just what we need, fewer inings

[ruben]

Following a 92-loss season, the Mets will reimagine the way they use
their pitching staff, says Marc Carig of newsday.com. The so-called
“philosophical shift” may in part be driven by the Mets’ recent hire of
former Indians pitching coach Mickey Callaway as their new manager.
According to one of Carig’s sources, Mets starters not named Noah
Syndergaard or Jacob deGrom may be shielded from facing lineups more than
twice through the order, following a continuing trend throughout the
league. In order to compensate for potentially fewer innnings from their
starters, the Amazins plan to employ an eight man bullpen. The dramatic
change in plans comes after the team posted a 5.01 combined ERA (the
second-worst mark in the National League in 2017) despite watching deGrom
finish as one of the best pitchers in all of baseball. Carig lays out the
opponent OPS for each Mets pitcher per times through the batting order as
well.

[Bill]

On 11/11/2017 1:54 PM, ruben wrote:
> Following a 92-loss season, the Mets will reimagine the way they use
> their pitching staff, says Marc Carig of newsday.com. The so-called
> “philosophical shift” may in part be driven by the Mets’ recent hire of
> former Indians pitching coach Mickey Callaway as their new manager.

It's good to know that you know more about pitching than a guy who was
one of the top pitching coaches in the majors. Maybe you're in the wrong
profession.

[ruben safir]

On 11/12/2017 01:58 AM, Bill wrote:
> It's good to know that you know more about pitching than a guy who was
> one of the top pitching coaches in the majors.

What a bullshit response. For years I had to tell Doctors that they
were over prescribing opiates and that there methodology and claims that
pain patients don't become addicted to opiates was factually not true
and they said the same thing, "What you know more that a Doctor"


Fuck you Bill. If the pitching coach is saying that pitchers can't make
it past the second inning and that we lost so many games because we over
depend on starters going long, then he is an IDIOT PERIOD who is not
looking at the facts. The fact is that the ballpen gave away far too
many runs and games last season and the biggest contribution to their 92
loses was over dependence on a ballpen because the starters are not
trained to go more than 6 innings. The reason for the Astro's success
in the playoffs was Justin Verlanders ability to go deep, Just like
Madison Bumgarten before him, and Johnny Cueto for KC, and John Lester
and so on.

Starting Pitchers who go deep into games gives your great flexibility
with your ballpen and dominate games. Starters that go less than 6
innings and blow out of games are flawed and lose ballgames.

[ruben safir]

On 11/12/2017 05:38 AM, ruben safir wrote:
> What a bullshit response.


Sorry Bill, I didn't mean to be so rude. I guess I was in a bad mood
this morning.

[Beach Runner]

I think the modern statistical research shows that batters hit a pitcher much
better the third time in the lineup. This isn't bad statistics, this is based on a huge sample size, many cases, many pitchers. The outliers are the few that are effective a third time through the lineup.

I do not see a statistical or any argument not based on tradition on not updating pitcher use based on data.

I don't want to be confrontative. I love watching a pitching gem. It's hard to argue with data.

Here's some reports. http://amarillo.com/sports/pro-sports/2016-04-08/statistics-show-3rd-time-through-order-can-be-tough-pitchers

or a better study...

https://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/third-time-through-the-order-can-be-tough-to-navigate-040816


The data is hard to argue with. I'm sure when you argued with doctors you had good, solid, evidence and helped a lot of people.

[tmp]

On Saturday, November 11, 2017 at 1:54:50 PM UTC-5, ruben wrote:


> league. In order to compensate for potentially fewer innnings from their
> starters, the Amazins plan to employ an eight man bullpen. The dramatic
> change in plans comes after the team posted a 5.01 combined ERA

It's not really such a dramatic change. Last year, they had an 8 man bullpen at times, and never less than 7. Basically, they will be doing what they did last year when they were forced to do it, except that in 2018 they will be calling it their "plan". But what choice do you have anyway if 3 of your 5 starters suck.

