Rachel Phelps: I think he’ll fit right in with our team concept.
Charlie Donovan: That reminds me, I was going to ask you. What exactly *is* our team concept?
(From IMBD.com)
A lot of heat was thrown at Omar and the Mets for their “overzealous” pursuit of the catcher position. The Mets were just plain bad in 2009, much because of injury but also because of lousy pitching. The catcher position by many was considered one of the least important on a laundry list of improvements needed.  Today, it could be argued that the signings of Barajas and Blanco are the most imp0rant moves of the off-season. Before I start to break down pitching stats, which I believe are directly related to improved game calling and team philosophy, lets look at 2 catcher stats. The Mets are 1st in the NL in least amount of steals given up at 4 SB. They are also first in least amount of steals attempted at 8. Now thing about this, although the Mets still lead the NL in walks they have given up the least amount of SB attempted?
Now for the pitching. Lot of stats here so non-stat minded people beware.
- Mets are 3rd in pitcher age at 28.1. I put this up front because the once “old” Mets now have a very young pitching staff that could get younger if the Mets decide to make a move with Maine.
- 3rd in Runs/Game
- 4th in ERA
- 4th in Wins (Yup the Mets are tied for the 4th most wins in the NL)
- 2nd in Shutouts
- 1st in innings pitched (that 20 inning game does not help)
- 1st in least amount of unearned runs given up (only 2 UER the entire season)
- 2nd in least amount of HR given up
- 1st in K’s (how long has it been since the Mets lead the NL in K’s?)
- 3rd in K/9
- 5th in H/9
- 5th in BAA
All while achieving the least amount of SP run support in the NL.
While I know it’s early, is it a mere coincidence that the Mets bring in two catchers known for their game calling ability and the Mets staff becomes a strength? I think not.
While hot bats can carry you for a while, strong SP allows you to go on winning streaks. If the Mets continue to pitch well and the bats get going to they could be in great shape to compete for the playoffs. Just as many of us expected them to do. It’s early… but it’s also hard not to be excited.
53 comments
njstuckintx
4/26/2010-10:23am at 10:23 am (UTC -4)
# of strikeouts is nice. I wonder where they are with BB.
metsfan4decades
4/26/2010-10:59am at 10:59 am (UTC -4)
I don’t know what the official stats are but unfortunately, I believe they mentioned last night during the game that the Mets lead the league (or almost lead the league) in walks given up.
So..it must be a testament to the defense so far, and the pitchers who are able to get that K or double play when they’re walking so many guys.
trs86
4/26/2010-11:03am at 11:03 am (UTC -4)
Yes they indeed do lead the league in walks yet again.
njstuckintx
4/26/2010-11:12am at 11:12 am (UTC -4)
The walks are pretty bad. But, lady luck has been hanging with the Mets on that front so far.
And I glanced at Cincy’s SP… it’s pretty dreadful. I’m not so certain I would want any other their available pitchers (Arroyo, Harang). Maybe Bailey, but he’s out of options and hasn’t shown much as of yet. Come on Maine, get the ship righted!
Kingman 26
4/26/2010-10:29am at 10:29 am (UTC -4)
I was saying this all spring. Omar did a magnificent job with the catchers.
When the whining fools were all yelping about these two guys, saying Omar signed another two “broken down” “Latino” “bums,” some of us were insisting that they were two very solid defensive players who would tremendously help the pitching after the truly awful Schneider.
Nice work TRS.
metsfan4decades
4/26/2010-10:41am at 10:41 am (UTC -4)
As I said earlier, when Omar was talking about getting veteran catchers for this season, good plate defense, calls a good game, I was skeptical. I thought those stories we were reading about the pitching last year being worse than it should have been b/c of catching was over rated. Well…I now am reversing my opinion on that.
Pelf has done nothing but rave about Blanco. Said that game last night, had it been last year, he probably would have been knocked out in the 3rd, just throwing fastballs b/c he didn’t have his ‘stuff’. He gave a lot of credit to Blanco getting him through those 5 innings. He’s been saying since the first game he’s so much more comfortable with Blanco. Not sure what that says about Barajas, who I understand from the Phillies had a great reputation for working with young pitchers as well.
If I’m not mistaken, Blanco has like a 46% success rate for his career with throwing runners out on base (4 for 4 this year) and Barajas is above average as well.
