Marc Carig has a lot to say!

[Benjamin Grimm]

Mets plan to change how pitchers are used in 2018, sources say

Fewer innings from starters!

With the exception of Noah Syndergaard and Jacob deGrom, Mets starters may be shielded from facing lineups more than twice in a game, mirroring an industry-wide trend, according to a source. The adjustment comes after a season in which team officials watched many of their starters fade badly as they pitched deeper into games.

If you limit your starting pitchers from facing more than 18 batters, you're really going to tax your bullpen.

The Mets will look to establish a norm of carrying eight relief pitchers, one more than the standard seven.

A 13-man pitching staff leaves only four bench players!

An extra reliever means one less roster spot for the bench, which places even more importance on the ability to play multiple positions.

More indications that the Mets are not in fact "all in" on Dominic Smith:

Team officials remain wary about leaning on Dominic Smith at first base. With the Mets potentially sending Smith to the minors for more seasoning, they intend to seriously explore upgrades. But rather than targeting those limited to only first base, they want a player capable of being part of a mix to help fill holes elsewhere.

So what new faces might we see in Mets uniforms next year?

Reunions with free agents Neil Walker and Jay Bruce could also make sense since both have show a willingness to play other spots apart from their natural positions.

How about top-tier free agents?

They may be left with about $30 million to spend on new players, a modest amount given the scope of the Mets’ needs. It essentially prices them out of top-tier free agents.

Can they trade some prospects?

The farm system has slipped, becoming one of the thinnest in baseball, leaving the Mets with few chips to dangle in potential deals.

Do any of their big-league players have trade value?

Rival executives say the likes of Juan Lagares, Robert Gsellman, Wilmer Flores, Steven Matz and Brandon Nimmo could bring back help in other areas. But moving those types of players would only eat into the Mets’ depth, which is already an issue.

[Centerfield]

Sounds like a recipe for disaster.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Yeah, I'm not seeing a whole lot of good news there, other than that Steven Matz is still considered to have trade value.

[Guest 41Forever]

I don't oppose bringing back Walker or Bruce on a short deal, but I think that Bruce, especially, will want something longer. Walker seems to get hurt a lot, and after last season I'm more inclined to go with guys who have a track record of being able to stay on the field.

[Centerfield]

Yeah, both are useful pieces, but none are really difference makers. I feel like if you want to win it all you need somebody on your team that is great.

I just don't see how the Mets will get that type of player.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Wasn't there some 'news' that Bruce didn't want to be in NY or did that
change after he got his feet wet here?

[Benjamin Grimm]

Latest is that he'd rather play in Texas, but he'd be open to returning to the Mets.

[dgwphotography]

Centerfield wrote: Sounds like a recipe for disaster.

Sounds like a recipe for a space-filling, click driving, off-season piece with little actual meat to it.

Let me see what the roster looks like on Opening Day. Until then, this isn't worth an ounce of angst.

[Edgy MD]

With the exception of Noah Syndergaard and Jacob deGrom, Mets starters may be shielded from facing lineups more than twice in a game, mirroring an industry-wide trend, according to a source. The adjustment comes after a season in which team officials watched many of their starters fade badly as they pitched deeper into games.

I'm not sure what games Carig is reporting that the Mets officials saw. The Mets gave up 131 runs in the first inning, their highest number for any inning.

This sounds like some real pseudo-science.

[Ceetar]

Split	G	PA	AB	R	H	2B	3B	HR	SB	CS	BB	SO	SO/W	BA	OBP	SLG	OPS	TB	GDP	HBP	SH	SF	IBB	ROE	BAbip	tOPS+	sOPS+
2nd PA in G as RP	704	2469	2205	445	638	112	5	110	0	0	203	427	2.10	.289	.353	.494	.847	1090	55	28	8	25	23	22	.312	125	100
3rd PA in G as SP	4395	27685	24876	3477	6766	1398	133	1025	36	56	2280	5096	2.24	.272	.337	.462	.800	11505	625	259	87	170	132	258	.303	113	100
3rd+ PA in G as RP	45	129	115	15	30	6	2	4	0	0	10	22	2.20	.261	.333	.452	.786	52	6	3	0	1	0	0	.289	109	100
2nd PA in G as SP	4813	42213	37854	5311	10025	2014	183	1526	44	135	3462	8530	2.46	.265	.331	.449	.780	16983	869	401	230	257	142	403	.303	108	100
4td+ PA in G as SP	693	1446	1304	179	352	80	9	41	0	5	121	258	2.13	.270	.337	.439	.776	573	27	13	4	4	11	12	.308	107	100
1st PA in G as SP	4860	43526	39158	4348	9776	2001	189	1387	51	104	3467	9807	2.83	.250	.315	.417	.732	16316	861	367	292	230	81	344	.298	95	100
1st PA in G as RP	4801	67827	60055	8411	14629	2786	274	2012	70	132	6286	15964	2.54	.244	.320	.400	.720	23999	1367	692	304	481	581	591	.296	93	100

Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Original Table
Generated 11/10/2017.

[Chad ochoseis]

Edgy MD wrote: I'm not sure what games Carig is reporting that the Mets officials saw. The Mets gave up 131 runs in the first inning, their highest number for any inning. This sounds like some real pseudo-science.

- Not clear who is responsible for that. Without looking, I suspect it may have been driven by pitchers who don't figure into the Mets' 2018 plans.

- I think most runs are scored in the first inning in general, since the first inning is the one inning where the top of the order always bats. So it's not clear if the Mets' percentage of 1st inning runs allowed is high relative to the league.

[Mex17]

Three things. . .

1) It definitely looks like I was wrong when I said that the Mets were "all in" on Smith as the undisputed starting first basemen for 2018.

2) I would caution against going completely into "all is lost, woe is us" mode with regard to the $30 million budget for new players (if that even is true). You have to look at this with an eye towards next year's Hot Stove as well in that you want money saved and positions on your roster available for what is a clearly better class a year from now. This can go in any number of directions obviously, but in theory what if an on it's face meager 2018 haul of Morrison, Vargas, and Shaw paves the way to a dual splash of, let's say, Donaldson and LeMahieu next year?

3) If this "trend" of limiting the innings and exposure of pitchers continues, MLB as a whole is going to have to either: a) add an extra active roster spot for the whole season, allow teams to carry/travel with more players than they would be able to "dress" for any given game and just move guys in and out of the active roster on a daily basis at will, or c) do both of those things in conjunction.

[Frayed Knot]

Chad Ochoseis wrote: - I think most runs are scored in the first inning in general, since the first inning is the one inning where the top of the order always bats.

Correct, at least it was for this past year. More runs were scored in the 1st than in any other single inning*.

So it's not clear if the Mets' percentage of 1st inning runs allowed is high relative to the league.

Ahh but it is.
NL as a whole allowed 13.12% of runs in the 1st inning as a pct of runs given up in innings 1-9 (iow, not including extras as that could vary between different teams)
NYM pitchers = 15.41% of runs allowed in inning #1





* followed by the 4th, 3rd, 6th, 7th, 5th, 8th, 2nd, and then 9th in decreasing order - although the 9th is naturally last as frequently only half the inning is played and one-run strategies are often employed even when the bottom half is played

[Guest cooby]

This is BS. What ever happened to offense?

[Ceetar]

cooby wrote: This is BS. What ever happened to offense?

record number of home runs this year.

[nymr83]

A 13-man pitching staff leaves only four bench players!

terrible idea. if the Mets plan to go "bullpen heavy" i'd propose this:

1. Focus on acquiring bullpen arms who regularly pitch multiple innings at a time, screw the 1 inning reliever.
2. stockpile guys with options. burn a guy out for 10 days then send him down, let him rest and pitch once every few days in AAA/AA, bring him back - you could manage workload this way without the major league staff being 13 men.
3. skip the 5th start whenever the calendar allows and make him available in relief.

[ashie62]

8 relief pitchers? Is this still MLB Baseball?

[Centerfield]

So Dave Roberts tried this during the postseason, where there are more offdays, and managed to exhaust the best and deepest bullpen in baseball. This might have cost them the championship.

We want to try this for 162 with a shitty bullpen?

[seawolf17]

Centerfield wrote: So Dave Roberts tried this during the postseason, where there are more offdays, and managed to exhaust the best and deepest bullpen in baseball. This might have cost them the championship. We want to try this for 162 with a shitty bullpen?