Hopefully they can acquire at least one decent starter who can get past the 5th inning once in a while, to add to deGrom and Synderguaard. Then, if they can get some something from Matz and/or one of their other holdover starters, things won't be so bad.

[ruben safir]

Guarantee the ERA for the pen was worst than the starters

[ruben safir]

guarantee the ERA for the Pen was worst than the starters and their best
pitcher in the pen is now gone.

Of they have 15 pitchers they can use 3 per game in 3 inning stints for
a 5 game rotation.

Or do a 4 game rotation

[tmp]

in 2017, the Mets starters ERA was actually worse than their relievers ERA in 2017; 5.14 starters, 4.82 relievers.

But the bullpen ERA being better than the starters ERA was not unique to the Mets. If you look at MLB as a whole, the relief pitching ERA beat the overall starters ERA by 4.15 to 4.49.

The Mets staff sucked all the way around, starters and bullpen. No surprise there, especially when you consider that they played in a pitcher's ballpark.

So what they need is pitchers who pitch better (what a concept!), not a "revolutionary" pitching plan, especially one that is basically the same as what they were forced to do in 2017 because their pitching sucked.

[ruben safir]

On 11/18/2017 09:32 AM, tmp wrote:
> But the bullpen ERA being better than the starters ERA was not unique to the Mets. If you look at MLB as a whole, the relief pitching ERA beat the overall starters ERA by 4.15 to 4.49.

I don't believe it. That is bullshit. The reason for those skewed
number, if they are right, was that the ballpen was accelerant and
allowed for nearly every runner they inherited to score.


I'm really not in the mood to go dig out that mid season post I wrote on
this, one can use google to find it, but that ballpen this year couldn't
stop runners from scoring even against Philedephia and Cincinatti.
Everything fucking scored. Chasen Bradford, and Smoker and Robles were
all batting tees

[ruben safir]

On 11/18/2017 09:32 AM, tmp wrote:

> But the bullpen ERA being better than the starters ERA was not unique to the Mets. If you look at MLB as a whole, the relief pitching ERA beat the overall starters ERA by 4.15 to 4.49.

http://hosted.stats.com/mlb/getleaders.asp?rank=315

12 Brad Hand SD 22.9 ( 8/35 )
13 Fernando Salas NYM 24.2 ( 8/33 )
14t Josh Edgin NYM 25.0 ( 10/40 )
14t Mike Dunn Col 25.0 ( 9/36 )
14t Carl Edwards Jr. ChC 25.0 ( 9/36 )
17 Craig Stammen SD 25.5 ( 14/55 )
18 Jerry Blevins NYM 28.0 ( 14/50 )
19 Ian Krol Atl 28.1 ( 9/32 )
20 Josh Smoker NYM 28.9 ( 11/38 )

Houston at LA Dodgers, 8:20 PM ET

@STATS_Insights
Tweets by STATS_Insights

[tmp]

The 2017 ERA numbers are correct, taken directly from the ESPN stats page here, using the "As Starter" and "As Reliever" splits.
http://www.espn.com/mlb/stats/team/_/stat/pitching/year/2017/seasontype/2/league/nl

The bullpen was bad, but the starters as a group were worse if you go by ERA. I understand about inherited runners, so if you're saying the Mets bullpen was especially bad about allowing inherited runners to score, I'll take your word - I didn't check that.

The whole staff was so damn bad, they're not worth spending any more time digging up the stats for them....

[Beach Runner]

Rueben makes a great point, without looking at inheritated runners, their era is almost meaningless, it's basically what did they do when their ass was on the line?

Thus, a stat that includes those runners would be a valid comparison.

As I've said, the idea of pitchers only going through the line up 2x works great, only if the bull pen is actually lights out.

[ruben safir]

On 11/20/2017 07:16 AM, Beach Runner wrote:
> As I've said, the idea of pitchers only going through the line up 2x works great, only if the bull pen is actually lights out.

