Forum Home

Master Index of Archived Threads


Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

metirish
Dec 08 2022 06:50 PM

Various beat writers have it at 8 years / $162 million

G-Fafif
Dec 08 2022 06:54 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Brandon from Wyoming embraces New York. Way to be, elder statesMet.

ashie62
Dec 08 2022 06:55 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Great to have Nimmo back



Lifelong Met

A Boy Named Seo
Dec 08 2022 07:04 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Damn, Hayseed got PAID! Good for him, good for us. I really like the team with Nimmo in CF and Marte in right. Comfortable with him in center for at least 4 of those 8 years. Raise a cold, glass of 2% vitamin D milk for our wholesome boy.

nymr83
Dec 08 2022 07:07 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

I'm glad he is back and glad it is not my money!

roger_that
Dec 08 2022 07:11 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

[TWEET]https://twitter.com/JeffPassan/status/1601030781706637312[/TWEET]

Great move!

Johnny Lunchbucket
Dec 08 2022 07:11 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

I am so happy. I was terribly worried thus team would be dull and not fun to watch without this palooka

The Hot Corner
Dec 08 2022 07:27 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Very pleased to see that Nimmo is back in the fold. He brings energy to the team. Would like a right handed DH (not named Ruf) and a few more quality arms for the pen.

Marshmallowmilkshake
Dec 08 2022 07:51 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

He's pointing to the heavens tonight! Great news!!

metsmarathon
Dec 08 2022 07:58 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

yay!



now go extend squirrel and polar bear!



um, and if you've still got cash to throw about, i wouldn't terribly mind senga. but i'm greedy and it ain't my money.

Edgy MD
Dec 08 2022 08:03 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

A Boy Named Seo wrote:

Damn, Hayseed got PAID! Good for him, good for us. I really like the team with Nimmo in CF and Marte in right.


Aye. We were looking at an outfield of Cahna, Marte, and McNeil, and that was feeling a bit jerry-rigged.

Lefty Specialist
Dec 08 2022 08:07 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Glad they kept Nimmo, but 8 years, sheesh.

Edgy MD
Dec 08 2022 08:09 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

On-basin' skills are the last thing to go, so they are.

Johnny Lunchbucket
Dec 08 2022 08:17 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

He would likely be a career Met if it plays out.

RealityChuck
Dec 08 2022 11:20 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

I felt there were three players that were essential to sign: Diaz, Nimmo, and DeGrom.



[YOUTUBE]k5hWWe-ts2s[/YOUTUBE]

roger_that
Dec 09 2022 01:17 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Lefty Specialist wrote:

Glad they kept Nimmo, but 8 years, sheesh.


He's the kind of guy who can lose .050 points off his OBA and still help you, lose range in the OF and some arm strength and still play a decent LF, lose some speed and run the bases ok. And I don't expect that process to start for a little while.



I read something interesting about these long-range-contracts today--that it's better to pay 200 million over 10 years, even though those last few years are $$$ flushed down the donnicker, than it is to pay 150 mil over five because the luxury tax will kill you. Not saying it's true but it makes some sense.

Fman99
Dec 09 2022 04:27 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

This is great news. He's really a player that didn't have an equivalent out there in the FA market so I'm glad he's staying put.

Frayed Knot
Dec 09 2022 05:01 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Lefty Specialist wrote:

Glad they kept Nimmo, but 8 years, sheesh.


At least it's not Eleven!

metsmarathon
Dec 09 2022 05:22 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

based on this signing, and robertson too, fangraphs' depth charts has the mets projected as the second best team in the mlb, with a projected WAR of 51.5, just ahead of the braves at 50.9. the padres sit atop the list with a projected WAR of 52.3. a replacement-level team sits around 45-wins, as near as i can tell.



the mets project currently to having the 7th best batters/fielders, and the best pitching staff.



not a bad place to be after the winter meetings.

Ceetar
Dec 09 2022 07:12 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

not gonna fret too much over like 2029. Nimmo's a good player and happy to have him around for a while. I'd like him to get his game more in-line with his pre-2022 metrics, feel like he adjusted a little too much last year and took fewer walks. He swung A LOT more, particularly out of the zone, which seems like a bad-ish habit to get into. Those are the kind of things that can hurt you in aging, swinging at hard to hit pitches and then suddenly you can't make the contact you wanted to. I think this might have been a team-philosophy thing last year, more contact. It hurt his numbers a bit. Maybe there's an argument to be made that team-wide adherence to this philosophy lifts team offense at expense of individual, but I'm not sure I buy that.



Seems like Mets will lead the league in HBP again though.



Brandon Nimmo is currently 34th in PA for the Mets, with 2368. Michael Conforto the "active" leader (also a guy I wouldn't mind bringing back, for the power) with 2980. David Wright has 6872. Nimmo would have to average 563 a year. Only 15 guys have gotten that many over the last 8 (and maybe 10 more prorated Covid year)



323 walks is 20th (9 behind Duda). Wright had 762. ~55 walks a season does that. His career BB% easily gets that done, his 2022, not so much.



Already leads in HBP.

smg58
Dec 09 2022 07:45 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

=Fman99 post_id=114382 time=1670585239 user_id=86]
This is great news. He's really a player that didn't have an equivalent out there in the FA market so I'm glad he's staying put.



That lack of an equivalent is the reason he got eight years instead of five or six. Players with legit offensive value who can hold their own in center are really hard to come by right now. Most of the league (or at least, the portion of the league that spends money this time of year) was in on him. And the Mets obviously already knew he was a good fit here and the plan B's, whatever they were, were a lot less palatable. Personally I'm a little squeamish at eight years, but I'd much rather have him than not have him.

metsmarathon
Dec 09 2022 08:45 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

fangraphs sez nimmo's 5.4 WAR 2022 was worth $43M. he projects next year at 4.6 WAR, which is a reasonable and safe projection. at that level of production, he'll could end up being quite a bargain, since OBP isn't valued in the market nearly as much as big whomping homers, or shortstopping.

Edgy MD
Dec 09 2022 12:38 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

That's an impressive WAR number considering he put his walk tool on the shelf the second half of the year.

roger_that
Dec 09 2022 12:43 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

If you're Buck, do you strategize with him on getting his walks total back to where it was? Or leave him be?



