Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: NHL Trade Rumors: Do You Make A Move For Rick Nash?

First Half Grades: Mets Pitchers

Hey! It's this guy!  (Photo by Jim McIsaac/Getty Images)

Bumped to the top. I wrote this at two in the morning so you have to read it even if the subject matter and comprehensibility betray my having written it at two in the morning.

These probably should have been done a few days ago and by now everyone else has already posted their mid-term report cards/All-Star Game blog filler, but I was too busy cutting the sleeves off of my Carlos Voltron shirt to worry about these things. Now that Voltron shirt is sleeveless and my guns can breathe, here are your obligatory first half grades for the Mets pitching staff.

---

Manny Acosta: C-. The best thing you can say about Acosta is that he isn't Ryota Igarashi. He throws hard and had 14 strikeouts in 12 innings, but also had eight walks (all unintentional) to go along with them. Woof.

Elmer Dessens: B-. An "A" for results but a "D-" for process. The 1.47 ERA looks nice and is probably sufficient ammo for Jerrybrain to keep sending Dessens out there, but the 3.39 FIP betrays his lousy peripheral stats: eight strikeouts and five walks -- plus two HBP -- in 18 innings. His 5.10 xFIP is a reflection of the zero home runs allowed. All of this means that, given more playing time, the results are likely to catch up (or down?) to the process and Dessens will be right back where he belongs: far away from a big league roster.

R.A. Dickey: A. Easily the most pleasant surprise of the first half, and even though the euphemistic headlines are getting old, I think Dickey's outlook has been solidified by an arousing performance thus far. His strikeout, walk, and home run rates are the best of his career, and while you wouldn't typically expect a pitcher to have a career season at age 35, knuckleballers aren't exactly your garden-variety hurlers. He's a lot of fun to watch -- both for the whimsy of his pitches and the intensity of his facial expressions -- and we can only hope his success continues.

Pedro Feliciano: B. Feliciano is having a decent season that could be excellent if he either a) didn't face as many righties, or b) didn't walk so many of them. He has 13 walks (three intentional) in 18.2 innings against righties, which works out to a ridiculous 6.27 BB/9; it's still 4.82 if we toss out the intentional passes (which we should, really, if the exercise is to quantify Feliciano's control, or lack thereof). On the plus side, he's striking out plenty and his ground ball rate is terrific.

Sean Green: LOL.

Star-divide

Ryota Igarashi: F. Iggy throws mid-nineties heat with interesting movement but has been terrible at basically everything. Bad strikeout rate. Bad walk rate. Bad home run rate. Too many fly balls. Worse than Toyota.

John Maine: D+. Might have already thrown his last pitch as a Met. He can still strike batters out, but as often as not he has little control over the location of his pitches or the mechanics of his arm. There are probably zero remaining reasons to expect that he'll ever make a meaningful contribution to this team again.

Jenrry Mejia: C-. Mejia should never have made the big club out of Spring Training, and despite a deceptively low 3.25 ERA he really didn't pitch very well. He has a terrifying arm but quite a bit to learn about how to use it effectively. Pitching instead of throwing, and so on. He's currently on the shelf with a posterior cuff strain in his throwing shoulder but is expected to be back in action soon.

Jon Niese: B+. There's a lot to like about Niese. His control has been exceptional, particularly for someone so young. His strikeout and swinging-strike rates are both above average for a starting pitcher. And to boot, he puts the ball on the ground more often than not. He's 23 and cost controlled, and I'm just happy he wasn't traded for Cliff Lee.

Fernando Nieve: D+. He'd have to be worth another win from here on out just to get back to replacement level. Yes, he's really been that bad. It's the same old story about a pitcher who isn't good at baseball things, pitching in particular.

Bobby Parnell: B+. This could very well be an "INC", but that'd be a cop-out so screw that. Also, Parnell has been legitimately awesome, albeit in just 11 innings. He has 14 strikeouts to just three walks (two unintentional), so his 1.64 ERA has been thus far supported by outstanding peripherals.

Mike Pelfrey: B. Big Pelf had a 2.23 ERA with 58 strikeouts and 28 walks in his first 12 starts (and one relief appearance). In his last half-dozen starts the ERA is 6.96 with 14 walks and just 11 strikeouts in 32.1 innings. His ground ball rate has dropped by 20% but really he's just giving up a mind-boggling number of hits. His hit rate when things were going well was 7.36 per nine innings. During his poor stretch? 15.31. I'm not sure what that's all about, exactly, but I assume it's Alex Cora's fault.

Oliver Perez: F. Over seven starts and four relief appearances spanning 38.2 innings, Perez has 30 strikeouts, 33 walks (one intentional), two hit batsmen, and three wild pitches. He also has seven home runs allowed. Somewhat interestingly, a career-high 39.2% ground ball rate, of which I'm not really sure what to make. His career mark is 33%. His contract is pretty clearly worse than either Bobby Bonilla deal, (the former of which wasn't actually a bad deal) but paying him to not pitch seems far preferable to actually letting him take the mound again.