Not to mention, even though neither are offensive power houses, how much more confident are you when they come up to bat with a man on third, < 2 outs, they’ll actually get a sac fly? I know I am….
Saw many comments on the Phillies blogs last Friday after that Hamels blow up where they were putting some of the blame on Schneider and the game he was calling……
Kingman 26
4/26/2010-10:58am at 10:58 am (UTC -4)
Supposedly Padre pitchers hated to see Blanco go, and supposedly it was over less than 1 mil.
So, when the morons in the offseason were saying that getting Blanco was a “typical small market” move by “Los Mets” and “The Coupons” it was extremely irritating, as it was precisely the OPPOSITE.
A big-market team spending a few bucks on a backup catcher who was too expensive for a small market club.
trs86
4/26/2010-10:54am at 10:54 am (UTC -4)
Interesting? From MB, is Jerry a genius after all?
Jose Reyes is 4 for 9 with two walks, two stolen bases and three runs scored, during which the Mets are 3–0, since he moved from the leadoff spot to batting third.
Similarly, Jason Bay, who is batting behind Reyes, is 5 for 9 with two walks, no strike outs and two RBI.
ceetar
4/26/2010-10:56am at 10:56 am (UTC -4)
Or simply two players taht were due getting hot. Good for them to be near each other though. Of course, Pagan has cooled off since going to leadoff.
udontmesswthejohan
4/26/2010-11:26am at 11:26 am (UTC -4)
It’s been a real pleasure to watch these two guys work thus far. That may say more about them not being Schneider than anything else, but so far, both of them have been really pleasant surprises. Blanco is worth the money he’s getting paid just for the confidence he seems to have instilled in Pelfrey.
Barajas also catches a good game and has some pop in his bat. If this lineup ever gets running on all cyclinders, then you can certainly take what he gives you in the 7th or 8th hole.
These guys may not be around long term, but as far as the catchers position, it’s like night and day compared to alst year. I forgot that catchers could, you know, occasionally block balls in the dirt and/or hit HRs.
GravediggerHebner
4/26/2010-12:08pm at 12:08 pm (UTC -4)
That stat “1st in innings pitched” what is that referring to specifically, total innings by the entire staff?
The reason I ask is I thought last night the broadcasters noted that the Mets lead the league (unclear if this is MLB or NL) in relief innings pitched, which while it shines another light on the brilliant bullpen does not exactly reflect well on the starters.
trs86
4/26/2010-12:10pm at 12:10 pm (UTC -4)
Total innings pitched. Misleading stat because of extra innings game AND I think we have played more than most.
Mr North Jersey
4/26/2010-12:22pm at 12:22 pm (UTC -4)
Mets starters are actually 22nd in innings pitched with 105.0/IP
1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th are
122.0 Toronto
121.2 Tampa
120.2 Anahaein
120.2 St Louis
Mets releivers are 3rd in MLB in innings pitched with 71.0/IP
1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th are
73.1 Pirates
72.2 Nationals
71.0 Mets
66.0 Tigers
Mr North Jersey
4/26/2010-12:15pm at 12:15 pm (UTC -4)
All the stats are nice but the stat that I would say is funny is the one that says the Mets are
4th in Wins.
No doubt it is accurate but when you add that the Pirates are tied for 7th in wins with a 7-11 record being fourth loses its luster especially when just about 25% of MLB is tied for 4th.
With an 8th of the season just about out the way there are definite good signs though.
trs86
4/26/2010-12:38pm at 12:38 pm (UTC -4)
Considering where we started, being 4th in wins is an accomplishment.
Mr North Jersey
4/26/2010-12:43pm at 12:43 pm (UTC -4)
Yep we went from 7th to 4th.
trs86
4/26/2010-12:49pm at 12:49 pm (UTC -4)
I guess it depends on when you start from. I would think the Mets at 2-6 or 3-7 would have been lower than 7th.
Mr North Jersey
4/26/2010-1:00pm at 1:00 pm (UTC -4)
The Pirates are 4 games below 500 and are 7th.
trs86
4/26/2010-1:04pm at 1:04 pm (UTC -4)
Uh… OK. But wouldn’t that be assuming that the 3-7 Mets played .500 ball from then until now?