In other words, is Nimmo's decline in walks a problem or a one-year blip?

batmagadanleadoff
Dec 09 2022 01:02 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Nimmo himself would be the one to know whether he's changed his approach to pitch selection and recognition, and if so, whether that change will continue into 2023. Or .maybe his pitch recognition skills are suddenly in decline. Or if it's health related, and then, how permanent that is. Unless it's just randomness. Or maybe the pitches are in the strike zone more and more often. Me, I wouldnt have a clue, but thanks for asking. But me and Nimmo are going to the FIFA World Cup final next week so I'll be sure to ask him on your behalf when we're in Qatar. Great question, though. Keep 'em coming. You're on a roll. Unless anybody else here already knows this answer. Also, I'd like to know why Brandon didn't hit a homer on May 8, 2021.



And finally, problem and one year blip aren't mutually exclusive.But keep the questions coming. Do you think that Buck should also work on having Nimmo hit 50 or 60 HR's next season? 50 or 60 is so much better than mid-teens.

roger_that
Dec 09 2022 03:33 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

If anyone has an intelligent answer to my question, I'd be interested in hearing it.

MFS62
Dec 09 2022 03:39 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

=roger_that post_id=114432 time=1670614994 user_id=128]
If you're Buck, do you strategize with him on getting his walks total back to where it was? Or leave him be?



In other words, is Nimmo's decline in walks a problem or a one-year blip?


Ralph Kiner is famous for saying that home run hitters drive Cadillacs.

Nimmo was in the last year of a contract looking toward free agency and he might have amped up his power stroke in anticipation of a big payoff. Now that he got the big contract, he may go back to doing what he does best, get on base.

Or maybe not.

But I'd give him this year to be able to answer that question.



Later

batmagadanleadoff
Dec 09 2022 04:31 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal


If anyone has an intelligent answer to my question, I'd be interested in hearing it.


Ask a stupid, attention craving question ....



If you're Buck, do you strategize with him on getting his walks total back to where it was? Or leave him be?



In other words, is Nimmo's decline in walks a problem or a one-year blip?




I'm not sure why you use the phrase "In other words". Your two dumb questions aren't synonymous. Which means you've asked two distinct dumb questions. Also, I'd have to be Buck to answer your first question, but not necessarily Buck to answer your second one. And again, "problem" and "one year blip" aren't mutually exclusive because it could be a one-year problem. Which theoretically, could be synoynmous with one-year blip. I guess your query for the 19th centerfielder on the Mets depth chart didn't draw enough interest to satisfy you.



Are we trying too hard to impress?

Ceetar
Dec 09 2022 04:34 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal


If anyone has an intelligent answer to my question, I'd be interested in hearing it.


scroll up? I talked about it in my post. tl:dr Maybe it's an Eric Chavez philosophy thing. He's swinging at more pitches outside the zone and it's bad for his personal numbers. He should absolutely stop it. It's a problem, precisely for the reason's Eno describes in this tweet. But if it was a conscious choice to swing more, it's not a problem so much as an "easily" fixable approach thing. Especially going into a second year where advanced scouting is going to reflect him swinging at more pitches outside of the zone. He should readjust and set a career high BB%.


[TWEET]https://twitter.com/enosarris/status/1601031747558207489[/TWEET]

batmagadanleadoff
Dec 09 2022 04:43 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

=roger_that post_id=114436 time=1670625191 user_id=128]
If anyone has an intelligent answer to my question, I'd be interested in hearing it.



Isn't it implied in your original dumb question that you're looking for responses?



Anyways, me I'd trade Nimmo right now. I recently discovered in my thesis that I invented that baseball players peak and then they decline right after. Nobody else knows this And Nimmo's coming off his best season ever. So I could probably bring in a haul for Nimmo in a trade.

Frayed Knot
Dec 09 2022 04:50 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

If nothing else, this deal gives the Mets several years to find and groom and legit CF'er. Despite Nimmo morphing himself into a considerably better CF than I thought he'd

ever become based on his early career, I've long thought his best fit to be in left and that's likely where he's going to wind up by the time this contract hits its halfway point

so it would be real nice if they could manage to have one in the pipeline sometime before the present decade starts to run out.







P.S., there's no way Nimmo intentionally altered his approach strictly for purposes contract negotiations only to plan on altering it back right after. Being a success at hitting

is tough enough without trying to chase some old-timey baseball bromide from 3/4 of a century ago, especially one that hasn't even been true in decades.

vtmet7
Dec 09 2022 04:50 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal


If you're Buck, do you strategize with him on getting his walks total back to where it was? Or leave him be?



In other words, is Nimmo's decline in walks a problem or a one-year blip?


I think Nimmo's walk obsession has been a byproduct of Sandy Alderson's directives in the organization...and with Buck/Chavez/Eppler influence last year, Nimmo focused a little more on: "if it's a good pitch to hit, pounce on it"...Which, IMO, as long as he's not chasing bad pitches is a good thing...



I'm sure that most teams around the league know that Nimmo goes up there trying to draw a walk; and pitchers with good control are probably not going to walk him...



There were some interesting splits for Nimmo (some good and some not so good):



From July 29 until the end of the season, Nimmo hit: .298/.398/.455/.853;

From Opening Day until May 27, Nimmo hit: .293/.386/.452/.838;

In between (May 31 thru July 28), Nimmo hit: .237/.311/.390/.701 (appears that he was playing hurt since he missed May 28 thru May 30, and was a pinch runner on May 31);



Home: .234/.321/.366/.688;

Away: .309/.406/.492/.898;



First pitch (swinging or getting HBP): .358/.374/.605/.803;

Batter ahead in count: .272/.492/.473/.965;

Even count: .310/.323/.456/.779;

Pitcher ahead in count: .232/.263/.368/.631;



by the way, Nimmo had 29 hits (and 2 HBP) on the first pitch of a Plate Appearance...

of those 29 hits, he had 10 XBH: 4 Home Runs; 2 Triples; 4 Doubles....

that's a pretty good percentage of his Home Runs and Triples on the season...

