Master Index of Archived Threads


Noffense Revisited

Edgy DC Sep 24 2009 08:35 AM

One of the forumites joked on Facebook that the Mets don't hit singles. He was joking, but being a jerk I answered him seriously, while checking my facts, posting something like: Actually, the Mets are second in the league only to the Dodgers in singles, and it's a very close two-team race. In fact, the Mets are second in batting average and do relatively well in clutch situations. They're sixth in doubles and first in trips. They're first in steals and --- don't you know --- third in sacrifice hits. They perform well in everything except the Billy Beane numbers --- homers and walks, and so they don't score. Even last night, they were held to two runs, but they garnered 11 hits. Notice how they tend to score a disappointint two to four runs a night, but don't get shut out that often --- 11 times certainly not being good, but also not as high as you might expect for a team struggling to score. (Maybe it is, I don't really know.) Now, I guess there's some bad news and good news you can take from that. One chunk of bad news is how huge Adam Dunn (38 homers and 110 walks) might have been for this team. That's water under the bridge, but it's also an opportunity the team shouldn't want to miss if it becomes available again. The good news is that a lot of the power and some of the OBP they need has been on the DL. But that's cautious good news, as it's unclear how much of that can be expected to be restored. It's unrealistic to expect all of it to be. But it's also not crazy to hope that Francouer, Murphy, Evans, and F-Bomb come along a little bit. I guess the point is that not all of the pieces have been missing, but the ones that have been have been big ones. And also that if a surviving Manuel continues to give away outs with the bunt next year at this rate, I may go crazy, and being so far removed from New York, nobody here is going to know why I did what I did. Tell them. Tell them why I did what I did.

metirish Sep 24 2009 12:48 PM Re: Noffense Revisited

Dunn would have been huge......probably would have done a hammy or something though. I wish I could see into the future and see what the makeup of the team and coaching staff will be next season.(all I would need is 2 minutes and 17 seconds) Wright and Francoeur are heading to Hojo's house in FLA for some hitting instruction during the off-season , a bit presumptuous by HoJo ? I can't imagine the coaching staff will return intact , it's just the way things go usually.

Frayed Knot Sep 24 2009 12:59 PM Re: Noffense Revisited

They perform well in everything except the Billy Beane numbers --- homers and walks, and so they don't score. They're below average in walks (497 vs a lg avg of 523) but absolute bottom of the NL barrel in power; a .122 Isolated Power in a league where average is .151 and no one else is even below .132. Basically that means that, although their BA may be high, they have the smallest pct of their hits going for extra-bases as compared to every other team ... and it's not even close.

Edgy DC Sep 24 2009 01:23 PM Re: Noffense Revisited

And, when you're sixth in doubles and first in triples, that absent power is pretty much all the over-the-wall kind.

Ceetar Sep 24 2009 03:36 PM Re: Noffense Revisited

Not only the giving up outs, routinely, with bunts in way too many situations (Never mind the confidence you show in a player asking them to bunt regularly or swapping them for a pinch hitter for platoons. Tell a guy he can't get it done, and he won't.) the IBBs kill me too. The one that stands out is from way back when the Mets were healthy, against the Marlins, with Johan Santana. (may have been the josh johnson/Murphy game) Manuel had him intentionally walk Alfredo Amezega twice to face the pitcher. This is Johan Santana, against a player who hadn't faced him before. It's that underlying attitude from coaching that gets me the most. Here's Manuel/Warthen showing no confidence in one of the best in the game to get a singular hitter out. Johan Santana should intentionally walk no one, with the possible exception of a runner on third with 1 out with the score tied or up by one..late in the game. On the offensiveside they seem to go up there with a bad game plan, or no game plan. How often do we see guys swing first pitch (and I'm not talking All-Stars like Beltran that you generally let swing if they feel they're going to get a good pitch) when they should be taking? Bunting when a pitcher is struggling to get outs, and then suddenly on 2-strikes you have him trying to get a hit? way to set him up to fail. On the fielding side, they've been sloppy and disorganized. Even player that normally aren't. Murphy to me has looked like a good first baseman, but he looks flustered. he looks like he works too hard. he looks like he takes everything personally and stresses constantly. Most of the onus is on him, but a manager should have their players in the right mindset the play the game. How many walked-off errors do we have now? If I had to pick one word to describe the 2009 Mets, besides injured, it would have to be 'unprepared'. (Remember the game Manuel pinch hit for Castro with Omir Santos, who was apparently neither ready nor in the dugout at the time? How about how they hemmed and hawed about what to do with 1B when Delgado was hurting and they had Murphy learning 1B while also trying to learn LF and just sorta threw Tatis, or Reed, or whoever there? How about how they had no contingency plan for what to do with Murphy should Delgado actually make it back on time?) I like Murphy and would support him coming back to play 1B given the right acquisition in LF (and catchers), but given walks is one of our offensive issues, can we afford Murphy and Francoeur on the team right now?

Edgy DC Sep 24 2009 09:33 PM Re: Noffense Revisited

I'mnot sure who in particular you don't like swinging at first strikes, but I kind of agree. But it also sounds like the msot unprepared guy you're pointing at is Jerry himself. Maybe I'm trying to hear that.

