Jump to content
Grand Central Mets
  • Create Account

Recommended Posts

Old-Timey Member
Posted


After the game, Luis said that he had 6 "ups" which means that it's about the number of innings pitched and not the number of pitches. WTF?


  • Replies 213
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Old-Timey Member
Posted


Like I said, I know what he said before the game. And, like, it's not like they were "high-stress" innings, either. So unless his philosophy of pitcher management changed in-game...


Posted



After the game, Luis said that he had 6 "ups" which means that it's about the number of innings pitched and not the number of pitches. WTF?


He's covering his ass behind bullshit. I haven't been this furious since 2008


Posted


I've seen managers box themselves in with that logic before. The pitch count governs when he pulls the pitcher ... and if the pitcher keeps the pitch count down, the innings govern it. It's maddening, but yeah, the philosophy does seem to change mid-game.



I once saw saw Bud Black pull Greg Maddux with a shutout in the eighth and he had only thrown 68 pitches.



The guy was 42 years old. There was nothing to save him for. I looked up Maddux after the game and it turned out that he had been lifted after six two games earlier ... with an intact no-hitter going.



Can anybody even present any data showing that this is actually saving arms?


Posted


Tom Seaver's rolling over in his grave over this pitch count six inning start stuff. For the best pitcher on the planet, no less, who throws harder than Koufax and Ryan.



Bob Gibson, too.


Grand Central Contributor
Posted


Edgy MD wrote:



Can anybody even present any data showing that this is actually saving arms?


it's so hard to tell. modern medicine makes things better, we know more about conditioning in general. Guys were pitching hurt, so even if it seemed like they weren't getting hurt back then they probably were.



A lot of this stuff does make sense, from a muscle/workout standpoint right? Repetitive strain, cooling down and getting warm again, recovery times. but 100 pitches, and hell, even every 5th day are just made up benchmarks.



You obviously can't trust a pitcher to be honest with you, but I'm like 99.9% positive that between statcast and pitching coaches, you can detect when a pitcher is starting to actually fatigue, and deGrom wasn't there. Look at his release point! his velocity! hell, maybe even subtle changes to pace could indicate fatigue. But just counting innings? nah.


Posted


Lefty Specialist wrote:

This is shaping up to be one of those games where Jake pitches well enough to win but gets a ND instead.


I'm doing the equivalent of retweeting this forum post


Posted


A Boy Named Seo wrote:

Lefty Specialist wrote:

This is shaping up to be one of those games where Jake pitches well enough to win but gets a ND instead.


I'm doing the equivalent of retweeting this forum post


Yeah, you could see this one coming a mile down the road.



No clutch hitting with men in scoring position early, so they kept the Phillies in the game. Hell, Jake had to drive one in himself.

Pulling deGrom an inning early.

Rotating compost in the bullpen.

A key error in a big spot.



This is basically the Mets, 2017-2020. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.


Posted



After the game, Luis said that he had 6 "ups" which means that it's about the number of innings pitched and not the number of pitches. WTF?


This quote is my lede if I'm writing about the game. WtF are "ups" and when did this standard arrive?


Posted


The phrase wheedled its way into Rojas's explanation for pulling Lugo after three very sharp innings in his first start last year. I'd never heard it before then.


Rojas pulled Lugo after 39 pitches in Game 2, later saying that three up-and-downs was enough stress on the former closer in his first start. Lugo said he felt he could have gone longer, but thought it was “a good call” considering the circumstances. But the Marlins immediately took advantage, with Brian Anderson ripping a two-run double off Jared Hughes in the fourth inning to take a 2-0 lead.


Jared Hughes. Trevor May. Aaron Loup. The beat goes on.



https://nypost.com/2020/08/26/mets-blanked-twice-in-sweep-in-return-from-coronavirus-hiatus/https://nypost.com/2020/08/26/mets-blanked-twice-in-sweep-in-return-from-coronavirus-hiatus/


Posted


This was textbook 2020s managing - starter does his thing for six innings, then you bring in your 7th Inning Guy™, then your 8th Inning Guy™, then your LTOGY™ (fuck you, Manfred, for screwing up baseball AND screwing up the anagram), to get to your Closer™.



Problem is, when you have a shit lineup to begin with (Wouldn't it have been nice to have Nimmo up there with the bases loaded instead of Pillar in the fourth?), and when you play by The Book™ instead of letting the best pitcher on the goddamn planet just go (he couldn't get the 8-9-1 guys out in the seventh?), then you get what you get.


Old-Timey Member
Posted (edited)


Counterargument: Jake only would have pitched one more inning and Castro didn't allow a run in the 7th so taking Jake out one inning too early didn't cost them the game as May would have likely started the 8th regardless of who pitched the 7th.



I'm not sure if I buy it but I'm throwing it out there for consideration.


Edited by Guest
Posted


I was as dismayed as everyone else when deGrom was pulled, but I'm not sure it's why the Mets lost. I had expected that deGrom would pitch the 7th and that Rojas would go to May for the 8th. If that was going to be the case, then Castro's scoreless inning just replaced deGrom's scoreless inning, and the implosion would have happened anyway.



However, if deGrom could have gone 8 innings (and he really might have been able to) then that's a different story entirely.



Rojas definitely did screw up. But the screwups by May and Loup were what really responsible for the loss.


Posted


=bmfc1 post_id=59698 time=1617713004 user_id=73]
Counterargument: Jake only would have pitched one more inning and Castro didn't allow a run in the 7th so taking Jake out one inning too early didn't cost them the game as May would have likely started the 8th regardless of who pitched the 7th.