In other words, in 12.6 % of Nimmo's Plate Appearances; Nimmo had 25% of his Home Runs and 29% of his Triples;

Ceetar
Dec 09 2022 05:04 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Nimmo didn't particularly square up any more balls last year than previously. His power numbers, his barrel numbers, his "good contact" stuff, were all pretty on-par.



He sacrificed a few walks and a few strikeouts for a few more ground ball outs and singles. His weak contact was up. His GD% up. his LD% down. Pull numbers down.



Again, he sacrificed walks and strikeouts for ground ball outs and singles, but he sacrificed more value than he gained. I guess you could wonder if he's just not as attuned to the zone as he was previously, but the higher swing% makes me thing it was on purpose. Prioritizing contact does seem to fit with some of the things Buck and Chavez said, but it was detrimental here, which jibes with what we know about batting.

vtmet7
Dec 09 2022 05:08 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal


Nimmo didn't particularly square up any more balls last year than previously. His power numbers, his barrel numbers, his "good contact" stuff, were all pretty on-par.



He sacrificed a few walks and a few strikeouts for a few more ground ball outs and singles. His weak contact was up. His GD% up. his LD% down. Pull numbers down.



Again, he sacrificed walks and strikeouts for ground ball outs and singles, but he sacrificed more value than he gained. I guess you could wonder if he's just not as attuned to the zone as he was previously, but the higher swing% makes me thing it was on purpose. Prioritizing contact does seem to fit with some of the things Buck and Chavez said, but it was detrimental here, which jibes with what we know about batting.


it will be interesting to see how those types of numbers change for left handed hitters in 2023...Don't know how many times that Nimmo was screwed by the shift, but lefties typically get screwed more than righties do...Volgelbus particularly hits into shifted outs a lot...

Frayed Knot
Dec 09 2022 06:01 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Nimmo also beat the shift -- particularly with two strikes -- more than most LH hitters.

Edgy MD
Dec 09 2022 08:05 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

=batmagadanleadoff post_id=114439 time=1670628675 user_id=68]
=roger_that post_id=114436 time=1670625191 user_id=128]
If anyone has an intelligent answer to my question, I'd be interested in hearing it.



Ask a stupid, attention craving question ....


Have you ever just tried to stop?

Ceetar
Dec 09 2022 08:23 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

nobody gets "Screwed" by the shift. hit the ball hard and it doesn't matter. There are only 8 guys out there. As i said, Nimmo used the whole field more last year than ever, and as a result they didn't shift on him as much. his wOBA was .357 unshifted, .321 shifted. (103 shifts)



The difference from 2021 is that when shifted in 2021 he was .415 wOBA versus .350 unshifted.



I mean, all in all his 2022 was still really good. He just traded some OBP for soft contact, and it didn't really work out for him, though he did still crush a bunch of pitches. But he lowered his launch angle and missed the sweet spot more, because he was making a lot more bad contact at out of the zone pitches. Essentially he opted to softly ground out into the shift instead of taking a few pitches and striking out (but walking) more.



His average HR trot though, increased from 18.29 in 2021 to lead MLB to 19.21 in 2022 which was merely 3rd.

roger_that
Dec 10 2022 06:51 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

One thing I'll be following closely is whether the trend continues or reverts. I don't remember the exact stats, but from watching him, it seemed that he swung at first pitches more last year than in previous years. His HRs and triples jumped in 2022, but oddly enough his overall SLG declined slightly (because fewer singles) so he seemed to be trying to take advantage of early strikes thrown in the "knowledge" that he'd be taking, a strategy (if I'm correct) that can be used only for so long before the opposing pitchers wise up. if I had to bet, I'd say that 23 triples and HRs (7 + 16) will be his career peak as he sees fewer fat first pitches in 2023 and beyond.



WHOOPS! I looked it up and he actually peaked earlier with 25 triples and HRs (8 and 17).

Ceetar
Dec 10 2022 07:01 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

he saw the exact same percentage (61.9) of first pitch strikes at 2021. He swung at 1.4% more (30.9) first pitches than 2021, and 1.3% more overall, so pretty much didn't change his first pitch approach at all. It's like maybe a pitch more a month.

roger_that
Dec 10 2022 07:51 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

=Ceetar post_id=114471 time=1670680861 user_id=102]
he saw the exact same percentage (61.9) of first pitch strikes at 2021. He swung at 1.4% more (30.9) first pitches than 2021, and 1.3% more overall, so pretty much didn't change his first pitch approach at all. It's like maybe a pitch more a month.



Thanks. Interesting to know that my subjective thinking (more HRs and fewer BBs = swinging at fat first pitches) was ex post facto thinking.

Edgy MD
Dec 10 2022 08:42 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

I tend to still think that his approach changed, but it's not particularly detectable within the data of a single season, because the change occurred as the season progressed.



It's not even detectable if you split the season in half. But cut it up just a bit more granularly and voila! Look at this inverse bell curve! It's like, one third of the way through the season, he got off his game, had a crap middle of the season, but then corrected about 2/3 of the way through. By September, we were looking at something like peak Nimmo. It's certainly too much to ask that that's the guy we get over the course of the contract, but if it is, happy days!




[th]Split [/th][th]G [/th][th]GS [/th][th]PA [/th][th]AB [/th][th]R [/th][th]H [/th][th]2B [/th][th]3B [/th][th]HR [/th][th]RBI [/th][th]SB [/th][th]CS [/th][th]BB [/th][th]SO [/th][th]BA [/th][th]OBP [/th][th]SLG [/th][th]OPS [/th][th]TB [/th][th]GDP [/th][th]HBP [/th][th]SH [/th][th]SF [/th][th]IBB [/th][th]ROE [/th][th]BAbip [/th][th]tOPS+ [/th][th]sOPS+[/th]
March/April1816766311173137001213.270.387.492.87931201000.298119159
May252411094182953010001116.309.385.426.81140221203.363103130
June2525110981325612701520.255.327.398.72539060101.29981101
July252511810820244051501922.222.288.398.68643110003.2357092
August292913111017317025001523.282.397.400.79744460000.341101129
Sept/Oct2929128107233352420301922.308.417.505.92254011001.35813016

G-Fafif
Dec 10 2022 08:56 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Good headline (bottom) becomes better headline (top).