Not necessarily. First, you can't have that many pitchers on the
roster. Secondly, a game and training philosophy where the pitcher is
told to throw everything out there for only 6 innings or less and then
expect to come out of the game encourages arm injuries, and that is just
what we are getting. These guys need to learn to PITCH and to extend
there endurance to more pitches or they are just going to continue to go
down like flies. How long are they going to continue to train these
guys like they are robots, and not just the pitchers evidently, but also
the hitters.

I think this is a side effect of the steroids error. Maybe it is
possible that humans can't throw 100+ MPH constantly without their arms
falling off and that they need to learn to pitch more like Colon did,
with their brain and not just their arms.

[tmp]

On Monday, November 20, 2017 at 7:17:00 AM UTC-5, Beach Runner wrote:
> On Saturday, November 18, 2017 at 10:42:49 AM UTC-8, tmp wrote:
> > On Saturday, November 18, 2017 at 11:27:44 AM UTC-5, ruben safir wrote:
> > > On 11/18/2017 09:32 AM, tmp wrote:
> > > > But the bullpen ERA being better than the starters ERA was not unique to the Mets. If you look at MLB as a whole, the relief pitching ERA beat the overall starters ERA by 4.15 to 4.49.

> Rueben makes a great point, without looking at inheritated runners, their era is almost meaningless, it's basically what did they do when their ass was on the line?

The Mets bullpen ERA was 4.82 vs the MLB average of 4.15. That is ALREADY enough to tell you they were bad without even looking at inherited runners which, as it turns out, tells you they were even worse than the ERA indicated.

>
> Thus, a stat that includes those runners would be a valid comparison.
>

Of course, the more information the better.

> As I've said, the idea of pitchers only going through the line up 2x works great, only if the bull pen is actually lights out.

Of course. My point has been that the Mets basically did the "2x through the lineup" thing in 2017, NOT because they thought it was a good idea, but because most of their starters were so bad that they usually couldn't go further anyway. Unfortunately it didn't work because the bullpen was also terrible.

[Beach Runner]

On Tuesday, November 21, 2017 at 8:13:07 AM UTC-8, tmp wrote:
> On Monday, November 20, 2017 at 7:17:00 AM UTC-5, Beach Runner wrote:
> > On Saturday, November 18, 2017 at 10:42:49 AM UTC-8, tmp wrote:
> > > On Saturday, November 18, 2017 at 11:27:44 AM UTC-5, ruben safir wrote:
> > > > On 11/18/2017 09:32 AM, tmp wrote:
> > > > > But the bullpen ERA being better than the starters ERA was not unique to the Mets. If you look at MLB as a whole, the relief pitching ERA beat the overall starters ERA by 4.15 to 4.49.
>
> > Rueben makes a great point, without looking at inheritated runners, their era is almost meaningless, it's basically what did they do when their ass was on the line?
>
>
> The Mets bullpen ERA was 4.82 vs the MLB average of 4.15. That is ALREADY enough to tell you they were bad without even looking at inherited runners which, as it turns out, tells you they were even worse than the ERA indicated.
>
>
> >
> > Thus, a stat that includes those runners would be a valid comparison.
> >
>
> Of course, the more information the better.
>
>

> > As I've said, the idea of pitchers only going through the line up 2x works great, only if the bullpen is actually lights out.
>
>
> Of course. My point has been that the Mets basically did the "2x through the lineup" thing in 2017, NOT because they thought it was a good idea, but because most of their starters were so bad that they usually couldn't go further anyway. Unfortunately, it didn't work because the bullpen was also terrible.

You are right, but I think we need to look beyond that and see it's a result of virtually everyone getting injured. I am so happy they will replace their entire training staff, adding expertise that will add things like Yoga as they have so many soft tissue injuries. Even Lugo was injured, so they lost their depth. Not sure about Gsellman, but he has potential.

The Mets staff has the talent to be awesome, but they need to stay healthy.