Francisco Rodriguez: A-. I still hate the contract, but the dude has been really good this season. Yea, he seems to let a few more guys on base than my cardiologist would prefer, but his walk rate is actually way down and his strikeout rate way up. He has given up a lot of hits, more than you might expect, which could very well even out as the season wears on.

Johan Santana: B. He has the lowest strikeout rate of his career -- 5.88 (!) -- and the highest walk rate since 2002 -- 2.91. The bad news gets worse when we factor in that he has allowed just eight home runs so far, which may not sound like bad news but really is when we consider that his home run rate of 0.57 is well below his career mark of 0.96 while his fly ball rate remains basically unchanged from prior years. Either he has developed a magical ability to give up lots of fly balls but not so many home runs, or we might reasonably expect the home run rate to come back up in the latter half of the season. His last three starts have been better, I guess.

Hisanori Takahashi: B-. Excelled in long relief before a promotion to the rotation, where he excelled for two starts. Then had seven less excellent starts over which he allowed 27 runs in 37 innings and an .892 OPS against. Now back in the bullpen, has one three-inning appearance with no runs allowed. Terrific 8.31 K/9 and a not-awful 3.58 BB/9.

Raul Valdes: C. He's still kind of interesting to me. Made his big league debut at age 32 this year, he's a bit of a junkballer but has gotten plenty of swinging strikes. Lefty, too. 5.04 ERA is poor, but 3.18 FIP is nice and 4.03 xFIP is decent.

Comment 94 comments  |  1 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Valdes deserves a B

this guy had pitched 28.1 innings with a 2.86 ERA, then he gets roughed up in San Diego 2 nights in a row. In fairness the first night the staff gave up 15 runs, so it was a bad night for all. hisERA jumps up to 5.34 after giving up 8 ER in 0.1 IP. Then he is only given the ball 3 more time for a total of 1.2 IP and 0 ER.

 If Jerry did the same to K-rod after 2 bad outings he wouldn’t be [itching in the majors either.

Valdes should be an option for a 3 inning save or an 8th inning guy when Parnell has pitched a coupl eof days in a row. He is much better than Iggy

by Rickfansince76 on Jul 15, 2010 6:58 AM EDT reply actions  

Maine is an F for me

Feliciano maybe a B- or C because of blowing 2 games recently
K-rod a B, he has 4 BS
Johan a B+ because he had a string of great starts that resulted in no wins because we didn’t score
Pelfrey really lowering his score after being asolid A early, hope he comes back ready after th ebreak

by Rickfansince76 on Jul 15, 2010 7:40 AM EDT reply actions  

Elmer is what he is....

   He’s old, and not a great pitcher. But he’s useful, has decent control (at least one of those walks was intentional), and knows how to pitch, but has limited stuff to work with. I won’t gripe about your grading, but I think you’re far too harsh on your verbage. There’s no reason for him not to have a major league roster spot given his results, both this year and last. There’s also no reason to view him as a closer or a natural eighth inning guy either. He’s a decent fourth or fifth man in the pen, is inexpensive and produces well enough to justify holding that position unless or until the Mets have young arms with upside who can push him aside. Thus far, there are other roster spots (I’m looking at you Green) that can’t say the same.

by Cranky50 on Jul 15, 2010 8:50 AM EDT reply actions  

Check out Valdes' splits

At the very LEAST, Valdes would make a great LOOGY to take pressure off Perpetual Pedro. It was beyond stupid to drop him from the roster in the first place.

by garik16 on Jul 15, 2010 9:02 AM EDT reply actions  

Gotta love Sabermetrics

Sabermetrics make it sound like there are no good baseball players, just lucky ones. Every player who’s doing a good job is only a larger sample size away from crashing and burning into mediocrity. No one is talented, everyone is lucky. Elmer Dessens might be giving up fly balls and putting guys on base, but he’s just LUCKY that the fly balls aren’t home runs and the guys on base aren’t coming around to score. It’s not like he buckles down and makes his pitches when he gets in jams. No, not at all.

lol I’m glad I don’t subscribe to that trash.

by GeddyLeeIsGod on Jul 15, 2010 10:17 AM EDT reply actions  

Yeah, science sucks, screw those nerds.

/sarcasm

Way to fundamentally not understand what sabermetrics is about, and yet still condemn it.

by SoCal Metfan on Jul 15, 2010 10:25 AM EDT up reply actions  

Sabermetrics

At its worst, it vilifies every ballplayer and makes him seem lucky rather than good, and is oftentimes wrong anyway. At its best, it completely saps all the romance out of baseball and makes it a boring math lesson for geeks. Either way it’s bad.

by GeddyLeeIsGod on Jul 15, 2010 11:00 AM EDT up reply actions  

The advanced metrics/stats can be right sometimes...

