Lincecum	18-5 2.62 ERA 227.0 IP CY YOUNG AS	15-7 2.48 ERA 225.1 IP CY YOUNG AS	16-10 3.43 ERA 212.1 IP AS	13-14 2.74 ERA 217.0 IP AS	10-15 5.18 ERA 186 IP
Pablo Sandoval	NO FULL  SEASON	.330 BA 25 HR 90 RBI	.268 BA 13 HR 63 RBI	.315 23 HR 70 RBI AS	.283 12 HR 63 RBI AS
Buster  Posey	NO FULL  SEASON	NO FULL  SEASON	.305 BA 18 HR 67 RBI ROOKIE OTY	NO FULL  SEASON	.336 BA 24 HR 103 RBI MVP AS

In 2008, Lincecum performed at star-level, but neither Posey nor the Panda played a full season; Posey did not play at all. In 2009, Both Lincecum, who won his second consecutive Cy Young, and Sandoval, who had the second-highest batting average in the league and impressive power numbers in his first full season, played like stars. Posey made his major league debut but had only a few subpar plate appearances late in the season. In 2010, Posey broke out in his first full season and won the Rookie of the Year award while hitting cleanup for the World Series champion team, but neither Lincecum or Sandoval played like stars. In 2011, conversely, both Lincecum and Sandoval played great, but Posey was injured early in the year and did not play a full season. And last year, 2012, Posey won the MVP and played accordingly, but Sandoval was mediocre at best and Lincecum was absolutely awful. 

So let us review, and reference the chart below. The Giants, one of baseball's biggest successes, with three of the league's biggest stars, have never had a season in which all three of their standout players played great. Sure, one could argue that mediocre seasons could be in fact more indicative of these athletes' abilities, but that does not change the fact that, in the past five seasons, each has played like a superstar at least twice. The team has never even had Sandoval and Posey or Lincecum and Posey peak at the same time; the two seasons where two of the stars peaked did not involve Posey, quite possibly the best of the three.

	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012
Tim Lincecum	✓	✓		✓
Pablo Sandoval		✓		✓
Buster  Posey			✓		✓

Will it be hard for the Giants to win a third World Series title in four years? Absolutely. Will it be a challenge to even stay competitive, achieve another a winning record in the NL West? Sure. But that doesn't change that fact that if Tim Lincecum plays like he did in 2008, 2009, or 2011; Pablo Sandoval plays like he did in 2009 or 2011; and Buster Posey plays like he did in 2010 or 2012; we might just have another parade down market street.

SEALS and little things...

Close your eyes for a moment. Imagine a parallel universe. Everything is the same except that for whatever reason, the San Diego Padres have to change their name. Maybe it was the capricious whim of the ever-brilliant Bud Selig. Maybe the Swinging Friar, the team mascot, tested positive for performance enhancing drugs. Or maybe Franciscan monks file a class action lawsuit against the team. At any rate, I have the perfect new name.

The San Diego Seals.

Now keep in mind I'm not advocating for a name change, I am just saying that if we went back in time to before 1969 and had to pick a name for the team, the Seals is so perfect that I am almost surprised that that is not what the team is called.

Obviously, the team could adopt the name, insignia, and uniforms of the San Francisco Seals, one of the most iconic baseball franchises on the west coast. The team could not hoodwink fans into believing that they are the very same team, but it would only take some great, Giants-caliber, marketing to co-opt some of the SF Seals history and culture. Remember that the Seals were founded in 1907, won 14 league titles, and fielded the likes of Joe DiMaggio, his brothers, and Frank Crosetti, who won 17 (yes, you read that correctly) World Series championships with the New York Yankees. And years before Willie Mays, Sandy Koufax, and Ichiro Suzuki traveled west (or east) the Seals and their Pacific Coast League brethren paved the way for the vibrant baseball culture across the west coast. This concept or re appropriation of another team's legacy is actually very common. The team that is now the Chicago Cubs was called the Chicago White Stockings in the late 1800's, and that is where the newer White Sox got their name. The team that is the New York Yankees began as the Baltimore Orioles, and their have been about three incarnations of "Rangers" teams. Even the Mets are named after an obscure 19th century team called the Metropolitans, and furthermore, they themselves try to re appropriate a lot of the Giants' and Dodgers' New York history. But that is not even the best part. Seals are intelligent marine mammals that frolic around San Diego bay in huge numbers. SD is a huge garrison town, Practically half the navy is based there, and even its city motto is modeled on the various armed services mottos. The seals name would pay tribute to the most elite fighting force in the world, something you know the Padres would be interested in, because they have a camouflage alternate uniform. And the dichotomy between the cute animals and special forces unit would provide a kind of depth that most team names lack.

But enough about that. I do not expect the Padres to change their name any time soon. But I thought this rant was worth including because, in a way, it demonstrates everything that is wrong with franchises like the Padres and Astros and everything that is right with franchises like the Giants, Dodgers, Red Sox, and Yankees. It takes discipline and vision and a whole lot of other attributes to run a professional baseball club. It is obvious that big-ticket signings and catchy promotions are key to running a great franchise, but one also has to look at even the smallest things; the dirt of the warning track, the view from a particular upper-deck seat, the color of chopped onions at condiment stance. Alone these are insignificant, but together they combine to vastly effect the experience of a ballgame and the image of the team. And so things like team names can function like canaries-in-the-coal mine. When a team fails to design an effective slogan or ballpark design, what else might be missing? Most likely, everything "less important"- the thousands of tiny things that combine to make a world class organization- are not up to standard. Any team (or almost any team) can lure a star player with a $100-million dollar check. If you really want to evaluated the quality of the organization, look at the brand, the name, the concessions, the color of the uniform, the alternate jerseys (or, preferably, the lack of alternate jerseys). 

Look at the small things.