[tweet]https://twitter.com/joe_manniello/status/1601074035173232641[/tweet]

batmagadanleadoff
Dec 11 2022 09:46 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Edgy MD wrote:

=batmagadanleadoff post_id=114439 time=1670628675 user_id=68]
=roger_that post_id=114436 time=1670625191 user_id=128]
If anyone has an intelligent answer to my question, I'd be interested in hearing it.


Ask a stupid, attention craving question ....



Have you ever just tried to stop?


Have you ever tried to write a post like the one you just wrote-- but addressed to your buddy kc on my behalf? You had 10 years to do so and the situation merited you writing that post dozens of times. But you never did and so here we are with me still holding deep rooted grudges. Or what about when this pushy blowhard started with me, unprovoked, and then threatened to put his boot up my ass whenever the hell he feels like putting his boot up my ass --- in five or six different posts? Not only havent you, but then on top of everything else, you then take his side. And KC's, . You're the only one. What does that say, as if I dont know. Rhetorical question.



Whatever. Not that I expect an honest response from you on this.Youll just cry out martyr which carries as much intellectual sense as the Mets themed phrase last piece to the puzzle. Carry on about Nimmo. Knock yourself out spending 45 minutes researching this blowhard's attention craving ridiculous question. He no doubt posited his Nimmo query mainly to see how many others he could get to respond rather than out of a sincere interest in the answers themselves. 16th centerfielder on the Mets depth chart? Is he serious? A national crisis over Agee's mispronunciation instead of just a mistake? Oh my! Call the FBI. Get President Biden to the podium.

Edgy MD
Dec 11 2022 11:12 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

It's a yes-or-no question.

kcmets
Dec 11 2022 11:42 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

=batmagadanleadoff post_id=114527 time=1670777168 user_id=68]but then on top of everything else, you then take his side. And KC's, . You're the only one. What does that say, as if I dont know.



Truth be told, we're divorced after ten years of marriage. It was in the prenup

that he always take my side. It's in our separation agreement as well. I have a

very good legal staff. He got the Ryan and Seaver rookie cards, the bastard...

batmagadanleadoff
Dec 11 2022 01:18 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Edgy MD wrote:

It's a yes-or-no question.


How many times does he have to threaten to put his boot up my ass whenever the hell he feels like putting his boot up my ass before you finally respond on my behalf? Six times? Ten times? Thirty? A million? Never?



Yes or no?



Me, I'm too tired now from the horrible horrible occurrence involving Agee's mispronunciation on BRef. Just horrible. A day that will live in infamy. Think of the children.

batmagadanleadoff
Dec 11 2022 01:19 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

By the way, BRef's pronunciation isn't entirely off (accent on 2d syllable). That's exactly how Agee's name was pronounced when Mets fans chanted his name: Ay-GEE!. Ay-GEE! Ay-GEE! So spare me the fucking dramatics. Horriible occurrence. Oh, my. Call the National Guard!

vtmet7
Dec 11 2022 03:07 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

I guess that I don't understand the drama but...



how much of this thread is actually about Nimmo?

Marshmallowmilkshake
Dec 11 2022 03:34 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

=vtmet7 post_id=114545 time=1670796463 user_id=80]
I guess that I don't understand the drama but...



how much of this thread is actually about Nimmo?



I like Nimmo! I'm glad he's back! I love that he always seems happy to be there. Love the enthusiasm, the smiles, the running to first on the walks. Love his humility and that he shares his faith. The leaping catch against the Dodgers might have been my favorite moment of the year - and the best Topps Now card. I love that he worked hard to improve his defensive skills. I bought one of the grab bag things in the authentics shop and got a framed photo with a piece of a game-worn Nimmo road jersey.



I worry that he gets hit by pitches so much because of the injury risk - the Marte hand injury probably cost us first place - but that's a small thing.

vtmet7
Dec 11 2022 03:38 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

=Marshmallowmilkshake post_id=114547 time=1670798045 user_id=119]
=vtmet7 post_id=114545 time=1670796463 user_id=80]
I guess that I don't understand the drama but...



how much of this thread is actually about Nimmo?



I worry that he gets hit by pitches so much because of the injury risk - the Marte hand injury probably cost us first place - but that's a small thing.


good point with the HBP...prior to Buck taking over, it seemed like the Mets might be receptive to getting hit by pitch (not saying that they were doing a Jason Kendall and leaning into pitches; just saying that they saw it as another way of getting on base so they didn't get offended by it)...Nimmo, McNeil, Alonso and Marte all get me worried when they get drilled...and it looked like it really bugged the shit out of Buck when it happened

Edgy MD
Dec 11 2022 03:46 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Cahna got drilled more than anybody and he neither dug in close to the plate nor leaned in during his swing.



It's hard to explain. Maybe the prevailing scouting report on the team said they were all vulnerable inside.

Marshmallowmilkshake
Dec 11 2022 03:56 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Good point about the scouting reports.



One thing I found interesting is the booth said one night that while Nimmo has decent speed, he doesn't steal many bases. The thought is that he worries about getting hurt.

roger_that
Dec 11 2022 04:04 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

=Marshmallowmilkshake post_id=114550 time=1670799419 user_id=119]
Good point about the scouting reports.



One thing I found interesting is the booth said one night that while Nimmo has decent speed, he doesn't steal many bases. The thought is that he worries about getting hurt.



Or that stealing bases is of marginal use? I forget the exact stats, but I read somewhere that if you steal at 75%, 30 bases in 40 tries, you're accomplishing very little positive for your team's offense, on the order of a run or two per season.

Edgy MD
Dec 11 2022 04:21 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

I would disagree with that.



I think we've all read some variation on that, and allowed it to become an established truth, while we neglect to cite where we got it, and mostly don't remember where we got it, or what the break-even point actually is alleged to be.

vtmet7
Dec 11 2022 04:48 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Edgy MD wrote:

I would disagree with that.



I think we've all read some variation on that, and allowed it to become an established truth, while we neglect to cite where we got it, and mostly don't remember where we got it, or what the break-even point actually is alleged to be.