But not all the time. It’s not the be-all end-all. There is more to a player’s worth than what the number crunchers will have you believe, anyway.

by GeddyLeeIsGod on Jul 15, 2010 11:07 AM EDT up reply actions  

the basic problem here is that all values of "right sometimes" are not actually equal

The whole point of “the advanced metrics” is to work towards better and better correlation with winning games (or if you prefer, scoring and preventing runs). Sure, every predictor from a dartboard to a scout’s educated guess to a computer simulation is wrong “sometimes” and right “sometimes.” The point is that the most worthwhile of the last twenty years’ saber stats are closer to what happens, most of the time, than the best guesses of people who talk about “number crunchers.”

by anonymous on Jul 15, 2010 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions  

So why the hell do you even both reading the site and commenting?

I find this incomprehensible. You hate advanced statistics, find the commenters to be bores (based on what you wrote above), and yet you’re on here wasting your time writing comments that you know no one will take seriously. Are you that bored at work or hard up for friends that the only way you can find any form of interesting human interaction is to troll a sports blog?

by dcmetsfan on Jul 15, 2010 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions  

Well,

I may dislike sabermetrics, but I love the Mets. I don’t find the writing here “boring” (not sure where you got that from). I feel I can bring a unique perspective to the discussions that go on here, and so far I think I’ve done that, though there have been some growing pains.

by GeddyLeeIsGod on Jul 15, 2010 11:16 AM EDT up reply actions  

ignore it

then ignore it. There are more facets to fanhood than performance evaluation and projection, and if statistics don’t agree with you, that’s probably one you should eschew.

"Infield hits are sexy, because they require technique."

-Ichiro

by VivaLosBravos on Jul 15, 2010 11:26 AM EDT up reply actions  

moving pictures is a great album, btw

"Infield hits are sexy, because they require technique."

-Ichiro

by VivaLosBravos on Jul 15, 2010 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions  

The BEST

album ever, anywhere, ever. Ever. Q.E.D.

by tmu on Jul 15, 2010 11:28 AM EDT up reply actions  

Hey

there’s no real reason to get hot under the collar, and you have to admit, if you take on the almighty stat around here, people get an image of Jim Rome in their minds and take out the long knives.

by tmu on Jul 15, 2010 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions  

If you want to "take on the almighty stat" (BARF, by the way)

Then do it in a constructive and substantive manner. Explain why the stat, or application of the stat, sucks. Giving us “lol i’m glad I don’t subscribe to that trash” adds nothing. It’s the Fernando Nieve of comments.

by James Kannengieser on Jul 15, 2010 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

But look

I don’t think it’s debatable that there are some folks on here (youngsters, as has been revealed in the past) who really get bent when someone tosses off something fairly benign, like “lol, I’m glad I. . . etc.” there was a trollish accent to what he wrote, but so what? In the past, we’ve had people explain “luck” and why it’s something of a misnomer. But instead, this time, we got “way to not understand shit, but still bash it, you rube.” (paraphrase.) That’s pretty defensive, by any measure. Is it really a surprise when the troll guy’s “presentation” gets defensive after that?

I think the main issue is actually that the main posts often have the typical mocking, snarky tone that we find all over the web — nothing wrong with that. That’s what people like — ‘s clever and funny. But the “snarky” tone that accompanies presentation of “advanced” (chuckle) metrics has a hint of "you’re an idiot if you don’t buy into this." And, so, the odd reader drawn in by the writing and insight but not too keen on the stats is a little . . . insulted — not severely or seriously, but enough to comment, or post a little retort/ barb, etc.

And then all hell breaks loose.

by tmu on Jul 15, 2010 2:39 PM EDT up reply actions  

I can't say that it's the case 100% of the time

But generally the snarky stuff is reserved for those who have proven to be willfully ignorant. When people mock things they don’t understand, they deserve ridicule, in my opinion. When people are curious about concepts they can’t quite grasp and ask questions about said concepts, they deserve to be treated with respect and engaged in discussion.

by James Kannengieser on Jul 15, 2010 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

How do we know he doesn't understand it?

there was some hyperbole in what he wrote, but I think he understands the basic concepts w/r to the discussion of Elmer Dessens. Just doesn’t buy it. I guess the correct response is to say, hey, if you think Elmer Dessens is going to be a trailblazing Maddux-like anomaly for the rest of his career, I’ll be happy to pat you onthe back.

by tmu on Jul 15, 2010 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

It would be more helpful to simply ignore GLG, guys.