Rockin' Doc Sep 24 2009 09:59 PM Re: Noffense Revisited

[quote="Edgy DC":255xrvtg]I'mnot sure who in particular you don't like swinging at first strikes, but I kind of agree. But it also sounds like the msot unprepared guy you're pointing at is Jerry himself.[/quote:255xrvtg] I agree with that observation. Granted, injuries left him with a team that bore little resemblance with the one that was expected to don the blue and orange for Citi Field's inaugural season. Manuel drives me absolutely crazy with his passive managing style. His penchant for the sacrifice bunt is maddening. Manuel seems a slave to "the book" such that he micromanages virtually every match up to get the lefty/righty hitter or pitcher into the game. I'm tired of seeing three pitchers used in an inning to (hopefully) get three outs.

metirish Sep 25 2009 07:36 AM Re: Noffense Revisited

It's that underlying attitude from coaching that gets me the most. Here's Manuel/Warthen showing no confidence in one of the best in the game to get a singular hitter out. Johan Santana should intentionally walk no one, with the possible exception of a runner on third with 1 out with the score tied or up by one..late in the game. good one , it's one of the things that drives me nuts abotu the game in general. I want to see that great pitcher go after that great hitter and not be told to walk him intentionally. I remember when Bonds was in his pomp the Mets always it seemed pitched to him , loved that.

Edgy DC Sep 25 2009 07:46 AM Re: Noffense Revisited

'Cept when Willie walked him in the first inning, with two outs and a runner on first --- with a friggin' lefty on the mound and a righthanded batter on deck. http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes ... 4240.shtml Three-run homer by Alou. The thing about Ceetar is that he's not mentioning great hitters but Alfredo Almezega. I'd like to see some research about walking a number-eight hitter with two out and a runner on second. Is the advantage you get by pitching to the pitcher instead, worth the boost that the other team gets by clearing the pitcher, and opening the next inning 1-2-3 instead of 9-1-2?

metirish Sep 25 2009 07:52 AM Re: Noffense Revisited

I was thinking pre Willie but point taken and point taken on walking bottom of the order hitters....

John Cougar Lunchbucket Sep 25 2009 08:32 AM Re: Noffense Revisited

Not to defend Jerry, whose game style I hate as much as anyone (maybe more), but I would suspect that if you asked him why he did all this stupid stuff and he was being completely honest with you, he'd confess that it was ultimately in the service of creating an atmosphere of teamwork and sacrifice that after a time would be stitched into the fabric of the club and reveal itself in moments of heroism and glory down the road. All the injuries and subsequent setbacks of course played complete havoc with the idea of there ever being a "team" to sacrifice for. Everyone was a temporary fill-in, on the verge of being replaced as soon as the better option returned. So one of the things I am going to take away was how this squad did not ever feel like a team. Had Jerry understood that 4 of his top 5 hitters would miss huge chunks of the season, he might not have called on Santos to pinch hit for Castro.

smg58 Sep 25 2009 08:57 AM Re: Noffense Revisited

There's really no evidence that the park had a negative influence on the home run totals of the Mets, or their opponents. If anything, the Mets will wind up hitting and allowing a few more home runs home than away. (The current totals: 47 for and 81 against in 78 games at home, 41 for and 71 against in 75 games on the road.) Part of the ugly power shortage has to do with injuries, for sure, but you could argue that home runs were downplayed by the GM and the coaching staff. Jeremy Reed and Cory Sullivan were recruited as reserve/store in AAA outfielders presumably for their gloves, even though the Mets already had better secondary options for centerfield in Ryan Church and Angel Pagan, and Reed and Sullivan average a homer per a hundred AB's between them. Cora, likewise, was known not to be any sort of home run threat. If not for the late pickup of Sheffield, the Mets would have had zero power off the bench, and it certainly appears to have been by design. Church, Murphy, and Tatis cut down significantly on their strikeout rates, and became worse hitters for it. Were they acting on their own? And if David Wright deliberately tried to hit fewer home runs, anybody on the coaching staff who encouraged it (or knew about it and failed to discourage it) does not deserve to be brought back. As for Santos vs. Castro -- the bases were loaded, and Santos can't draw a walk.

Edgy DC Sep 25 2009 09:11 AM Re: Noffense Revisited

I could argue that home runs were downplayed by the GM and the coaching staff, but I'm not going to. Sheff was one more slugger off the bench than the Mets have had in recent years. And bench sluggers have increasingly become a luxury in an enviroment where a surfeit of relievers means a team seeks more versatility than specialization from it's reserve hitters. The Mets power went down precipitously mostly because their power hitters went down precipitiously. If you caught any words of trying to win without the long ball, it's because (a) setting low expectations, and (b) underscoring your willingness to do little less-glamourous things are what people do. In such a situation, it's all they could do. The Church-Francoeur trade sure suggested they were continuing to look for power. Having corralled Beltran, taken two attempts to get Delgado, blown two seasons on Alou, and swallowed pride and perhaps sense to add Sheffield and Francoeur, I get the idea Minaya thinks power is a valuable thing, in any ballpark.