Enough of this madness. IMO they have done well to go from 3-7 to being with in one win of the NL leaders.
trs86
4/26/2010-1:06pm at 1:06 pm (UTC -4)
Regardless they have went from having only the Astros have less wins to being one win away from the most wins in the NL. To me, even if it is not for you, that is a significant achievement.
Mr North Jersey
4/26/2010-1:10pm at 1:10 pm (UTC -4)
Why you feel the need to be so defensive of such a vague stat I don’t know?
I never said the stat was inaccurate just that when looked at as a whole being 4th in wins is not that big a deal when 25% of MLB is also and the Pirates at 7-11 are 7th.
If you want to say it’s significant because of where we came from the that is fine but then show where we came from so we can see the significance of it.
trs86
4/26/2010-1:14pm at 1:14 pm (UTC -4)
from having only the Astros have less wins to being one win away from the most wins in the NL
3-7 to being with in one win of the NL leaders.
I would think the Mets at 2-6 or 3-7 would have been lower than 7th.
Mr North Jersey
4/26/2010-1:23pm at 1:23 pm (UTC -4)
I don’t want to debate fact or opinion with you because it is a waste of my time so i will say that if you think the Mets at 2-6 or 3-7 would have been lower than 7th then by all means you are welcome to your opinion.
trs86
4/26/2010-1:54pm at 1:54 pm (UTC -4)
How about I provide facts then? On April 14th the Mets were in 15th place in the NL for wins.
http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/standings/index.jsp?ymd=20100414
On April 16th at 3-7 the Mets were also 15th in the NL.
Thus I stand by my opinion on facts that the Mets going from 15th place to 4th is indeed a good achievement.
Mr North Jersey
4/26/2010-2:15pm at 2:15 pm (UTC -4)
lol TRS this is the NL wins for April 16th
Philadelphia 8/Wins 1st
St. Louis 7/Wins 2nd (Tied for 2nd)
San Francisco 7/Wins 2nd (Tied for 2nd)
Atlanta 6/Wins 3rd (Tied for 3rd)
Florida 6/Wins 3rd (Tied for 3rd)
Washington 5/Wins 4th (Tied for 4th)
Chicago 5/Wins 4th (Tied for 4th)
Pittsburgh 5/Wins 4th (Tied for 4th)
Cincinnati 5/Wins 4th (Tied for 4th)
Arizona 5/Wins 4th (Tied for 4th)
Colorado 5/Wins 4th (Tied for 4th)
Los Angeles 5/Wins 4th (Tied for 4th)
Milwaukee 4/Wins 5th (Tied for 5th)
San Diego 4/Wins 5th (Tied for 5th)
New York 3/Wins 6th
Houston 1/Wins 7th
If that is significant then that is fine but 3 wins separate them from being tied for 3rd. This is just not huge to me why you continue to challenge my opinion on this I do not understand. It is just not that big of a stat.
trs86
4/26/2010-2:35pm at 2:35 pm (UTC -4)
Because you are using in accurate stats in your opinion. They were not 6th they were 15th. That is not an opinion but fact. You have to count the spots in between as places.
Thus there are 10 runners in a race and 9 of them tie for 1st you are not 2nd you are 10th.
Mr North Jersey
4/26/2010-2:56pm at 2:56 pm (UTC -4)
I will simply fall back to the good old we will just have to agree to disagree on how significant this stat is.
trs86
4/26/2010-1:17pm at 1:17 pm (UTC -4)
Also, looking at stats the Pirates are NOT 7th. They are LAST. The tied spots still count as places. Thus the Mets are tied with a lot of teams for 4th. The next in line is actually 9th with 9 wins.
Mr North Jersey
4/26/2010-1:25pm at 1:25 pm (UTC -4)
TRS the Orioles are last with 3 wins.
Mr North Jersey
4/26/2010-1:41pm at 1:41 pm (UTC -4)
This is what i see according to MLB.