Now this is just one more thread he’s derailed, which is probably a good part of his aim.

by Jack Str on Jul 15, 2010 7:25 PM EDT up reply actions  

this

I want Jerry Manuel fired now, not three years from now. That is my stance.- John Peterson

by Gina on Jul 15, 2010 7:28 PM EDT up reply actions  

TMU, perhaps you’re a much better/more patient person than I (or anyone else I know)…

But it sure is hard to respond to

lol I’m glad I don’t subscribe to that trash.
with civility and levelheaded commentary.

formerly known around these parts as nycbroncosfan

by Douglas A. Lee on Jul 15, 2010 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

I dunno

You’d be the first person to accuse me of patience on this site!!

I think it’s probably because I’m not that invested in the debate. Maybe Dessens was makign his pitches. I just really, really doubt he’s going to keep makign his pitches.

by tmu on Jul 15, 2010 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

However you feel about the debate, you have to admit that Geddy came out with guns blazing. If he’s a troll, then mission accomplished. If not, well, he earned the responses.

formerly known around these parts as nycbroncosfan

by Douglas A. Lee on Jul 15, 2010 3:20 PM EDT up reply actions  

One other thing

I noted it below in a comment, but nowhere in this post did Eric use the word “luck”.

by James Kannengieser on Jul 15, 2010 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

I know

but this guy had read enough on BABIP, FB% etc. to know what the basic argument is. Is Eric not saying that Dessens has been “lucky”? He’s basically saying that ERA is the outlying statistic. It’s not hard to smelt “luck” out of that argument. Now, there’s “luck,” and there’s “luck”, and I think Alex’s discussion of “luck” that you discussed below could clear up quite a bit of confusion.

by tmu on Jul 15, 2010 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

So would you prefer Eric, or anyone else, copy and paste Alex's screed

every time they compare a pitcher’s runs allowed to his peripherals? No, of course not. I think Eric’s wording is more than fair:

given more playing time, the results are likely to catch up (or down?) to the process

Reliable statistics led Eric to this conclusion. It’s not a guarantee, it’s an opinion based on sabermetrics. What’s the problem? If a person feels otherwise, they can express it. But if it’s provided without a shred of evidence, it will justifiably be questioned. If GeddyLee wants to say Elmer has a special skill that helps suppress BABIP, great! I’d love to hear about that, assuming GeddyLee has something to back that statement up. But of course, he doesn’t, and reverts to “Gotta love sabermetrics” and “lol I’m glad…”.

by James Kannengieser on Jul 15, 2010 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions  

point taken, though I wasn't suggesting Eric do that

but if someone reading that freaks out about “luck”, we can say, “it’s OK, buddy — we’re just saying that pitchers like Dessens have been shown not to be able to maintain a low ERA. If you think he’ll be an outlier, off to Vegas with you.”

As an aside, this is an awesome sentence:

If GeddyLee wants to say Elmer has a special skill that helps suppress BABIP, great!

by tmu on Jul 15, 2010 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions  

And by the way

Dan Lewis made a FanPost titled “It’s Time To Stop Using BABIP”, where he took on the “almighty stat”. It has 12 “rec’s” and has generally been well received and sparked interesting discussion. Show me the long knives there.

by James Kannengieser on Jul 15, 2010 1:01 PM EDT up reply actions  

This.

"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.

by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Jul 15, 2010 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions  

The arguement....

for or against various statistical measures pretty much loses it’s focus when things get personal. There’s a difference between “I think I’m right” and “I AM right”. Some stats are better than others, I think all are useful tools, though none by themselves tells a whole story and while the sum of them offer a framework for predictable future performance, none guarantee it.

by Cranky50 on Jul 15, 2010 11:17 AM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

Bingo

The problem that I’ve seen is that some of the more stat-orthodox think that they really can prove that they really “ARE right.” i think what they miss is that that they’re arguing about some inherently fuzzy notions, like who has had a “better year,” etc. It’s starts to become a very tired linguistic exercise.

by tmu on Jul 15, 2010 11:26 AM EDT up reply actions  

Those who do that...

… tend to be the medium-smart, standing-on-the-shoulders-of-giants types, not looking for more knowledge, baseball-wise, in their embrace of “new stats,” but a new religion with which to bludgeon nonbelievers.

These guys are almost as annoying as the Luddites, if not moreso at times. It’s like, YOU’RE on MY side?

by LeiterMilnerFasterStronger on Jul 15, 2010 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

this

don’t feed the troll

I want Jerry Manuel fired now, not three years from now. That is my stance.- John Peterson

by Gina on Jul 15, 2010 5:30 PM EDT up reply actions  

And gravity?

Don’t get me started! That meanie keeps everyone from realizing their dreams of flying. At ITS worst, people fall and die! WHAT UP WITH THAT?

by LeiterMilnerFasterStronger on Jul 15, 2010 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

If this were the case

wouldn’t everyone get a grade of ‘C’ with an explanation of why they were lucky or unlucky? Do you really think Elmer Dessens is going to have a sub-3.00 ERA all season? Do you think Mike Pelfrey is going to win 20 games?