I second that...obviously, if a guy is not an elite base stealer, you might be better off with them not risking it...however, if you have someone like Jose Reyes, Lance Johnson, Mookie Wilson, Lenny Dykstra, Trea Turner, Rickie Henderson, Tim Raines, etc type of elite base stealing; it's another story...



getting to first is more important than not getting to first...however, getting into scoring position is more important than getting to first base...There's gotta be a margin where speed outweighs OBP, and conversely a margin whereas OBP is more important...



cherry-picking a little bit but...



Reyes averaged 66 stolen bases per 162 games from 2005-2008; his "162 game average" for those seasons results in:

116 runs scored; 68 RBI; 80 K's;



Nimmo in his career so far has an almost identical Slugging Percentage while having a significantly higher OBP (and more strikeouts as well); his 162 game average:

89 runs scored; 57 RBI; 141 K's;



yes, Reyes played on better offensive teams than Nimmo so his teammates are going to affect things; but still Reyes had a significantly higher runs per game and significantly less strikeouts...a guy like Reyes (or Rickey) in their prime, force pitchers and defense to make mistakes which IMO helps their teammates have better hitting opportunities...



A guy like Eric Young Jr doesn't get on base or hit enough XBH's for his speed to be real useful...



and a guy like Jay Payton that might have good speed but sucks at stealing bases, is better off staying put (Jay stole 14 bases as a Met, while getting caught 17 times)...by the way, I didn't realize how bad Payton was in terms of stolen bases or OBP until I just looked him up

The Hot Corner
Dec 11 2022 07:05 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

I believe the modern game undervalues the benefits of an aggressive and capable base stealer. A base good base stealer can disrupt the defense as well as impact the pitches his teammates often see when batting behind him.



Remember the chaos Terrence Gore wreaked in his limited time with the Mets at the end of last season?

roger_that
Dec 11 2022 07:40 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Edgy MD wrote:

I would disagree with that.


Which part? You'd almost have to agree that there is a point where your caught stealings are costing the team more runs than your stolen bases are creating.



I think the conventional wisdom was that the breakeven point was about 67%, and I believe that figure has only risen in recent years. But let's say it's 67%--it certainly isn't far from that figure.



So someone who steals at a 75% rate, 30/40, is breaking even with 30 attempts (where he steals 20 bases) and netting you 10 bases on his other 10 attempts. How many runs is 10 bases? You know it's not 10 runs, not even close to that. Is it 5 runs? Doubt that very much. 3? 2? Something like that.



So how many wins is your 30/40 stealer getting for you, if his stealing attempts add up to 3 runs or fewer?



If you'd like to disagree with my speculations here, could you start by identifying the single largest flaw in my reasoning? Do you think the breakeven point is much lower than 67%? Do you think 10 bases over the course of 162 games are much more productive than I'm making them out to be?

Ceetar
Dec 11 2022 08:00 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

I don't know what's to agree with or disagree about. It's not the relative values of say second and no outs versus bases empty and 1 out are a secret. If the value added by stealing X amount of times is outweighed by being caught Y amount of times, you're not adding value to your team. You can quibble around the margins of that equation if you like, but it's not like there's some super secret sauce that you can't see that's making it more valuable.



If you add in calculus that makes you think a guy might be a little more prone to injury, that just makes even less profitable to steal.

Ceetar
Dec 11 2022 08:08 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal


Edgy MD wrote:

I would disagree with that.


So someone who steals at a 75% rate, 30/40, is breaking even with 30 attempts (where he steals 20 bases) and netting you 10 bases on his other 10 attempts. How many runs is 10 bases? You know it's not 10 runs, not even close to that. Is it 5 runs? Doubt that very much. 3? 2? Something like that.








in 2022:



Stealing second with no outs, nets you 0.208 runs.

Getting throwing at second with no outs nets you -0.611



So if you steal successfully 3 times but get thrown out the fourth, you'll have earned .624 and cost .611. So you're up 0.013. So if you steal 231 bases at a 75% clip, you'll have earned your team one extra run.

batmagadanleadoff
Dec 12 2022 05:57 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Edgy MD wrote:

I would disagree with that.



I think we've all read some variation on that, and allowed it to become an established truth, while we neglect to cite where we got it, and mostly don't remember where we got it, or what the break-even point actually is alleged to be.


Bill James has been researching the value of stolen bases at least since you were in elementary school, if not earlier. Tom Tango and then like a zillion others. The break even point is in the neighborhood of a 75% success rate and the math you'd need to calculate this yourself is fairly simple and straightforward. You just need to assemble the data so that you can then calculate break even. Or just trust James and Tango and like every other reputable sabrmetrician. They're not defending their break even figures the way others claim there's an invisible magician in the sky who runs the world. This is just math and logic.. There's no mystery here, not by any stretch of the imagination.



Break even might change radically in 2023 as the bases will be larger and pickoff attempts will be severely limited. Its gonna be easier to steal a base next season.

metsmarathon
Dec 12 2022 07:23 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

the game is better and more fun when stolen bases are in play.



unfortunately, the math says that unless you're really good at doing it successfully at the major league level, you're team is better off if you just don't.



at least, according to the maths that we are currently able to measure.



there may be secondary effects of having a base-stealer on first that are harder to measure, and it makes sense that these effects must surely exist - we just cannot measure how much value they have - of skewing the infield defense, or distracting the pitcher's focus, or degrading the catcher's ability to frame pitches, or affecting pitch selection, or being more primed to go first-to-third, or advancing on a bad throw, and so on and so forth - that i think teams and players should keep the SB in their arsenal, even before the upcoming rule changes, but it's probably a hard sell. i dont know how much those knock-on effects truly move the needle, but you're still going to need to be significantly more successful than not for it to be worth it.

Edgy MD
Dec 12 2022 07:34 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

If anybody wants to cite their studies, please do.

metsmarathon
Dec 12 2022 07:48 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

per a cursory google search:



[url]https://batflipsandnerds.com/2018/11/03/analytics-and-its-effects-on-the-mlb-the-stolen-base/



just scanned through it a bit; has lots of math, draws some conclusions. seems pretty good.



i've been reading this kind of thing for at least the past 10-20 years, so there are plenty of other sources out there.