Last year was a joke. EVERYONE not named D'Groom was injured. Imagine a healthy starting staff, Cespedes, Conforto, healthy catchers, When healthy their catchers were fine. Larges with a thumb that lets him hit and throw, and add a few free agents, we'll be headed to the postseason.

[Beach Runner]

Well, it looks like this will not happen as Callaway is not on board with the 2 x through the lineup. It a pitcher still has plenty in the tank, is still effective, leave him in.

You can not argue with that.

How about they take out pitchers when they run out of gas, or become less effective, or need a specialist for a single batter?
Radical idea I know.

[ruben safir]

On 11/21/2017 11:13 AM, tmp wrote:
> Of course. My point has been that the Mets basically did the "2x through the lineup" thing in 2017, NOT because they thought it was a good idea, but because most of their starters were so bad that they usually couldn't go further anyway. Unfortunately it didn't work because the bullpen was also terrible.

That I agree with 100% and we are making the same point. I see no
advantage of using this method to win games. It is the fall back
position of a broken pitching staff to begin with.

[ruben safir]

On 11/22/2017 11:46 AM, Beach Runner wrote:
> The Mets staff has the talent to be awesome, but they need to stay healthy.
>
> Last year was a joke. EVERYONE not named D'Groom was injured. Imagine a healthy starting staff, Cespedes, Conforto, healthy catchers, When healthy their catchers were fine. Larges with a thumb that lets him hit and throw, and add a few free agents, we'll be headed to the postseason.

I don't know about that. Even with everyone healthy, this team is not
on the level as Houston. They play baseball in a higher division of play.

The last team I saw like that was the 1975 Reds. They field everything.
They turn routine hits into routine outs. They hit everything and
anyone. The Mets, even when completely healthly, don't stack up and the
current roster can never do so.

If they add Votto, Stanton and Arenado, now you are talking.

[ruben safir]

On 11/22/2017 01:24 PM, Beach Runner wrote:
> How about they take out pitchers when they run out of gas, or become less effective, or need a specialist for a single batter?
> Radical idea I know.

:)

[Beach Runner]

Blevins take on it. Will having a smart pitcher running the club help?


https://www.sny.tv/mets/news/blevins-believes-in-mets-excited-to-get-to-work-with-callaway/262337642

[tmp]

On Wednesday, November 22, 2017 at 1:54:24 PM UTC-5, ruben safir wrote:
> On 11/22/2017 11:46 AM, Beach Runner wrote:
> > The Mets staff has the talent to be awesome, but they need to stay healthy.
> >
> > Last year was a joke. EVERYONE not named D'Groom was injured. Imagine a healthy starting staff, Cespedes, Conforto, healthy catchers, When healthy their catchers were fine. Larges with a thumb that lets him hit and throw, and add a few free agents, we'll be headed to the postseason.
>
>
> I don't know about that. Even with everyone healthy, this team is not
> on the level as Houston. They play baseball in a higher division of play.

Right, not even close, and nothing promising in the pipeline to speak of. Last season really exposed what they are.

>
> The last team I saw like that was the 1975 Reds. They field everything.
> They turn routine hits into routine outs. They hit everything and
> anyone. The Mets, even when completely healthly, don't stack up and the
> current roster can never do so.
>
> If they add Votto, Stanton and Arenado, now you are talking.

Except that none of those are going to happen. I'd rather see them build around young position players anyway, although right now I have little hope that they will do that.

[ruben safir]

On 11/25/2017 09:14 AM, tmp wrote:
>> If they add Votto, Stanton and Arenado, now you are talking.
> Except that none of those are going to happen. I'd rather see them build around young position players anyway, although right now I have little hope that they will do that.
>

And yet 2 of them are available for nothing more than money, pretty much.

@ players I ever wanted the Mets to target, Cabera and Guererro.

Now there are these two player I would strip the team for
Votto and Stanton, especially Votto. Votto on the Mets immediately
becomes the biggest personality in Sports.

A line up with Conforto, Votto, Cepspedes, and Stanton has a shot