Master Index of Archived Threads


Mets Record by Starting Pitcher

Gwreck Jul 06 2006 01:07 AM

I know this is an inexact science, but I found these statistics to be particularly interesting. I think the numbers are encouraging. Clearly they won't win that many Glavine starts for the rest of the year, but they should be winning more Pedro starts too. Perhaps the need for another starter isn't quite as great as it's percieved to be? The team's record broken down by starting pitcher: Pitcher W L Glavine 15 3 Trachsel 11 5 Martinez 9 7 Hernandez 4 4 Soler 3 5 Bannister 3 2 Zambrano 3 2 Gonzalez 2 1 Lima 0 3 Maine 0 2

Nymr83 Jul 06 2006 01:21 AM

] Perhaps the need for another starter isn't quite as great as it's percieved to be? perhaps the run support has been good, and teams that can't pitch rarely go deep into october.

Gwreck Jul 06 2006 01:29 AM

If the wins can be attributed to run support, then the depth a starting pitcher goes into a game isn't really as important. How deep a starting pitcher goes into a game also is only important relative to the quality and depth of the bullpen. As for going deep into October, perhaps the answer lies not in personel but in how they're used? I think a 6-man rotation -- Pedro, Glavine, Trachsel, El Duque, and pick 2 of Soler, Maine, Pelfrey, Bannister, whomever -- could be what's needed to keep arms fresh for October.

Edgy DC Jul 06 2006 07:40 AM

Who can't pitch? The Mets are third in the majors and second in the NL in ERA.

TheOldMole Jul 06 2006 10:31 AM

I'd still love it if someone could research my quality starts ratio question. I'd do it myself, but I can't find complete QS stats anywhere. How much strength is it reasonable to expect from bottom of rotation vs. top of rotation?

Edgy DC Jul 06 2006 10:36 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jul 06 2006 01:47 PM

There's a ton of ambguity in some of those terms there. Start with the inherent ambiguity in "reasonabile" and stumble into the fog of who is a "number three starter" and who is a "number four starter." I'll take a crack at it, as I used to do a similar research project every year called "Is Al an Ace?" But I'd have to define those terms along the way. Is it reasonable to define "reasonable to expect" as "what the average team gets"?

TheOldMole Jul 06 2006 01:37 PM

Yeah, that was basically my question. If you;'re trying to shore up the bottom of your rotation, and you have a number 5 starter who has, let's say, 1 QS out of 3, is it reasonable to suppose you're going to upgrade that, or is that the norm?