2014 IPP: Dillon Gee

[Benjamin Grimm]

It was moderately popular last year, so we'll try it again this year. IPP stands for Individual Player Predictions. These will be threads where we share our expectations of how a player will perform in the current year. Feel free to make your predictions as specific or as vague as you like. (You can find a listing of the 2013 IPPs here.)

I think Dillon Gee will finally meet his goal of pitching 200 innings (last year he ended at 199). If he avoids getting off to a terrible start like he did in 2013, he'll be a decent, but unspectacular, regular in the Mets rotation. I'll put him down for 13 wins and a 3.90 ERA. He's also a pretty good trade chip who could very well be squeezed out of the Mets plans in the next couple of years. Depending on circumstances, I could very well see him being dealt in July, but I'll predict that he finishes the season with the Mets.

[metirish]

I think Gee will be the whiz on this team , 18 wins - 200IP - 2.95 ERA

[MFS62]

14-9, 200 IP, 3.39ERA.
A whole bunch of "quality starts" that don't result in decisions because of spotty run support and shaky middle relief.

Later

[ashie62]

200 IP 14-7 3.55

225 K's

[Benjamin Grimm]

Four people in a row have predicted exactly 200 innings for Dillon Gee.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Good start, good finish, midseason iffiness (perhaps with a side of biceps tendinitis, or some other such mala-gee).

31 GS, 176 IP, 10-8 W-L, 3.89 ERA, 1.23 WHIP, 138 K, 7.1 K/9, 2.5 BB/9

[Theoldmole]

Pitches decently, 9 wins, out of the rotation by end of season.

[Lefty Specialist]

Pitches decently, 11 wins, 3.9 ERA, 180 innings, because it's always something.

[Vic Sage]

12-10, 3.90

[Zvon]

Damn, Gee is an important piece.

He's gotta win 15.
15-9, 3.53ERA
How many innings will he need to do that?

[smg58]

I'm thinking 210 IP and 3.50, but Montero, Mejia, and Syndegaard will all be better pitchers by the end of the season.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

He's made me look bad while I wait for the day he pitches his way off the team, but more realistically: He's probably stopped getting better and therefore won't be good enough to hold back the horses behind him, and if he is, well then that's super.

10-10, 4.19 127-53 in 30 starts, 195.2 innings.

[Guest d'Kong76]

11-12 wins, we'll still like him when season is winding down.

[Edgy MD]

14-9 with a 2.86 ERA in his last 26 starts, dating back to last season.

He may be a pitcher.

[Benjamin Grimm]

He may even turn out to be a keeper.

[Guest Mets Guy in Michigan]

Gee seems to be one of those guys who does well, but doesn't inspire a lot of confidence. I remember when he first came up and was doing decently, all the pundits were saying he'd never be anything better than a 5th starter.

Of course, a decent and dependable 5th started is nothing to sneeze at!

[TransMonk]

I feel the same way about Gee right now as I did about Dickey in mid-2011. I acknowledge that he has done a tremendous job...but I'm always subconsciously waiting for the wheels to fall off.

I was wrong in feeling that way about Dickey and have hopes that Gee can keep up the great work.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Before we kill ourselves with praise for this guy let's not forget that could he hold a multi-run advantage in either of his first 2 starts we'd be in first place right now.

I do think he's done a great job with shaving that stupid beard he used to have.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Before we kill ourselves with praise for this guy let's not forget that could he hold a multi-run advantage in either of his first 2 starts we'd be in first place right now. I do think he's done a great job with shaving that stupid beard he used to have.

Ooh, ooh, are you doing that Dickey thing? Keep doing the Dickey thing!

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Naw, man. A first-inning, 3-run home run, on opening day, off Steve Strasberg, by a guy who wasn't even supposed to be starting, is the kind of gift that can't be exchanged. He also gave up leads to the Reds and the Angels (twice!).

[Frayed Knot]

On the other hand, heading into last season's May 30th start against the Skanks, Dillon was 2-6 w/an ERA of 6.34 and a WHiP north of 1.7
Starting with that (7.1 IP, 12 K/0 BB, 4 Hits) game, he's gone:11-5; 2.86 ERA; 1.11 WHiP; 122/37 K/BB ratio.
That's 26 starts of more than pretty-goodness.

