metsmarathon

by the way... =baseballreference.com]249,995 HR in MLB History Through 9:13 EDT, Sunday. Last HR: Carlos Delgado (NYM) off Cole Hamels (PHI). unless something truly silly happens tonight, and with ten games tomorrow, it does not appear that the distinction of hitting this 'momentous' home run will belong to a met.

Home Runs Allow. Rank Player HRA Year 1. Roger Craig 35 1962 2. Pedro Astacio 32 2002 3. Jay Hook 31 1962 4. Pete Harnisch 30 1996 Rick Reed 30 1998 6. Roger Craig 28 1963 Rick Reed 28 2000 Steve Trachsel 28 2001 9. Jack Fisher 26 1966 Bobby Jones 26 1996 Frank Tanana 26 1993 Steve Trachsel 26 2003

damn... waited too long on tickets for the 14th, so no shea stadium tin for m.e.t.b.o.t. to play/live in. but i am going to the game on the 25th! yay! anyone else going?

i think it would be super cool if mr met dressed up as darth vader....

whew! ...jeez!

well, his era can only get better!

i would look at it more akin to an umpire getting a better pair of glasses mid season. nothing changes but the ability to more accurately make a call.

some pitcher who once either said or wrote: "The muscles in the arm are like any other muscles - the more you exercise them the stronger they get" i remember hearing that as well. the problem is that it's got nothing to do with pitch counts. and it has everything to do with pitch counts. i would consider pitching to be analogous with running. the more you run, the more you can run. but, you need to run more in training to be able to run more in a race. if all your training, and all your history is in the half mile, and you put yourself into a mile race, you're going to hit a wall, and may injure yourself. moreso if your history is in the 5k or 10k and you suddenly try to run a marathon. once you go beyond the limit of what you're used to, injury can and usually will occur. if you've got a pitcher, and you want him to throw 120 pitches in a game, you've got to have built him up to being able to throw 120 pitches in a game, both through training, and gradually building him up in game conditions. if you're training for a marathon, you don't want to add more than 10% of your mileage every week. more than that and your chances of injury increase tremendously. i would think it obvious that similar concerns should be extended to pitchers - not specifically that 10% per week, but the mantra that gradual increases over time reduce the potential for injury and significant increases over short time dramatically increases the potential for injury. also, there are various different levels of ability across the braod spectrum of elite athletes. you've got sprinters, milers, 5- and 10k runners, and marathoners. some guys can go longer than others before their performance begins to drop off. not every pitcher can go 120 pitches in a game, and wishing it to be so doesn't make it so. you need to find out what each pitcher is capable of, and work him appropriately. a pitching coach needs to monitor his guys to ffind out which guys can only go 110 pitches, which can approach 120, and which can pitch for days and days. pitch count is important to monitor because an athlete isn;t always going to come out and say "i'm starting to fatigue" that said, i think that pitch counts are too arbitrary, erring moreso on the side of caution than in getting the most out of the athletes.

AG/DC wrote: Folks whose last name I know who have a Met share their name: KC John Cougar Lunchbucket duan Metfairy and husband Ben Grimm (a spring training Met, anyhow) Willets Pont A Boy Named Seo Frayed Knot Almost everybody but me, it seems. i've got a minor league met named after me who i should get off my butt and adopt...

well, that's certainly true, and i haven't gone that deep into the analysis to figure it out. i would suggest that the hold stat should be amended such that coming in, allowing the tying run to reach base, and bequeathing that run to a subsequent pitcher should not be considered a hold. nor should coming in with the tying or go ahead run on base, adding another baserunner or two, and bequeathing those two or three baserunners to a subsequent pitcher should also not get you credit for a hold. but coming in with the tying or go ahead runner on base, getting an out, and bequeathing only those runners you inherited to a subsequent pitcher should still merit a hold. i should look in to how many times heilman has gotten a hold in which he contributed to the loss... on july 2nd, heilman came into a 7-5 game, and got through his first inning of work. the next inning, he hits hte first batter, and is relieved by feliciano. feliciano allows a homer, and heilman's runner scores. that's still legit enough hold, as the hit batter was not the tying run. the remainder of heilman's holds this season came in wins, so i didn't look at them. last year, on july 31, heilman came into a 2-1 game in the 8th inning. he allowed a leadoff single and got the next batter to fly out. again, he was relieved by feliciano, who hit the next batter and was relieved by mota. mota allowed a ground rule double in which heilman's runner scored the tying run. that fits my suggested definition of "not a hold" the remainder of heilman's holds came in met wins, so i didnt look at them. in 2006, on august 19th, heilman came into a 4-6 game in the 7th inning. the rockies had scored 4 runs against starter dave williams, but in the bottom of the 6th inning, the mets scored 6 runs themselves. heilman pitched two scoreless innings for the hold. he also was awarded a win. i thought i'd mention this 'cos it looked weird. on august 1st, heilman came into a 5-4 game in the 8th inning, and allowed no runs. wagner came in in the ninth and gave up two runs. this was a legit hold. on june 21, heilman came into a 5-4 game in the eight, allowed no runs, and saw wagner blow the save in the ninth. another legit hold. and finally on april 5, heilman came into a 4-3 game in the eighth, allowed no runs, and saw yet another billy wagner blown save. the remainder of his holds came in wins, so i didnt look at them. so, in three years, we have, what, five heilman holds in met losses, and only one of them, last year, was an illegitimate hold. i don't think his hold/save percentage is appreciably inflated by the peculiarities of the hold rule.