Edgy MD
Dec 12 2022 07:55 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Thank you.

batmagadanleadoff
Dec 12 2022 03:55 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal






there may be secondary effects of having a base-stealer on first that are harder to measure, and it makes sense that these effects must surely exist - we just cannot measure how much value they have - of skewing the infield defense, or distracting the pitcher's focus, or degrading the catcher's ability to frame pitches, or affecting pitch selection, or being more primed to go first-to-third, or advancing on a bad throw, and so on and so forth - that i think teams and players should keep the SB in their arsenal....




Wouldn't these other effects already be baked into the formula, to a large degree? If these "secondary" effects impact run scoring, they would change the break-even number for base-stealing, which is a function of run scoring.

nymr83
Dec 12 2022 06:47 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal


Edgy MD wrote:

I would disagree with that.



I think we've all read some variation on that, and allowed it to become an established truth, while we neglect to cite where we got it, and mostly don't remember where we got it, or what the break-even point actually is alleged to be.


Bill James has been researching the value of stolen bases at least since you were in elementary school, if not earlier. Tom Tango and then like a zillion others. The break even point is in the neighborhood of a 75% success rate and the math you'd need to calculate this yourself is fairly simple and straightforward. You just need to assemble the data so that you can then calculate break even. Or just trust James and Tango and like every other reputable sabrmetrician. They're not defending their break even figures the way others claim there's an invisible magician in the sky who runs the world. This is just math and logic.. There's no mystery here, not by any stretch of the imagination.



Break even might change radically in 2023 as the bases will be larger and pickoff attempts will be severely limited. Its gonna be easier to steal a base next season.




Why would larger bases change the break even rate? they would likely change the success rate for many players, thus changing the number who should attempt to steal more often as they are more likely to hit that break even rate, but why would the break even rate change?

Ceetar
Dec 12 2022 07:08 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

the break even point will change because MLB will fuck with the baseball again. The bigger bases and the inane pick-off rule will have some effect, but it's hard to tell what exactly yet. It might be that the huge lead you'd be able to get if you can draw 2 throws cuts into a lot of the value of a SB, because if you can be 40% of the way already..



If you really want to get in the weeds with it, you could adjust based on park and offense. If you're a light-hitting offense in a low-run park, your break even point is lower. Same if you're playing against the Yankees and Aaron Judge, because MLB has made sure the balls are more likely to fly out of the park in those games. More chance of a HR means less difference between being on first or second.





As for secondary effects? we can measure those too. We have all sorts of splits for pitchers, runners on base, speed of runner on base. We can isolate out pitcher stats when Rickey was on base versus not. I don't know those conclusions off the top of my head, but they're not significant. You'd also have to look for potential batter distraction too. Perhaps rhythms get broken up for batter's too, when there's throw overs. This might be ESPECIALLY true in 2023, with the pitch clock. The pitcher still has quite a few ways to delay the game, and mess with timing. And with a faster pace of play and the pitcher still in control of it, it might mess with batter's more. We're absolutely going to get pick-off attempts on comically slow catchers, just so the pitcher can take an extra 15 seconds or whatever. Pete Alonso takes the lazy 40mph pick off throw, puts the tag on the runner in a comically slow manner. Looks at the ball. Adjusts his grip, Lobs it back softly.

metsmarathon
Dec 13 2022 07:58 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal







there may be secondary effects of having a base-stealer on first that are harder to measure, and it makes sense that these effects must surely exist - we just cannot measure how much value they have - of skewing the infield defense, or distracting the pitcher's focus, or degrading the catcher's ability to frame pitches, or affecting pitch selection, or being more primed to go first-to-third, or advancing on a bad throw, and so on and so forth - that i think teams and players should keep the SB in their arsenal....




Wouldn't these other effects already be baked into the formula, to a large degree? If these "secondary" effects impact run scoring, they would change the break-even number for base-stealing, which is a function of run scoring.


the secondary effects can absolutely be measured, it's just that, to my knowledge, WE don't have ready access to that dataset.



they're not currently in the formula, because it looks at the entire population of base/out situations, not the quality of the runner or the expected outcome.



you would need to at minimum parse it out to the effect having a likely basestealer on first vs an unlinkely basestealer, and look at the change in the outcomes. there's a lot of small sample size things, and apples & orangutans comparisons that would come out, where with a narrower dataset you're probably going to need to normalize for the quality of hitter - presuming a better hitter could be more likely to follow a good basestealer and a less-good hitter may likely follow a worse basestealer. but given enough data, i'm sure it could be done.



give me a well-paying job, and maybe some python lessons, and i'll get right on it LOL.



but i do believe the secondary effects would change the break-even number. i don't think it's a wholesale change, but maybe a few percentage points of success rate, and maybe that's enough to encourage the entire volume of basestealing to rise, if the data were to bear it out.



also, it may be true that if mlb continues to deaden balls, the cost of an unsuccessful stolen base goes down. i think too that perhaps as k-rates increase, maybe advancing that extra base could become more valuable (?). math must be done! to the calculators, baseball nerds!

A Boy Named Seo
Dec 13 2022 01:00 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Changing topic slightly, Sherman said the Mets were asking the DBacks about Alek Thomas before they re-signed Nimmo. AZ asked for Baty in return (kinda comparable minor league numbers!) but the Mets decided to keep Baty and just buy back Nimmo because money isn't real for Cohen. Considering an alternate universe with Thomas the center fielder of the now and future and Escobar/Vientos at third for this year is kind of a fun exercise. Wonder if they woulda been content with Vientobar? Or try for Justin Turner for a year?

Ceetar
Dec 13 2022 02:02 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Thomas is an interesting thought. It's Sherman so I won't put too much thought into how real that "plan" was but looks like Thomas struggled with MLB, though still a good center fielder. I could see how you could think he would regain some of the BB% he had in the minors, and be a pretty useful MLBer. Though not as good as Nimmo, and the Mets offense is already a little hit or miss, and could probably use some more power. Still could use some more power. Maybe they have something in their three? prospects that on the cusp here, I dunno. Gotta try to find spots for them too, be interesting to see how that shakes out.

batmagadanleadoff
Dec 13 2022 06:43 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal



Edgy MD wrote:

I would disagree with that.