[Vic Sage]

unfortunately, the first 1/3 of the season counts too, and his overall performance was what it was. And you can say that about most players... if you take the worst 1/3 of a season out of most player's overall production in a given year, their numbers will look much better. But is Gee's performance in the later part of the season more indicative of his future performance, or is he just streaky and inconsistent? I don't know that the verdict in on that question yet.

[Ceetar]

Vic Sage wrote: unfortunately, the first 1/3 of the season counts too, and his overall performance was what it was. And you can say that about most players... if you take the worst 1/3 of a season out of most player's overall production in a given year, their numbers will look much better. But is Gee's performance in the later part of the season more indicative of his future performance, or is he just streaky and inconsistent? I don't know that the verdict in on that question yet.

You have to factor in recovering from surgery into that. His improvement strongly correlates with an increase in velocity.

[Edgy MD]

The only true verdict on the future is the future. But you do well to weigh more recent performances as more indicative of current trending.

[Frayed Knot]

Vic Sage wrote: unfortunately, the first 1/3 of the season counts too, and his overall performance was what it was. And you can say that about most players... if you take the worst 1/3 of a season out of most player's overall production in a given year, their numbers will look much better. But is Gee's performance in the later part of the season more indicative of his future performance, or is he just streaky and inconsistent? I don't know that the verdict in on that question yet.

Sure, but the part we're throwing out isn't just the worst part it's also the oldest part, all of which leaves us with (nearly) a running season which is certainly better than the expectations most had for him a year ago at this time and just plain pretty damn good by most standards -- even considering his recent (and small sample) inability to close out innings when sitting on a lead.

[Vic Sage]

yes, but that "oldest" part didn't happen years ago; it was a few months earlier in the same season. So yes, maybe he turned a corner in June and never looked back, and his 2nd half represents the pitcher he "really" is, not the mediocre arm with over a 4 ERA in his prior full seasons (including over 220+ innings at AAA level). Or maybe he's streaky and unreliable and we just don't know what he have. Like i said, too early to say. And it's certainly too early to say whether his shaky start this year is indicative of anything yet, but i can just as easily look at it as consistent with his career to date as be disappointed that he hasn't picked up exactly where he left off last season.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

I think the numbers then and now suggest that if Gee has a real issue it's that there's a big drop in quality between the first ~70 pitches and the rest; or the 2nd & 3rd time through a lineup.

They show that stat all the time now because it seems so drastic but offhand I can't tell you how much worse it actually is than the average schmo. It seems in fact that a guy could suffer in a first 70/ next 30 comparison by being especially good in the first group which Gee certainly seems to be. But anyway, that's why I'm kind of wary of him, he's obviously been pretty good but at the same time even when he's good he makes me worry and there's the associated worry about what his starts mean for the bullpen guys etc etc.

[Frayed Knot]

Vic Sage wrote: yes, but that "oldest" part didn't happen years ago; it was a few months earlier in the same season. So yes, maybe he turned a corner in June and never looked back, and his 2nd half represents the pitcher he "really" is, not the mediocre arm with over a 4 ERA in his prior full seasons (including over 220+ innings at AAA level). Or maybe he's streaky and unreliable and we just don't know what he have. Like i said, too early to say. And it's certainly too early to say whether his shaky start this year is indicative of anything yet, but i can just as easily look at it as consistent with his career to date as be disappointed that he hasn't picked up exactly where he left off last season.

My only point here is the DG has had himself a very nice nearly full season, not that such stuff means he should be considered a front of the rotation starter - even though he kind of is on this staff right now (partly on merit, largely by default).

I think the numbers then and now suggest that if Gee has a real issue it's that there's a big drop in quality between the first ~70 pitches and the rest; or the 2nd & 3rd time through a lineup.

Which is why I thought a game where he was cruising with two-hitter, a 3 (later to be 5) run lead, and a super-low pitch count was the ideal time to push him ('push' isn't even the right word here) and see if he could break through that barrier. After all, we need to figure out if this is a trend or a quirk just as we do concerning the meaning of his last 26 starts.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I was listening to that game on the radio. Howie and Josh were speculating that Gee may have been removed because he may have been a little banged up from a collision in covering second base. The one inning he pitched after the collision was scoreless, but with three hard-hit balls.

I didn't see the play at second, so I don't know how much contact Gee made with the runner.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

It was more of an awkward collision, with Gee's leg bundling up under him as Parra made contact. Could've ended up bad, but Gee didn't do so much as grimace during or after the play; hell, he didn't even pause before running for the dugout.