heilman's first blown save came on april 10th against the phillies. he came into a 3-1 game in the 8th inning, and gave up two runs in one inning of work. had he held on and not allowed those runs, he likely would not have remained in the game for the ninth and would have earned a hold while billy wagner would've had the save opportunity. heilman's second blown save came on may 30th against the dodgers where heilman again came into the 8th inning, with a 5-4 lead, allowed an inherited baserunner to score, had two more score on his watch, and bequeathed two further runners to schoeneweis who then allowed them to score. the "save" was blown on the first inherited baserunner. had he held on, stranded that runner and gotten through the inning unscathed, he likely would not have remained in the game for the ninth and would have earned a hold while billy wagner would've had the save opportunity. for that reason, saves versus save opportunities is a tremendously misleading stat for non-closing relievers, when presented outside the context of the hold.not once this season has aaron heilman entered the game in the ninth inning of a ball game with the mets up by three or fewer runs; therefore he has not yet had a true opportunity to "close" a game. a more true measure of his ability to function in close games would be to look at saves plus holds versus save opps plus holds. here, heilman is (6+66) / (19+66) or 72 for 85, which comes out to about 85% for his career, and 87% this season. for comparison, billy wagner is about 87% in save opportunities from '99 to present (323 sv + 3 hld / 370 svo + 3 hld), and 79% this season.

blown holds also count, i think, as save opportunities.

i've been stupid busy for about the past three months at work.. mopst of it ive been nowhere near my computer... i've gotta get back on the voting saddle, and wind up my little friend as well!

i'm hoping for a major league team to return to sussex county, displacing/replacing the skyhawks... it would be too sweet if it were the metsies.

delgado - sabathia is my guess delgado - fuentes is my vote, just to be different from all y'all jiminez voters. 19 k in 10 ip, with a 0.00 era is pretty fancy

manny's eqa this year is 0.319; bay's is 0.325 manny's ops+ is 140; bay's is 135 manny's zone rating is 0.744; bay's is 0.806 not that i know much about their farm system and who they gave up, but i don't think boston weakened themselves nearly as much as do the radio guys (who all seem to think that the sawx abdicated the al east to the yankees)

i keep forgetting that dunn is only 28... seems like he's been around for freakin' ever. also, fwiw, griffey has the 4th best zone rating in right field, among qualified players, at 0.888, just behind fukudome 0.889, and trailing jeremy hermida 0.925 and brian giles 0.919. his 0.888 bests rangey ryan church's 0.885, even. i'm having trouble marrying this to the notion being bandied about that its downright foolish of the white sox to even consider putting griffey in center. sure, an 0.888 zr in right isn't indicitive of terrific centerfielding defense, but it aint suckage either. (granted, nick swisher, who griffey will likely displace, has a 0.903 in cf) dunn's zone rating is at 0.853, which puts him ahead of current left fielder tatis' 0.821.

according to baseball prospectus, the reds are getting 24yo 2b danny richar , whose pecota predictions see him as a 260/325/430 peak hitter with limited speed, and 26yo rhp nick masset, whose pecota predictions have him out of baseball in a few years, with a mid-five era, 3.5 bb/9 and 5 k/9. this season, richar is playing below those pecota predictions, while masset is playing just above them. i like griffey a lot, and am left wondering a) wouldn't that've been an easy package to beat and is he a player we would've wanted to add?

one basis, two bases. one tatis, two tates.

i always get yelled at for taking walks in slow pitch softball...

45 runs, only 32 of which were earned?! jeez!

thats a fantastic non catch by tatis. not sure i understand why its not a catch, but call it even for endy's single earlier, i guess.

too bad. i used to like nady.

seriously, 105 pitches, and your closer is unavailable. is it really that unheard of to think of santana at least attempting to pitch a complete game? jeez!

yeah, unfortunately, the glidden team colors dealie that home depot does doesn't include the mlb, though it does have college, mls, nhl, nfl teams and nascar. so you could luck out and find that one of those teams stole the mets colors... or buy some fancy mets merchandise to bring in for the matching...