No. We're going to have a *great* bullpen! That'll make all the difference! Except for when they all get hurt in May and have to have their arms amputated.

[smg58]

Split G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR SB CS BB SO SO/W BA OBP SLG OPS TB GDP HBP SH SF IBB ROE BAbip tOPS+ sOPS+ 2nd PA in G as RP 704 2469 2205 445 638 112 5 110 0 0 203 427 2.10 .289 .353 .494 .847 1090 55 28 8 25 23 22 .312 125 100 3rd PA in G as SP 4395 27685 24876 3477 6766 1398 133 1025 36 56 2280 5096 2.24 .272 .337 .462 .800 11505 625 259 87 170 132 258 .303 113 100 3rd+ PA in G as RP 45 129 115 15 30 6 2 4 0 0 10 22 2.20 .261 .333 .452 .786 52 6 3 0 1 0 0 .289 109 100 2nd PA in G as SP 4813 42213 37854 5311 10025 2014 183 1526 44 135 3462 8530 2.46 .265 .331 .449 .780 16983 869 401 230 257 142 403 .303 108 100 4td+ PA in G as SP 693 1446 1304 179 352 80 9 41 0 5 121 258 2.13 .270 .337 .439 .776 573 27 13 4 4 11 12 .308 107 100 1st PA in G as SP 4860 43526 39158 4348 9776 2001 189 1387 51 104 3467 9807 2.83 .250 .315 .417 .732 16316 861 367 292 230 81 344 .298 95 100 1st PA in G as RP 4801 67827 60055 8411 14629 2786 274 2012 70 132 6286 15964 2.54 .244 .320 .400 .720 23999 1367 692 304 481 581 591 .296 93 100 Provided by Baseball-Reference.com: View Original Table Generated 11/10/2017.

So the difference between the second and third appearance against a starter is 20 points of OPS. That's not that big of a deal. What I read from this is to field a better rotation, not to add more relievers.

[G-Fafif]

A truly innovative approach would be to have starters face the opposing lineup the second and third times through the lineup, but not the first.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Do we know, on average, in what inning a starting pitcher is most likely to face his 19th batter? I have a feeling that if you follow this strictly you'll often be into your bullpen before the fifth inning is over.

[Guest cooby]

cooby wrote: This is BS. What ever happened to offense?

Ashie62 wrote: 8 relief pitchers? Is this still MLB Baseball?

This is what I meant.

G-Fafif wrote: A truly innovative approach would be to have starters face the opposing lineup the second and third times through the lineup, but not the first.

LOL

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

I keep coming back to my blasphemous but sensible idea on how to solve many of the problems plaguing today's game (too many pitchers, too many injuries, too many long games).

Cut games to 7 innings.

Boom, like that.

It's not like the length of the season hadn't been messed with before (they played 80 then 98 then 116 then 140 then 154 then 162), just not the length of the game. This way maintains the same number of games (therefore tickets sold, broadcasts broadcasted etc) but gets everyone on with their days and nights as little better. It also cuts the longest parts of the game out (granted the 6th inning becomes the new 8th, the 5th the new 7th and so on). I'd imagine it would also spark new offensive strategies to respond to having fewer opportunities to score.

[seawolf17]

smg58 wrote: So the difference between the second and third appearance against a starter is 20 points of OPS. That's not that big of a deal. What I read from this is to field a better rotation, not to add more relievers.

And the best situation was relievers' first batter faced. So just bring in a new reliever before every hitter. BOOM. Problem solved.

[Guest Mets Willets Point]

seawolf17 wrote: smg58 wrote: So the difference between the second and third appearance against a starter is 20 points of OPS. That's not that big of a deal. What I read from this is to field a better rotation, not to add more relievers. And the best situation was relievers' first batter faced. So just bring in a new reliever before every hitter. BOOM. Problem solved.

Increase the roster to 27 and you can have one pitcher per out every game. They'd have to versatile about playing field positions and batting, though.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

[tweet:1flca7sq]

[/tweet:1flca7sq]

[tweet:1flca7sq]

[/tweet:1flca7sq]

from today's gm meetings

[Ceetar]