You don't cheer for the Mets. You drink for the Mets.

by Kevin H on Jul 15, 2010 11:51 AM EDT up reply actions  

Actually, one could make a case that Elmer might very well end up under 3.00...

    Over the last season and a half, Dessens has pitched in 49 games for a total of 51 innings. That equates to pretty much a full season for a number four or five guy out of the bullpen, which is really what he is. Over that time he’s posted a 2.65 E.R.A. Last year he gave up 5 homers, this year 0 thus far. I won’t argue he won’t give up any in the future, but many of his stats this year are fairly comparable to last year, and it really wouldn’t be shocking if he did. I’ll grant that this is a better mark than his career stats would indicate, but it’s also the best and freshest data we have. Maybe he is just “lucky”, he sure isn’t blowing people away, but he also hasn’t been ineffective during his time with the Mets.

by Cranky50 on Jul 15, 2010 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

I meant under 2.00

You’re right, it’s pretty possible that he could pitch fairly decently in the second half and still sneak in under 3.00. And it’s not impossible he could be under 2.00 for the whole year, just not very likely.

You don't cheer for the Mets. You drink for the Mets.

by Kevin H on Jul 15, 2010 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'll be VERY surprised if he stays under 2.00 on E.R.A., but the 3.00 can be done...

   He’s obviously well under 3.00 now and given the way Jerry butchers his bullpen if he has a bad outing or two, he’ll not only lift his E.R.A., but Jerry will stop using him for a month or two. Thus, with each successful outing he has, he makes it far more likely that he’ll maintain a decent E.R.A. for the year, even if he implodes later, based on the way we’ve seen Jerry mishandle the bullpen.

by Cranky50 on Jul 15, 2010 4:12 PM EDT up reply actions  

Good post.

Btw, xFIP is also a thoroughly unconvincing stat. Pitchers have a fair amount of control over BABIP. I don’t doubt that some pitchers are better at getting fly balls that don’t go over the fence than other pitchers are.

by Jack Str on Jul 15, 2010 7:27 PM EDT up reply actions  

When someone is performing in a completely different manner than the rest of their career would indicate, chances are they’re either going through a lucky or unlucky streak.

So, someone who subscribes to your theory was calling Pelfrey one of the best young pitchers in baseball a month ago, while the saber guys were saying, “Wait, something’s not right here. He’s not actually pitching that much better than in the past.”

formerly known around these parts as nycbroncosfan

by Douglas A. Lee on Jul 15, 2010 11:54 AM EDT up reply actions  

I also don't get why

it’s so terrible to say that somebody’s been a little bit lucky over a period of time. Luck is a big part of baseball, and I think it’s one of the big reasons we love it so much. If there were no luck in baseball, the better team would win every time, and it would be really boring. It’s as if there’s this unwritten rule that sportscasters can never chalk up anything to luck, and yet declaring somebody is “a winner” passes for solid baseball analysis.

You don't cheer for the Mets. You drink for the Mets.

by Kevin H on Jul 15, 2010 12:03 PM EDT up reply actions  

People who don't acknowledge luck

are the same folks who think they’re great blackjack players after a run of blackjacks…

formerly known around these parts as nycbroncosfan

by Douglas A. Lee on Jul 15, 2010 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions  

hey he donated a lot of money to Carolina too

next to our baseball stadium is the Steinbrenner Hall of Fame. I think his daughter’s on the board of visitors too.

I want Jerry Manuel fired now, not three years from now. That is my stance.- John Peterson

by Gina on Jul 15, 2010 5:31 PM EDT up reply actions  

lol at the 'buckle down' comment

yup…its very likely professional athletes only play hard when there are runners on base.

by Mike Clemente on Jul 15, 2010 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think Maine is a D- or maybe even an F.

and if the Mets had any offense for Johan starts, he’d be an A.

One day, this team is going to kill me.

by fxcarden on Jul 15, 2010 11:18 AM EDT reply actions  

I'll go with the F,

as he has simply failed at every aspect and should be off the team.

by Jack Str on Jul 15, 2010 7:28 PM EDT up reply actions  

Traid for Eckstein

"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.

by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Jul 16, 2010 1:20 AM EDT up reply actions  

I can't believe I'm saying this but...

Disagree. Maine still has potential. I think Ollie does as well. It’s a matter of improving assets, rather than getting new ones. Better to get marital counseling than to pay alimony, if you get my drift.

by MookieTheCat on Jul 16, 2010 1:39 AM EDT up reply actions  

I agree with basically all of these grades, down the line.

Iggy’s “F” is more like an “incomplete” in my book, but what he’s completed thus far has been a healthy slathering of fail.

Not sure about Santana’s “B”. either. More like a B+. That’s a dealbreaker, and this whole post therefore sucks ballzz.

by tmu on Jul 15, 2010 11:34 AM EDT reply actions  

That's all accurate, pretty much

I’d give Valdez maybe a C+, though.