I'm not sure if I buy it but I'm throwing it out there for consideration.

Old-Timey Member
Posted (edited)


Edgy MD wrote:



It's the Peterson Principle.


Fritz?

(yeah, I know)

Later


Edited by Guest
Old-Timey Member
Posted


Edgy MD wrote:

=bmfc1 post_id=59698 time=1617713004 user_id=73]
Counterargument: Jake only would have pitched one more inning and Castro didn't allow a run in the 7th so taking Jake out one inning too early didn't cost them the game as May would have likely started the 8th regardless of who pitched the 7th.



I'm not sure if I buy it but I'm throwing it out there for consideration.


I don't know if any of these things come to pass, but I'm bringing deGrom out for the seventh, and hoping he stays effective enough that I can bring him out for the eighth and ninth too. The fewer the moving parts, the less likely something breaks.



If he doesn't, I go with the next-best option.



It ain't about the bullpen. It's about the commitment to the bullpen.



It's the Peterson Principle. No matter how competent your relievers are, you will promote them to the point of their incompetence.
Posted


What I was hoping to find this morning was an audio clip of Phillies announcers at the moment he was pulled.



Phillies phans in my pheed all spoke of pheeling the game was a lost cause until deGrom was liphted.


Posted


Benjamin Grimm wrote:

I was as dismayed as everyone else when deGrom was pulled, but I'm not sure it's why the Mets lost. I had expected that deGrom would pitch the 7th and that Rojas would go to May for the 8th. If that was going to be the case, then Castro's scoreless inning just replaced deGrom's scoreless inning, and the implosion would have happened anyway.



However, if deGrom could have gone 8 innings (and he really might have been able to) then that's a different story entirely.



Rojas definitely did screw up. But the screwups by May and Loup were what really responsible for the loss.


I don't think the decision to pull deGrom alone was what cost the game. There were just so many mistakes. By my count:

g t

1. The decision to sit Dom in favor of Pillar. Dom was our best hitter last year, and is better against lefties against Pillar. Pillar also had bad numbers against Moore.

2. If you're going to play Pillar for defense, play Dom anyway and sit Nimmo. I like Nimmo a lot as a player, but Dom is better.

3. And certainly don't put Pillar at leadoff. This is dumb. This is the old "our CF hits leadoff cuz he's fast" philosophy.

4. Argue balls/strikes. The first call to Lindor was atrocious. It kept going from there. He also squeezed deGrom, especially on his AB to Harper. Get on him. If he keeps it up, get thrown out. This is one of the main things a manager is supposed to do.

5. PH Dom for Pillar in the 4th. Of course this is an issue because not only did you play Pillar, you batted him leadoff. PH with Dom and blow the game open. You still have Almora for defense later.

6. Leave Jake in the game. Duh. Maybe his pitch count wouldn't even be 77 if you barked a bit at the ump.

7. Leave Castro in the game. Looked sharp. No need to go to the "8th inning team" just because you want to show off your fancy new bullpen.

8. Lucchesi over Loup. First of all, he's the better pitcher. Secondly, he's better equipped to face the righties behind Harper. That righty, of course, singled to tie the game.

9. All of this leads to the game being tied with only one out when Guillorme throws home. He tries to put too much on it, which causes it to sail a bit. Which normally wouldn't be an issue except...

10. Terrible footwork by McCann at the plate. Gotta make sure of one there. If he fields that like a 1B, we get the out, and the next ball is an F9. Of course, he's thinking two as well. Rushes to meet the throw and is not in a position to stretch properly.



All this and we were still a few feet from taking the lead in the 9th.



Fire the manager. Score some runs. Win tonight.


Posted


I wonder if part of the problem the Mets have been having with deGrom's starts during his period of domination is that deGrom's stuff is so awesome that by comparison, deGrom's replacements' stuff looks like beach balls.


Posted


Edgy MD wrote:

What I was hoping to find this morning was an audio clip of Phillies announcers at the moment he was pulled.



Phillies phans in my pheed all spoke of pheeling the game was a lost cause until deGrom was liphted.


I was watching the Phillies telecast because it's the only one available to me. (The SNY broadcast is blacked out in my area when the Mets play the Phillies.)



The Phillies guys, John Kruk and the guy who was with the Mets briefly (forget his name) were shaking their heads, as were the studio guys they were talking to. (Ricky Bottalico and someone else.) They couldn't understand why deGrom was being removed, and saw it as an opportunity that was being handed to them.



And, of course, they were right.


Posted


=batmagadanleadoff post_id=59721 time=1617719526 user_id=68]
I wonder if part of the problem the Mets have been having with deGrom's starts during his period of domination is that deGrom's stuff is so awesome that by comparison, deGrom's replacements' stuff looks like beach balls.

Old-Timey Member
Posted


There are times when I wish DeGrom had a little of Bob Gibson's assertiveness in him.

Gibby would have told someone coming out to the mound to remove him, "Go back to the dugout and sit the fuck down".

Later


Posted


Tom McCarthy is the Phillies pbp guy that was with the Mets for a bit.



I don't believe that the problem lies in Jacob deGrom's personality.


Posted


=batmagadanleadoff post_id=59724 time=1617719721 user_id=68]
=batmagadanleadoff post_id=59721 time=1617719526 user_id=68]
I wonder if part of the problem the Mets have been having with deGrom's starts during his period of domination is that deGrom's stuff is so awesome that by comparison, deGrom's replacements' stuff looks like beach balls.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
The Grand Central Mets Caretaker Fund
The Grand Central Mets Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Mets community on the internet.

×
×
  • Create New...