Frayed Knot Sep 25 2009 09:40 AM Re: Noffense Revisited

A bench (as planned) with Sheffield, Castro & Tatis on it contradicts the intentionally shunning power theory. Virtually no one gets power from their defensive replacement/5th OFer or backup middle infielders. The Reed - Pagan - Sullivan triumvirate were supposed to be competing with each other for one spot, not all the roster at the same time much less frequently in the starting lineup at the same time.

attgig Sep 25 2009 10:33 AM Re: Noffense Revisited

castro vs santos.... 2 me, castro was in the doghouse, and jerry wasn't going to use him in any important situation. imo, it was him trying to get omar to trade ramon.... which eventually did happen. I agree with the preparedness. is that something that you blame hojo for? get him to coach that into players? he's done a fine job of getting the mets noffense into somefense with nopower... and as for the lack of power, a few thoughts: When daniel murphy is leading your team in hr's, there's something wrong. If sheffield was acquired for his power, he should've been played more often (he was the team's leader with 10 for a long time). The fact that wright just can't hit a hr anymore was definitely unexpected. If beltran stayed healthy, he may have been good for 25? probably would've helped the team win at least a handful of games. Delgado, it seems like we were praying for a repeat of the 2nd half of the season... merely hoping for the best. going into the season, I think the team was hoping for ~100 hr's from the trio of Wright, Beltran, and Delgado. and then 10-15 each from reyes, church, catchers, and lf'er. Going into the season, i don't think anyone would've said that was completely unrealistic, but are we really going to say it was the perfect storm? or is there something wrong here with the team/coaches?

Edgy DC Sep 25 2009 10:37 AM Re: Noffense Revisited

The alternative is to think that the these guys were coached into their injuries. If you're in favor of firing Howard Johnson because Wright's power lagged and too many of the reserves who ended up filling out the lineup were first-pitch swingers, that's fine, but I can't see firing him because of the rest of the power outage.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Sep 25 2009 10:43 AM Re: Noffense Revisited

The power void fwiw was somewhat foreseeable, with question marks around the potential of Church & Murphy, and zero expectations from 2B and the catchers. The bench actually I'd say was better prepared than previous years to step in, they just were handed a much bigger job than they were up to. Even with "normal" seasons from Delgado and Wright, etc, I think the Mets were at best a middle of the pack kinda power club.

metirish Sep 25 2009 10:44 AM Re: Noffense Revisited

I would fire Johnson because of the way he tinkered with Wright , CF might have something to do with things but I think whatever Hojo did really messed things up. Yet David is going to Johnson's house for more of-season work on his game. Then again I would fire the whole coaching staff.

Ashie62 Sep 25 2009 12:02 PM Re: Noffense Revisited

Manuel says today the Mets need to play crisp baseball ABOUT 3 MONTHS TOO LATE JERRY! Fired..please

Edgy DC Sep 25 2009 12:18 PM Re: Noffense Revisited

[quote="metirish":2m2z2ngu]I would fire Johnson because of the way he tinkered with Wright....[/quote:2m2z2ngu] Do you really think Johnson did all that much tinkering?

metirish Sep 25 2009 12:26 PM Re: Noffense Revisited

[quote="Edgy DC":1lhcbfut][quote="metirish":1lhcbfut]I would fire Johnson because of the way he tinkered with Wright....[/quote:1lhcbfut] Do you really think Johnson did all that much tinkering?[/quote:1lhcbfut] I'm sure I could find quotes but as I remember it Hojo specifically tinkered with Wright's hitting going into CF....wanted to emphasize hitting to the opposite field and not worry about home runs as such. Wright had a good season last year so why mess with that?

Edgy DC Sep 25 2009 01:17 PM Re: Noffense Revisited

I don't know that that works, as (1) the opposite field has always been his better power field, and (2) I think he pulled more than ever this season.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Sep 25 2009 01:30 PM Re: Noffense Revisited

I'd fire HoJo because we employ too many 86ers as it is. I want a 76er. David, Meet Coach Boisclair.

Ashie62 Sep 25 2009 02:56 PM Re: Noffense Revisited

[quote="Edgy DC":2hovigmb][quote="metirish":2hovigmb]I would fire Johnson because of the way he tinkered with Wright....[/quote:2hovigmb] Do you really think Johnson did all that much tinkering?[/quote:2hovigmb] unlikely

smg58 Sep 25 2009 03:01 PM Re: Noffense Revisited

[quote="John Cougar Lunchbucket":1gik7gw3]I'd fire HoJo because we employ too many 86ers as it is. I want a 76er. David, Meet Coach Boisclair.[/quote:1gik7gw3] Doug Flynn for hitting coach! (Oh wait, he didn't come along until 77. Leo Foster, maybe?)

Rockin' Doc Sep 25 2009 03:34 PM Re: Noffense Revisited

smg 58 - "Doug Flynn for hitting coach!" That would truly be the blind leading the blind.