"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.

by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Jul 15, 2010 12:13 PM EDT reply actions  

Raul Valdes

33 k’s in 30.1 innings
13 walks in 30.1 innings
3.18 FIP
4.03 xFIP
3.17 tERA
1.48 xFIP vs. lefties

All from a guy randomly signed out of the Mexican League?

A

by Pat Andriola on Jul 15, 2010 12:21 PM EDT reply actions  

So much value

You’d think he came in a Los Costco twenty-pack.

by LeiterMilnerFasterStronger on Jul 15, 2010 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

Sabermetrics

The fact is baseball is art and science, qualitative and quantitative. But to come in here and dismiss Sabermetrics on a site that’s devoted to Sabermetrics doesn’t really further the discussion. Baseball is situational, and if advanced statistics provide a more telling view of how a player performs in certain situations, why not embrace it? Jerry Manuel seems to “manage by the book,” yet the book was written based on traditional statistical measures that are basically raw numbers. If Sabermetrics is where baseball is headed, I would think the Mets should get with the program.

by ColoradoMetsFan on Jul 15, 2010 12:36 PM EDT reply actions  

Excellent, with one exception.

Manuel has explicitly said he does not manage by the book and instead goes with his gut, preferring to see how a player performs in BP as opposed to looking up his numbers and finding out that that player cannot, for example, hit righthanded pitching.

by Jack Str on Jul 15, 2010 7:31 PM EDT up reply actions  

he manages by the book

unless the book makes sense and his gut doesn’t.

I want Jerry Manuel fired now, not three years from now. That is my stance.- John Peterson

by Gina on Jul 15, 2010 7:37 PM EDT up reply actions  

I can solve this conundrum

He obviously swallowed the book

by tmu on Jul 15, 2010 7:44 PM EDT up reply actions  

Manuel and Managing by the Book

Arguably, his bullpen management is by the book, but you’re right, it is very gut driven. Although I question his gut. Recently there was a situation where he brought Chris Carter in to pinch hit and the other team responded with a left hander. Instead of letting Carter go against the left hander, which would have been a gutsy move based on by-the-book management, he sat Carter down and put Tatis into bat. We all know how that ended. So if he doesn’t manage by the book, it’s a matter of semantics. Call it management by conventional wisdom.

by ColoradoMetsFan on Jul 15, 2010 8:06 PM EDT up reply actions  

i call it management by a moron

I want Jerry Manuel fired now, not three years from now. That is my stance.- John Peterson

by Gina on Jul 15, 2010 8:40 PM EDT up reply actions  

K-Rod an "A-"?

uhm, I have problems with that.

he’s no more a “B”, for a “closer” in making that obscene amount of money and for having tons of shaky outings, forget the 4 “BS”, every closer as them. But K-Rod is not dependable… whenever he comes in I always shut off the TV or switch channels. to me, he’s that bad. like I said before, I trust him far less than I did Armando Benitez, or even Billy the Goat Wagner.

Give Raul Valdes a higher grade, at least a B/B+.
change Pelf to a B-. he’s overrated by a lot of fans mainly because we want him to succeed so badly. he’s not a number two, or an Ace yet, a very solid number 3 though.
I’m tempted to give Jon Niese an A-, but a very strong B+ is a happy grade and I for one am glad Omar did the right thing in hanging on to him.
I’d give Takahashi a B, he was inserted in the shaky starting rotation to simply stay the course…and he has done that and more.

I agree with the other pitchers’ grades though. I hope you’re right we never see Ollie or Maine again in a Mets’ uniform. I don’t care if they pitch elsewhere, but goodness, I had enough of these two.

"Fantasy, reality, science Fiction. Which is which? Who can tell?"

by feslenraster on Jul 15, 2010 1:30 PM EDT reply actions  

i am ok with krod getting an A-

his K-rate is really rather nice – 10.84, better than the last 2 years though he has still done better.
his BB-rate is really nice for him – 3.48, the second lowest of his career. together this makes a nice 3.12 K:BB
his average against is the highest of his career, but he also has the highest BABIP against of his career
he is getting the job done, and doing it with peripherals that are among the best of his career

I like Ike

by astromets on Jul 15, 2010 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions  

fwiw

i did an xBABIP of k-rod and it came out .297 vs the .336 BABIP he has had for the season. not confirmed if i can use the same excel program for pitchers, but if this were accurate i guess it would confirm he has been a little unlucky and if he keeps pitching the way he has that he will have an even better second half, a more watchable second half

I like Ike

by astromets on Jul 15, 2010 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions  

there's an xBABIP for pitchers

somewhere on fangraphs. It’s a formula, not a program.

