Frayed Knot

It's just ridiculous, this pitching staff just can't get past the 4th inning intact.

6-0 to start the 4th inning ... 9-6 to [CROSSOUT]end[/CROSSOUT] no, it's not even over yet.

NYM ERA in the 4th inning since the AS Break = 7.94

Another short outing from a starter despite being handed a six run lead. G!D! this is frustrating!!

3 + 3 = Winning!!

I'm starting to get 'Too Many People' messages on the site ... which would be one thing if it meant I was getting the Paul McCartney song but, alas, it's just a blank page.

Soto hits a HR ... with men on base!!!!!

Mets & Yanx with concurrent home series going on, but the Mets started their rain delayed game prior to the Yanx so I'm calling that a win for our side.

Oooooh, bad call of McN's strike three call!!! Meanwhile, Carrasco is proving Chad to be prescient so far ... five batters, one (questionable) out, and 29 pitches (13 strikes).

Two reasons: 1) there's never enough pitching to go around 2) See reason #1 8:45 is the current first pitch estimate

[YOUTUBE]bDRbF80NKDU[/YOUTUBE]

RMPL

You folks do realize that this discussion is coming a decade-plus into the era where 'Openers' / 'Bulk Starters' have been used and that pct of starter Wins has continued to go down all along, right? The only thing being proposed here is the slight adjustment that openers should go two to three innings instead of just one to two and selling that on the assumption that results are going to be suddenly different. But a longer stint for the opener -- a guy who is, essentially by definition, a lesser pitcher than the eventual starter -- is also a longer time for him to give up more runs and handing the starter not a lead but a deficit. And if it's the day for your Ace when the opener gets bombed are we going to still hand him the ball down multiple runs (potentially wasting his turn) or sit him down until the net game thereby both upsetting his regimen and reducing the the number of games he'll get into that season? This isn't a 'traditionalist'* vs modern argument. If openers were the key to both wins for 'starters' and for team wins then all teams would use them and the ones who have been using them all along would be using them for longer stretches. And, again, this whole (already too long) thread was proposed on the concept of finding out a way to get traditional starters (who would no longer be starting) more 'W's - as if that is, by itself, a goal worth pursuing. * I HATE that term!

Bucket was both right and wrong, but either way he wins the contest. It was indeed on the Tuesday night game vs Atlanta but he incorrectly labeled that day as the 13th rather than the 12th.

Teams are free to use pitchers in whatever fashion they choose now, and some do. If one or more of them hit upon a better mousetrap in doing so then more power to them. But that's a concept totally divorced from the goal of saying, 'Hey, we've got 20+ game winners again!' (even though we, y'know, manipulated what we call and how we use 'starters' just so we could artificially achieve that goal).

If you're doing it because you think it'll win more games, as in Team games, then, fine. Although there's a dearth of evidence indicating that would be the result. But doing it simply so the 'Gilded W' shifts more towards one set of pitchers, those designated as 'Starters' even though, under your plan, they're not actually starting, and away from the set we call 'Relievers', some of whom are now starting, then I don't see the point.

From the dead ball era of the early 20th century, to the Ruthian rise of the HR in the '20s, the hitting dominated '30s, the pitching dominated '60s, introduction of the DH in the '70s, back to the steroid-aided hitting surge of the '90s, and into into the high-velo/high-K 21st century, baseball stats have always varied over time and so any comparison needs to be viewed through that lens anyway. Your 'fix' is merely a manipulation for the sole purpose of driving a particular counting stat towards an artificial (by today's norms) level that you think is correct because that was more or less the norm when you were growing up. Why not jigger things so as to match the early 20th century when league leaders often topped 30? After all, wouldn't that be the 'true' correct level since that one was first and the game you and I were watching was being played the wrong way? Five man pitching staffs? ... Two different pitchers just to cover a double header? ... what are these young whippersnappers doing to MY game?!?!? And if we're going to manipulate how you play the game just so the stats 'work out' then the comparisons fall apart anyway because the conditions that created them aren't the same.

Looks like we should have used Hagenman to close out the last game in Milwaukee the other day: 4 IP, 0 R, 0 H, 1 BB, 5 K

With an eight run lead entering the 9th, mlb.com gives the Mets a 71% chance at winning this game.

Plus they're not going to let him continue to play with his own personal ball going forward. They're going to make him play with the smaller one from now on and that's going to be a big adjustment. [FIMG=300]https://voitusa.vtexassets.com/arquivos/ids/155598-800-800?v=638616906547530000&width=800&height=800&aspect=true[/FIMG]

More worrying is that they've issued six, which seemingly is their nightly average lately.

The mlb.com prospect crew [Jonathan Mayo, Sam Dykstra, Jim Callas] rank the NYM system #7 in their post-trading deadline analysis. Top-100 players: Carson Benge, OF (No. 20); Jett Williams, SS/OF (No. 30); Nolan McLean, RHP (No. 37); Jonah Tong, RHP (No. 44) The Mets have as many up arrows in their system as any other organization in baseball with Benge surging into the No. 20 spot in his first full season, McLean and Tong solidifying their places in the Top 50 overall and Jacob Reimer, A.J. Ewing and Will Watson making significant jumps in the Top 30 team list. That increased depth allowed New York to move several prospects at the Trade Deadline for bullpen help, while still maintaining an impressive system on the whole, and it makes you wonder what the organization could get out of 38th overall pick Mitch Voit as he moves to full-time hitter status in the pros. And you didn't ask but I'm going to tell you anyway: #1 - LAD #2 - MIN #3 - SEA #4 - MIL #5 - CLE #6 - DET #8 - CIN #9 - PIT #10 - TBR https://www.mlb.com/news/farm-system-rankings-2025-midseason?t=mlb-pipeline-coverage

[FIMG=400]https://cdn.theasc.com/Butch-Cassidy-Newman-and-Redford.jpg[/FIMG] Ten runs? Hits with runners in scoring position? HRs with runners on base? All runs scoring after two outs? Who are those guys?

I don't usually love them with bases empty and two outs from your #3 hitter. But in front of Soto it's more justifiable and, in this case, it certainly paid off.

You can't keep living like this and expect to win. Holmes faced 20 batters and retired nine. This is why I never felt secure even with the 5-0 lead the other day*. And today it was 5-1 and that doesn't even last a single inning. * the only time I briefly felt OK was after Tyler Rogers got an inning-ending GiDP in the 7th. I thought we had dodged it, but we didn't. btw, we also never got another hit after Pete's RBI bloop in the 4th of that game so don't think it can't happen again.