I think we've all read some variation on that, and allowed it to become an established truth, while we neglect to cite where we got it, and mostly don't remember where we got it, or what the break-even point actually is alleged to be.


Bill James has been researching the value of stolen bases at least since you were in elementary school, if not earlier. Tom Tango and then like a zillion others. The break even point is in the neighborhood of a 75% success rate and the math you'd need to calculate this yourself is fairly simple and straightforward. You just need to assemble the data so that you can then calculate break even. Or just trust James and Tango and like every other reputable sabrmetrician. They're not defending their break even figures the way others claim there's an invisible magician in the sky who runs the world. This is just math and logic.. There's no mystery here, not by any stretch of the imagination.



Break even might change radically in 2023 as the bases will be larger and pickoff attempts will be severely limited. Its gonna be easier to steal a base next season.




Why would larger bases change the break even rate? they would likely change the success rate for many players, thus changing the number who should attempt to steal more often as they are more likely to hit that break even rate, but why would the break even rate change?


The rules changes will likely change both figures -- the break-even point and the success rate. The two figures are independent of each other. All things being equal, base stealing will be easier in 2023. But this doesn't necessarily mean that the success rate will go up. because "all things being equal" is the operative phrase and all things might not be equal. The rules changes might also encourage lesser skilled base stealers to make more SB attempts, which could offset the improved rates that one would expect to be generated by the better base stealers. We'll see.

nymr83
Dec 14 2022 05:45 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal








Bill James has been researching the value of stolen bases at least since you were in elementary school, if not earlier. Tom Tango and then like a zillion others. The break even point is in the neighborhood of a 75% success rate and the math you'd need to calculate this yourself is fairly simple and straightforward. You just need to assemble the data so that you can then calculate break even. Or just trust James and Tango and like every other reputable sabrmetrician. They're not defending their break even figures the way others claim there's an invisible magician in the sky who runs the world. This is just math and logic.. There's no mystery here, not by any stretch of the imagination.



Break even might change radically in 2023 as the bases will be larger and pickoff attempts will be severely limited. Its gonna be easier to steal a base next season.




Why would larger bases change the break even rate? they would likely change the success rate for many players, thus changing the number who should attempt to steal more often as they are more likely to hit that break even rate, but why would the break even rate change?


The rules changes will likely change both figures -- the break-even point and the success rate. The two figures are independent of each other. All things being equal, base stealing will be easier in 2023. But this doesn't necessarily mean that the success rate will go up. because "all things being equal" is the operative phrase and all things might not be equal. The rules changes might also encourage lesser skilled base stealers to make more SB attempts, which could offset the improved rates that one would expect to be generated by the better base stealers. We'll see.


Maybe we are talking about different things here?



When I say "success rate" i mean the percentage of stolen base attempts that are successful. So if a player attempt 5 steals, steals 4 bases, and is aught once, his success rate is 80%. I agree that this number should go up under the new rules.



When I say "break even rate" I mean the rate at which a player must be successful for his stolen base attempts to be a net positive impact rather than a net negative impact on his team';s run scoring probability. Why would this change in the rules change that number?

batmagadanleadoff
Dec 14 2022 07:47 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal






Maybe we are talking about different things here?



When I say "success rate" i mean the percentage of stolen base attempts that are successful. So if a player attempt 5 steals, steals 4 bases, and is aught once, his success rate is 80%. I agree that this number should go up under the new rules.



When I say "break even rate" I mean the rate at which a player must be successful for his stolen base attempts to be a net positive impact rather than a net negative impact on his team';s run scoring probability. Why would this change in the rules change that number?


We're talking about the exact same things. Break-even changes every year, albeit very slightly usually. Otherwise, by your logic, break-even would be a constant, a fixed number. Generally, break-even rises when run scoring is more plentiful. The easier it is to score runs, the more costly a failed stolen base attempt is.



BTW there are different break even rates for stolen bases in the same season. So for example, in the bottom of the ninth inning in a tied game, when the home team needs to score just one run to seal a victory, the break-even rate is lower. Under other circumstances, the break even rate would be higher because a failed stolen base attempt could potentially cost that team more than one run. But in that ninth inning situation, those extra runs are moot.

Edgy MD
Dec 14 2022 09:20 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

And that's a big part of why I registered my tendency to disagree. While a homerun or double may happen whenever, a stolen base is a strategy targeted to a specific situation, and so taking it out of the game situation and declaring it to be worth X runs which equals Y wins isn't particularly accurate.

metsmarathon
Dec 14 2022 09:44 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

when you put it in the game situation, you're still ascribing it to "worth X runs which equals Y wins", just with a more narrow focus.

batmagadanleadoff
Dec 14 2022 09:55 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal


when you put it in the game situation, you're still ascribing it to "worth X runs which equals Y wins", just with a more narrow focus.


Yeah. I didnt get that either. Runs scored and wins correlate positively and very powerfully. The circumstances in which runs are scored are irrelevant to this.

Edgy MD
Dec 14 2022 09:56 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Well, I'm saying that X and Y do not have a constant value.



The assumption, when constructing bottom-line stats like WAR, is often that homers happen when they happen, so there is no point in distinguishing between a homer hit when up 10 in the eighth inning batting against a position player forced into service on the mound (of infinitesimal value in the great scheme of things) and a homer hit when down three with the bases loaded in the bottom of the ninth batting against Kenley Jansen to close (of supreme value). The notion is that the situation in which you hit the ball is a random roll of the dice. One could argue with that, but I understand why that's the way WAR is built. In bWAR and in fWAR, a homer is worth approximately two runs (X ≈ 2), no matter how many were on when you actually hit it, no matter what the game situation.



But it's different in stealing. Virtually nobody would steal up 10 in the eighth. But if you're the winning run trying to get into scoring position in the ninth — the very difference maker — the temptation to run is higher. There's a wicked closer on the mound who your matter has virtually no chance of squaring up for extra bases, but maybe they can squeak one through the infield and you can score from second. These are the factors that more typically occur around stealing.



Steals and steal attempts are not randomly distributed across all game situations.