"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"

by firejerrynow on Jul 15, 2010 2:59 PM EDT up reply actions  

in which case

his xBABIP is .2826

I like Ike

by astromets on Jul 15, 2010 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions  

Just realized

For all the bitching and moaning about saber-oriented people overusing luck to explain things, Eric didn’t use the word “luck” once in this post. All he did was suggest that, if current peripheral performances continued for certain pitchers, the results might worsen. Just re-read the Dessens part:

All of this means that, given more playing time, the results are likely to catch up (or down?) to the process

He’s not stating that it will happen, just that it’s likely. And history is on Eric’s side.

by James Kannengieser on Jul 15, 2010 1:38 PM EDT reply actions  

Here's a good comment from Alex in one of the Gary Cohen threads last week

Linked here.


We often use the term "luck" as a catch-all for things that aren’t easily explained. If a pitcher is thriving with a .325 BABIP, he may be finding a smidgeon more like on his fastball, or something like that, something that is the direct result of an action the pitcher performs, not something completely out of his control. That runs contrary to what we normally think of as luck.
But here’s the rub: unless the trait is a repeatable skill, it doesn’t really matter whether it’s truly luck—something the pitcher has no control over—or not. What matters is that it’s something the pitcher is not able to do at will, and therefore is not ultimately responsible for his success or lack thereof.
There are some pitchers who succeed with high BABIPs on a consistent basis. Finesse lefties, knuckleballers, guys who gets tons of infield flies, whatever. But because it takes so long to determine whether the pitcher has that skill or not (three years, minimum, in my eyes and probably more like five) we might merely add the pitcher might be "lucky," and I do firmly believe that is fair, regardless of whether it’s the Las Vegas variety is really at play or not. Once the player has proven it not to be the case, I have no problem qualifying the player’s strengths and/or weaknesses.

by James Kannengieser on Jul 15, 2010 2:40 PM EDT up reply actions  

Hmm...
Easily the most pleasant surprise of the first half, and even though the euphemistic headlines are getting old…

Hey, just because you have a hard time getting a grip on Dickey-related hu—

… I think Dickey’s outlook has been solidified by an arousing performance thus far.

Oh, I see what you did there.

by LeiterMilnerFasterStronger on Jul 15, 2010 2:43 PM EDT reply actions  

All joking aside...

… I look at Dickey, and a small part of me keeps whispering, “Hough and Wakefield were about the same age when they ‘got it,’ and he throws a lot harder and funkier a knuckler, and maybe this is just the start of something and…”

And then I try my best to strangle that part, for fear of disappointment.

by LeiterMilnerFasterStronger on Jul 15, 2010 3:03 PM EDT up reply actions  

Dickey would be the first to get stronger with age

OK, I’m stretching it now. (HA!!! Impossible to stop, even when you want to. HA!!)

Anyway, I don’t know enough about knuckleballers, but I can’t think of many who have had a run of success and then just . . . disappeared. Probably my crap memory, but usually, they just can’t control the pitch and never even get a foot int he door.

by tmu on Jul 15, 2010 3:07 PM EDT up reply actions  

POP QUIZ/OPINION POLL

More likely to collapse completely, performance-wise, in the second half (injuries excepted): Remarkable Athlete Dickey or Tak-2?

by LeiterMilnerFasterStronger on Jul 15, 2010 3:01 PM EDT reply actions  

Tak2

For Dickey, second time through the league, and yup — still a knuckleball.

by tmu on Jul 15, 2010 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

well taka if he is starting

dessens if taka gets moved to the pen. no reason to expect dickey to start doing bad

I like Ike

by astromets on Jul 15, 2010 3:06 PM EDT up reply actions  

Tak2

"I want to win now, not 3 years from now. That's my stance." - Kevin Burkhardt

by Brian. on Jul 15, 2010 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions  

dickey

just because I feel like tak-2 has already collapsed.

I want Jerry Manuel fired now, not three years from now. That is my stance.- John Peterson

by Gina on Jul 15, 2010 5:32 PM EDT up reply actions  

i thought it was funny, but i dont like laughing at green

one, he got injured and thats not funny. two, he would have just been one more pitcher that would have had to be cut for mejia to make the team

I like Ike

by astromets on Jul 15, 2010 3:51 PM EDT reply actions  

Where are the midterm batting grades?

That would be significantly more telling. Pitching, for better or worse, is the only reason we are over .500. If I missed the post over the past few days, apologies, but yeah….

by MookieTheCat on Jul 16, 2010 12:53 AM EDT reply actions  

eh our offense has also overperfprmed

we’re around middle of the league in runs..when we should probably be near the bottom given our absurd plate approaches.

I want Jerry Manuel fired now, not three years from now. That is my stance.- John Peterson

by Gina on Jul 16, 2010 7:20 AM EDT up reply actions  

with the exception of Jason Bay, you mean

my own grades on the hitters:

Jason Bay: D
David Wright: B+
Jose Reyes: C-
Angel Pagan: A
Rod Barajas: C+
Henry Blanco: C+
Ruben Tejada: C-
Luis Castillo: C-
Ike Davis: B
Frenchy: C-
Tatis: D
Cora: C-
Thole: INC/C

is there any scrub on the bench I’m forgetting to grade?

