Master Index of Archived Threads


Met Starting Pitching

Edgy DC Apr 26 2010 07:17 AM

The season is long and hard and patterns are difficult to sustain, but Met starting pitchers are now fourth in the National League and eighth in MLB in ERA.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 26 2010 09:27 AM Re: Met Starting Pitching Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 26 2010 09:43 AM

The team's letting on a LOT of baserunners, though, mostly with a walk rate that's frightening (4.86/9 innings, first in the majors) for a team that spent the spring "throwing strikes." How's the ERA so low, then? A strand rate nonpareil in the NL-- they're leaving runners dangling at a rate (80 percent) that laughs at the league average. Also, no HRs-- the Mets have gotten exceedingly lucky with flyballs staying in the park (0.56 HR/9, 2nd in the NL/majors behind St. Looie). Which is good, because they're not exactly Webbslinging-- led by Santana, Ollie, and Maine, they're still giving up a crap-ton of flyballs. Being second in team Ks (first in the NL, just ahead of the Cubs and Doyers) helps, but still... there's a reason why tightrope walkers don't generally walk for months up there. This is nice, but... well... it gets windy as the year wears on.

Edgy DC Apr 26 2010 09:34 AM Re: Met Starting Pitching

I have a feeeling that history will rate the 2010 CitiField Park Factor as startlingly low.

MFS62 Apr 26 2010 09:42 AM Re: Met Starting Pitching

I'd like to see the IP/ start improve. Later

Ceetar Apr 26 2010 09:44 AM Re: Met Starting Pitching

It's kinda amusing in a way that the stats show that the Mets pitchers may be as clutch as the hitters are not. Perez and Santana are two guys that have historically high strand rates. This is also a testiment to the defense. Colder Aprils, Coors Field, all play into those numbers too. Pelfrey is still refining his new pitches and how to throw them. Maine is either going to develop more velocity(or less on his breaking stuff) and control or be replaced by (theoretically) someone with better numbers. Niese is only likely to get better since he's a rookie. So I hope this says those walk numbers will go down, but the other excellent Ks and ERA will stay awesome. Pelfrey has a chance at Pitcher of the Month. especially if Halladay and the Colorado guy..(Jimenez?) get hit their next times out. Pelfrey probably is done for April. (normal rest is the 30th, but his spot is Saturday the 1st.)

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 26 2010 09:55 AM Re: Met Starting Pitching

Ceetar wrote: It's kinda amusing in a way that the stats show that the Mets pitchers may be as clutch as the hitters are not. I don't mean to crap on your dessert but... well... that's a really optimistic take on things. Perez and Santana have historically high(ish) strand rates because they've got good K/9 numbers. The issue is whether the rest of the guys on the Met staff-- Tak2, Niese, Pelf, etc.-- can keep up. I'm hopeful, but... well, I don't know. (Suffice it to say that that's a double-Jenny-Lopez-sized "but.")

Ceetar Apr 26 2010 10:08 AM Re: Met Starting Pitching

Well, I was just speaking of 'clutch' as it applies to the sample size we're discussing. I doubt the Mets keep it up and I doubt the hitters are as bad as they've been. I'm hopeful they can knock off the walks a little bit as the season rounds out. I'll certainly take the BBs if they're going to keep the Ks coming rather than having both go down.

MFS62 Apr 26 2010 10:11 AM Re: Met Starting Pitching

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: (Suffice it to say that that's a double-Jenny-Lopez-sized "but.") Some guys are always thinking with their Anaconda. Later

MFS62 May 03 2010 09:59 AM Re: Met Starting Pitching

Here's an update on the last class of free agent starters: John Lackey: 2-1, 4.50 ERA, 1.57 WHIP, 30IP (Lackey had one really bad start and has been walking more than usual) Joel Pineiro: 2-3, 5.76 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, 29.2IP (Pineiro was ripped in his last start, giving up 9ER in 3.1IP) Jason Marquis: 0-3, 20.52 ERA, 2.88 WHIP, 8.1IP (Marquis on on the DL for 4-6 weeks with a sore elbow) John Garland: 2-2, 2.57 ERA, 1.43 WHIP, 28IP Ben Sheets: 1-3, 7.12 ERA, 1.91 WHIP, 30.1IP Jarrod Washburn, Pedro (still free agents) Erik Bedard: Expected back in June Lackey I wanted. I thought the Mets should have gone after Pineiro when his price dropped. But so far it looks like Omar made the right non-moves. Later

Ceetar May 03 2010 10:04 AM Re: Met Starting Pitching

Garland would've been my choice, but it seemed he didn't want to come east anyway.

smg58 May 03 2010 10:30 AM Re: Met Starting Pitching

I still can't believe people were actually mad about Omar not outbidding the A's for Sheets.

Frayed Knot May 03 2010 11:11 AM Re: Met Starting Pitching

MFS62 wrote: John Lackey: 2-1, 4.50 ERA, 1.57 WHIP, 30IP (Lackey had one really bad start and has been walking more than usual) Joel Pineiro: 2-3, 5.76 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, 29.2IP (Pineiro was ripped in his last start, giving up 9ER in 3.1IP) Jason Marquis: 0-3, 20.52 ERA, 2.88 WHIP, 8.1IP (Marquis on on the DL for 4-6 weeks with a sore elbow) John Garland: 2-2, 2.57 ERA, 1.43 WHIP, 28IP Ben Sheets: 1-3, 7.12 ERA, 1.91 WHIP, 30.1IP Jarrod Washburn, Pedro (still free agents) Erik Bedard: Expected back in June And the guy who really bears comparison to all them is Jon Niese: 1-1; 3.10; 1.586; 29.0 IP Omar's winter talking-points was heavy on the angle that once Lackey was gone there was no one else out there who they thought any better than what could be filled from inside. Of course we never heard much about a NYM attempt for Lackey prior to his Boston signing and maybe it's stuff like that which has the player's association wondering about collusion, that maybe some shared inside info led everyone to know that Boston was going to go highest and so no one else ever bid so as to not make the inevitable more expensive than it was already going to be. But, who knows. On the Sheets front, there were definitely bunches of Met fans with visions of stealing him with a low-ball offer for this year plus some kind of 'make-good' deal for a second year. Turns out that the Sheets camp wasn't too keen on that (funny how that works) and once the Oakland offer for a straight $10mil came through many of the pro-Sheets folks abandoned the idea that he was such a good idea.

metsguyinmichigan May 03 2010 01:48 PM Re: Met Starting Pitching

So the Mets' "failure to sign" any of these guys will no longer be mentioned by any of the all-knowing media horde, who remember every one of Omar's bad decisions but seem to forget every prognostication that doesn't go their way, or worse, is "revised" hoping that no one is capable of Googling their previous efforts.

Edgy DC May 03 2010 02:13 PM Re: Met Starting Pitching

Well, the numbers certainly aren't all in yet. The critics all get to shoot with a wide spray, so if they advocate, that the Mets sign this guy... no, that guy... OK, he's gone, but this guy is definitely there for the asking. Now, if I'm tabloid columnist Bitchbait McReadme, and I advocated seven different mooks during the offseason, and two of those guys succeed, those will defintely be the two I hold over Minaya's head.