So the difference between adding .31 runs (or whatever) by stealing second and losing .57 runs (or whatever) by being caught should not be measured against all situations for a strategy that is mostly deployed in a narrower range of situations. The game situation matters, and the difference between a runner on first and a runner on second is vastly different and the strategy selected defers to that. When stealing, the difference between a runner on second and a runner on first is typically more valuable than its general difference. And of course, the difference between a runner on first and a runner out has a different value.



Sense? Does that make any?

batmagadanleadoff
Dec 15 2022 12:02 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Edgy MD wrote:





But it's different in stealing. Virtually nobody would steal up 10 in the eighth. But if you're the winning run trying to get into scoring position in the ninth — the very difference maker — the temptation to run is higher. There's a wicked closer on the mound who your matter has virtually no chance of squaring up for extra bases, but maybe they can squeak one through the infield and you can score from second. These are the factors that more typically occur around stealing.



Steals and steal attempts are not randomly distributed across all game situations.




The break even rate for base stealing is a direct function of run expectancy. And run expectancy has nothing to do with whether a team is up by a dozen runs or down by one.

Edgy MD
Dec 15 2022 07:36 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

But the relative value of a run does. And the relative value of an out.



Please feel free to cite any studies or formulas you are referring to.

metsmarathon
Dec 15 2022 08:35 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

M.e.t.b.o.t. would tell you that the value of an out or a run or even a base can be situationally valued in terms of the probability of winning the game.



The probability of a base turning into a run is derived from the run expectancies.



You could argue that run expectancies change given the expected performance of the players in question, sure, but in a macro sense they can be readily determined.



I feel like you're both mostly arguing about the same thing here.



I would say too that edgy, maybe you could provide some data and formulas that show that the risk of stealing a base against a wicked good closer is somehow greater, when it may be true that that unicorn base runner himself has higher value because of how unlikely he was to get on base in the first place and erasing him in an unsuccessful base steal attempt has a terribly detrimental effect on the outcome of the game.

Edgy MD
Dec 15 2022 10:01 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

I'm not actually offering a thesis, but expressing dubiousness toward one.



With regard to your post above, however, I would actually propose that the risk of stealing against a wicked good closer in a wicked high leverage spot is, if anything, less, not more. The impact of the run expectancy difference is filtered through the reality that the potential first run may be far more valuable relative to the potential second run than it is in a more general situation. We intuitively know this, which is why we call stealing and related maneuvers "one-run strategies."



Though I certainly don't think the matter is closed.

batmagadanleadoff
Dec 15 2022 10:37 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Edgy MD wrote:

But the relative value of a run does. And the relative value of an out.






Break-even rates are averages. Of course, a player should always consider the context when attempting a steal. And the catcher. Mike Piazza wasn't a bad defensive catcher but he couldn't throw his mother out on a stolen base attempt. And a base-runner twice as fast as Terrance Long should attempt a steal every single time he's on first base and second base is unoccupied. Also, any runner on first base should always attempt a steal of second base if the pitcher has a heart attack on the field and drops to the ground in cardiac arrest, so long as time-out isn't called. But none of this should impact the break-even rate. A runner caught stealing hurts his team just the same whether the pitcher on the mound had a heart attack or not.



As mentioned, there are separate break-even rates for when a team needs only one run to win a tie game. And it's understood that break-even should drop in the later innings of close games. Stolen bases are more valuable the closer the game is. That's because failed attempts tend to wreck a team's chances of having a big inning and very often, the winning team will score more runs in one inning than the losing team will score in nine innings.





But you can say this for every stat. A player doesn't get an extra boost to his BA or SLG or OPS or OBP just because his HR was a decisive come from behind walk-off HR. In the stats, that HR registers the same as a HR hit at the tail end of a blow-out win.



Break-even rates are based on run expectancy tables. And that, to some degree, is a limit. But no stat is perfect. A stat only measures what it measures A player's HR totals don't reflect how many doubles he hit.

Edgy MD
Dec 15 2022 11:01 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

=batmagadanleadoff post_id=114880 time=1671125853 user_id=68]But you can say this for every stat. A player doesn't get an extra boost to his BA or SLG or OPS or OBP just because his HR was a decisive come from behind walk-off HR. In the stats, that HR registers the same as a HR hit at the tail end of a blow-out win.



As noted above, stolen base attempts differ from homeruns because they are more targeted to game situations. Judging their utility by the average value of the difference between a on runner second vs. a runner on first doesn't really represent when and how they occur. This is true moreso with stolen bases than with most other offensive stats.



I wouldn't propose inflating a hitter's slugging percentage if his homeruns were all in high leverage situations, but I might be open to the idea that his slugging percentage is further from the bottom line on the ultimate value of his performance than another guy's.

Edgy MD
Dec 15 2022 07:40 PM
Are you ready for the storm?

Are you ready for the storm?



Brandon Nimmo meets press to discuss his long-term contract with Mets, but is more inclined to talk about the weather.



[YOUTUBE]k2CVKY2OS8U[/YOUTUBE]



Scott Boras joins the show, with cameos from from Chelsea Nimmo and Angela Showalter.



Buck is great, because no matter how anodyne the words being spoken into the mic are, Buck sits there with a face that says, "Am I really hearing what I'm hearing?"

metirish
Mar 17 2023 07:18 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

https://greaterlongisland.com/video-tour-mets-star-brandon-nimmo-finds-his-5-million-long-island-home/



New spread for Brandon and family

A Boy Named Seo
Mar 17 2023 09:42 AM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Great find, I love shit like this. I don't what Nimmo and his family's style is, but I suspect they won't be trying to buy all the staging furniture. Maybe they won't end up with a rope-lined wagon wheel in the house, but maybe they will?



I bet he told his agent "anything ranch-style" but ranch-style apparently looks hella different in the east.

Edgy MD
Mar 17 2023 12:41 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Yeah, four or five spacious colonials smashed together apparently equals "ranch" in Wantagh.

metsmarathon
Mar 17 2023 01:25 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

needs more pixellated artwork

metirish
Mar 17 2023 06:01 PM
Re: Nimmo and the Mets have a deal

Brandon might have lots of time to enjoy his new spread