Sean Green will still stink if he’s pitching at all. I don’t like laughing at guys legitmiately on the DL either, but meh, he sucks healthy or not!

"Fantasy, reality, science Fiction. Which is which? Who can tell?"

by feslenraster on Jul 16, 2010 8:37 AM EDT up reply actions  

Frenchy higher than Bay?

Factoring salary I assume? Also, I think Wright is an A. A- at worst.

by James Kannengieser on Jul 16, 2010 9:07 AM EDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Ctm-logo_small
My dirty little secret: I was once a Yankees fan
Awesome_small
Sabermetrics and Me: Drowning in Objectivity
Mets002_small
2012 AA Prospects List #3

Recent FanPosts

Mets002_small
2012 AA Prospects List #7
159714144_040c6c1501_small
Varieties of Baseball Experience
Small
Am I crazy?..
Mets002_small
2012 AA Prospects List #6
Mets002_small
2012 AA Prospects List #5
X-wing_small
BrooksBaseball Player Cards: An Amazing Resource For Mets Fans Who Are Curious About How Pitchers Pitch In The Major Leagues
Mets002_small
2012 AA Prospects List #4
Small
Sandy Alderson, @MetsGM, and getting ready for Spring Training

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recommended FanShots

Introducing Buddy Alderson, Sandy's dog, and the newest member of Puppy Avenue!

Embiggen here.
Judging by the comments to Matt Callan’s ode to 1986 Mets: A Year To Remember from a few weeks back, the video has a devoted Mets fan following. Despite being too young to remember anything about that season, it has a special place in my fandom as well. It was part of a two video rotation (Ghostbusters being the other) which ran almost daily on my television for a few years in the early 90s. And it remained a once-in-awhile watch through high school and college. 

Unsurprisingly, the physical tape deteriorated over time, and the screen jumps and sound skips made for a less than optimal viewing experience. With sale of the video discontinued, my brother converted it to DVD and gave it to me for Christmas in 2010. See the picture above for the box and DVD. He even created a scene selection function which can be accessed from the main menu. "Get Metsmerized!" plays on loop on the menu screen. It is my favorite Christmas gift ever and is still nice to throw on for a viewing.

"How'd we do it? Mirrors!"
I was flipping through some of my parents' photo albums this afternoon in search of one particular shot of the sign my older sister made for Mets Banner Day back in the late eighties. Though I didn't find that one — I'll post it when I eventually track it down, and I can assure you that it's Keith-themed — but I did stumble upon this wonderful photo of my younger sister's stuffed animal menagerie spread out in front of a glorious rainbow-festooned Mets pennant, also from the late eighties.

She works for the HRC now and was particularly delighted to be reminded of this photo.

(click to embiggen)

Recent FanShots

ST TV Schedule
Mets Expected To watch Scott Kazmir Pitch
Dickey is # 2 defensive pitcher
Yahoo Sports comments on Sandy's Tweets
Using hindsight to redo the Mets’ offseason | Mets360
Cespedes to the Athletics
Kevin Goldstein Top 101
Okay, there is no way this is Sandy Alderson

+ New FanShot All FanShots >

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Ctm-logo_small
My dirty little secret: I was once a Yankees fan
Awesome_small
Sabermetrics and Me: Drowning in Objectivity
Mets002_small
2012 AA Prospects List #3

Recent FanPosts

Mets002_small
2012 AA Prospects List #7
159714144_040c6c1501_small
Varieties of Baseball Experience
Small
Am I crazy?..
Mets002_small
2012 AA Prospects List #6
Mets002_small
2012 AA Prospects List #5
X-wing_small
BrooksBaseball Player Cards: An Amazing Resource For Mets Fans Who Are Curious About How Pitchers Pitch In The Major Leagues
Mets002_small
2012 AA Prospects List #4
Small
Sandy Alderson, @MetsGM, and getting ready for Spring Training

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


THE BIG GUY

Aa_avatar_small Eric Simon

THE INCREDIBLES

Blackfish2_small Alex Nelson

Endy_small Rob Castellano

Img_1262_small Matthew Artus

Kanye_pekka_small Sam Page

Best_infield_ever_small James Kannengieser

Metsstitches_small Eno Sarris

48900_1085732804_4466_n_small Chris McShane

Lg_rocker_ap_small Matthew Callan

Billy_and_daddy_4th_of_july_small Bill Petti

THE NEWS GURUS

Mrmet_small Steve Schreiber

3_small Stephen Schmidt

159714144_040c6c1501_small Pack Bringley

124967042_crop_340x234_small Jeffrey Paternostro