Giants should give Yusmeiro Petit the Game 4 start

3 Comments

You know, if they’re not going to use him in relief.

Yusmeiro Petit was the Giants’ second best reliever this year. In 49 innings out of the pen, he had a 1.84 ERA, a 0.86 WHIP and 59 strikeouts. He was almost a perfect match for Giants closer Santiago Casilla, except for how they were used (both had the same WHIP and .177 batting-averages against Casilla had a 1.70 ERA, but gave up two unearned runs compared to none for Petit).

Petit wasn’t quite as successful as a starter, mostly because of the home run ball. He gave up 11 in his 12 starts, which resulted in a 5.03 ERA even tough he had an exceptional 74/11 K/BB ratio and 1.13 WHIP in 68 innings. Still, most of those struggles were early on. After entering the rotation for good on Aug. 28, Petit had a 3.93 ERA in his final six starts.

Ryan Vogelsong was less good during that span; he had a 5.53 ERA in five during September. In the postseason, he’s had one fine outing against the Nationals (1 ER in 5 2/3 IP) and one lousy outing against the Cardinals (4 ER in 3 IP).

It’s not that Vogelsong is an awful choice to start Game 4 against the Royals. Petit is simply the better one. And if manager Bruce Bochy didn’t use Petit in Wednesday’s Game 2 loss to the Royals because he figures he might need him to go long in Vogelsong’s place on Saturday, then the obvious move is to simply go to Petit as the starter in the first place.

Petit has saved the Giants’ bacon twice so far in the postseason, pitching six innings in the marathon Game 2 against the Nationals and three innings in relief of Vogelsong in Game 4 of the NLCS. He allowed a total of two hits while not giving up any runs in those outings. He fanned 11. The Giants might not have won either game without him.

And facing the Royals in AT&T Park seems like a pretty ideal matchup for Petit. His issue is the home run ball. He’d be going against a team that doesn’t hit home runs in a ballpark that doesn’t give up many.

But it won’t happen. Petit seems to be the fallback. He’s getting saved for situations that might never materialize.

I don’t blame Bruce Bochy for eschewing Petit in Game 2. After Jake Peavy left a tie game in the sixth, Bochy thought he was going to get through the last four innings with his five cogs: Jean Machi, Javier Lopez, Jeremy Affeldt, Sergio Romo and Casilla. That was never a situation for Petit in the regular season, nor was it a situation he’s been used in during the postseason. Apart from a poor first half from Romo, those five guys got the job done for the Giants all season long. They’re the close-game relievers. Petit is the break-glass-in-case-of-emergency guy.

But Petit is too good for that role. He’s allowed 99 hits, walked 26 (six intentionally) and struck out 144 in 126 innings this year. He can make a difference, if the Giants let him.

MLBPA proposes 114-game season, playoff expansion to MLB

LG Patterson/MLB via Getty Images
Leave a comment

ESPN’s Jeff Passan reports that the Major League Baseball Players Association has submitted a proposal to the league concerning the 2020 season. The proposal includes a 114-game season with an end date on October 31, playoff expansion for two years, the right for players to opt out of the season, and a potential deferral of 2020 salaries if the postseason were to be canceled.

Passan clarifies that among the players who choose to opt out, only those that are considered “high risk” would still receive their salaries. The others would simply receive service time. The union also proposed that the players receive a non-refundable $100 million sum advance during what would essentially be Spring Training 2.

If the regular season were to begin in early July, as has often been mentioned as the target, that would give the league four months to cram in 114 games. There would have to be occasional double-headers, or the players would have to be okay with few off-days. Nothing has been mentioned about division realignment or a geographically-oriented schedule, but those could potentially ease some of the burden.

Last week, the owners made their proposal to the union, suggesting a “sliding scale” salary structure. The union did not like that suggestion. Players were very vocal about it, including on social media as Max Scherzer — one of eight players on the union’s executive subcommittee — made a public statement. The owners will soon respond to the union’s proposal. They almost certainly won’t be happy with many of the details, but the two sides can perhaps find a starting point and bridge the gap. As the calendar turns to June, time is running out for the two sides to hammer out an agreement on what a 2020 season will look like.