14/Wins Tampa 1st
13/Wins Twins 2nd
12/Wins Yankees 3rd (Tied for 3rd)
12/Wins Athletics 3rd (Tied for 3rd)
11/Wins Padres 4th (Tied for 4th)
11/Wins Phillies 4th (Tied for 4th)
11/Wins Cardinals 4th (Tied for 4th)
10/Wins Angels 5th (Tied for 5th)
10/Wins Nationals 5th (Tied for 5th)
10/Wins Rockies 5th (Tied for 5th)
10/Wins Tigers 5th (Tied for 5th)
10/Wins Marlins 5th (Tied for 5th)
10/Wins Giants 5th (Tied for 5th)
10/Wins Jays 5th (Tied for 5th)
10/Wins Mets 5th (Tied for 5th)
9/Wins Cubs 6th (Tied for 6th)
9/Wins Mariners 6th (Tied for 6th)
8/Wins Diamondbacks 7th (Tied for 7th)
8/Wins Astros 7th (Tied for 7th)
8/Wins Indians 7th (Tied for 7th)
8/Wins Red Sox 7th (Tied for 7th)
8/Wins White Sox 7th (Tied for 7th)
8/Wins Reds 7th (Tied for 7th)
8/Wins Braves 7th (Tied for 7th)
8/Wins Rangers 7th (Tied for 7th)
8/Wins Dodgers 7th (Tied for 7th)
8/Wins Brewers 7th (Tied for 7th)
7/Wins Royals 8th (Tied for 8th)
7/Wins Pirates 8th (Tied for 8th)
3/Wins Orioles 9th
http://mlb.mlb.com/stats/sortable_team_stats.jsp?statType=2&timeFrame=1&c_id=mlb§ion2=1&groupByTeam=true&sitSplit=&checkBoxTotal=0&statSet2=1&Submit=Submit&baseballScope=mlb&timeSubFrame=2010&sortByStat=W
trs86
4/26/2010-1:46pm at 1:46 pm (UTC -4)
That is why I said tied for 4th in the NL. In which the Pirates are last.
trs86
4/26/2010-1:48pm at 1:48 pm (UTC -4)
Also, it does not work that way and you know it does not. Those places count. Thus the O’s would not be 9th they would be 30th. How about copying what is beside of those team names? The part that has the Pirates 29th in the MLB and 16th in the NL.
Anyway.
Kind of pointless debate from the beginning.
Mr North Jersey
4/26/2010-1:58pm at 1:58 pm (UTC -4)
Exactly why the need to debate such a vague stat beats me.
trs86
4/26/2010-2:38pm at 2:38 pm (UTC -4)
I guess the same reason you decided from the beginning to debate me on it and continued just like I did?
Mr North Jersey
4/26/2010-3:07pm at 3:07 pm (UTC -4)
You made your point I offered mine and somehow you felt the need to challenge me on it as if somehow having a different opinion meant a call to arms.
Believe me when I tell you I don’t agree on many things said here but if I spent so much energy on debating every lil thing I didn’t agree with I would surpass you in most comments made on this blog.
So I just try to filter what I feel is worth getting into. This stat is something you feel highly about I guess that explains why you are so defensive about it.
I just didn’t think it was such a huge stat that would have you so defensive over it.
trs86
4/26/2010-3:12pm at 3:12 pm (UTC -4)
Nor would one thing that such an insignificant stat would have you so offensive about it. LOL.
Anyway, Mets went from 15th to 4th. I consider that a significant increase and you do not. Moving on.
Mr North Jersey
4/26/2010-3:21pm at 3:21 pm (UTC -4)
-sigh
Yep, I’m busted. That is what I was “offensive”.
Congrats you exposed me.
darn…
trs86
4/26/2010-3:25pm at 3:25 pm (UTC -4)
NJ, this was my first comment in this thread.
“Considering where we started, being 4th in wins is an accomplishment.”
Does not seem very defensive.
Mr North Jersey
4/26/2010-3:28pm at 3:28 pm (UTC -4)
<-- I surrendered.
trs86
4/26/2010-3:29pm at 3:29 pm (UTC -4)
Yeaaaaaaah. In our battle you did not finish last you finished tied for 2nd.
Mr North Jersey
4/26/2010-3:39pm at 3:39 pm (UTC -4)
Yes, whatever you say.
trs86
4/26/2010-1:46pm at 1:46 pm (UTC -4)
4th in Wins (Yup the Mets are tied for the 4th most wins in the NL)
stickguy
4/26/2010-12:19pm at 12:19 pm (UTC -4)
If they can manage to cut back on the walks and the number of pitches per inning (which logically tie together!), they should also get more innings out of the SP and cut back on pen usage. Jerry willing.
But, there is a plus to the walks. At least they aren’t XBHs. So instead of getting behind and giving up and grooving a FB, they are trying to let the batter get himself out.
Mr North Jersey
4/26/2010-12:28pm at 12:28 pm (UTC -4)
The Mets currently are 1st in Number of Pitches Thrown with 3130. The Yankees are last with 2516.
The Mets are 27th in Pitches per Innings Pitched with 17.78. Only the Royals, Reds and Dodgers are higher with 17.80, 17.96, and 17.99.
GravediggerHebner
4/26/2010-12:43pm at 12:43 pm (UTC -4)
I am much more interested in this stat than innings pitched. The reason I don’t really like “The Verducci Effect” is because it relies strictly on number of innings pitched (and IIRC doesn’t include minor league, spring training or post season innings).
Total pitches thrown by an arm seems much more meaningful than number of innings. That the Mets lead the league in total pitches thrown may be skewed slightly by the 20 inning game but the pitches thrown per inning stat does not bode well.
It should be noted that the Royals (7-11, 5.41 ERA – 28th in MLB), Reds (8-11, 6.02 ERA – 29th in MLB) and Dodgers (8-10, 4.92 ERA – 24th in MLB) are not exactly pitching stalwarts. The Mets may be more master illusionists than good pitchers at this point. As the season unfolds we’ll see if this is more real or more smoke and mirrors.
Mr North Jersey
4/26/2010-12:44pm at 12:44 pm (UTC -4)
Agreed
ceetar
4/26/2010-2:51pm at 2:51 pm (UTC -4)
And some pitches are less taxing, and probably an inning line of 14, 18, 35, 11, 13 is probably more damaging then a line of 20 20 20 20 20 20 20. I.e. trying to limit the innings where you really struggle. The first is two innings ‘better’ though.
None of these stats contribute to winning. It doesn’t matter how many pitches it takes as long as the health stays, which isn’t necessarily linked to high pitch counts.
Just like production isn’t linked to contract. (and looking at stats like ..WAR or Win Shares or whichever one it is that uses it is silly) Ryan Howard isn’t now suddenly “complete crap” if he doesn’t put up numbers that equate to A-Rod.
GravediggerHebner
4/26/2010-12:46pm at 12:46 pm (UTC -4)
Also the Mets are tied for 19th in MLB with 8 quality starts (tied with 7 teams). Only the Brewers and Phillies (7), the Padres (6), the Reds (5) and the Pirates (3) have fewer quality starts.
Mr North Jersey
4/26/2010-12:58pm at 12:58 pm (UTC -4)
Nice stat Grave where can i find that stat?
GravediggerHebner
4/26/2010-1:07pm at 1:07 pm (UTC -4)
ESPN baby!
Mr. NJ I think everything that you’ve brought up and that I’ve added supports TRS’ thesis that the catchers are doing a great job because IMO it’s a reasonable supposition that the Mets pitchers are walking a tightrope but that the catchers are carefully guiding them across it.
The problem only comes if that chore proves overwhelming for the catchers and the pitchers start falling off that tightrope.
Mr North Jersey
4/26/2010-1:17pm at 1:17 pm (UTC -4)
I agree Grave even just from listening to the pitchers talk about Blanco and Barajas you can see they are very happy with how the catchers are handling them and it is showing up in the stats.
I don’t know if you are aware of this but Pelfrey said that in his bullpen seession Blanco went and caught him which is something that catchers just don’t do according to him but Blanco does and he never had a catcher do that with him. It just shows how close they are working together and I for one have already said but will say it again early indicators are that next to the Baby Mets bearing fruit the signing of the catchers will go far in Minaya keeping his job.
Thanks for the link
GravediggerHebner
4/26/2010-1:24pm at 1:24 pm (UTC -4)
I did not know that about Blanco and the bullpen session, that’s cool. I just assumed that the bullpen catchers (Raccaniello?) did that and I guess that they usually do based on Pelfrey’s reaction to Blanco doing it.
For young pitchers, or veteran pitchers in some kind of funk, it makes a world of sense to have a ML catcher in there with them and not just (no offense to them) a bullpen catcher.
trs86
4/26/2010-1:08pm at 1:08 pm (UTC -4)
http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/NL/2010-starter-pitching.shtml