Ceetar

Lefty Specialist wrote: Well, Uncle Steve's spending binge is allowing the Mets to hang on to their prospects rather than trade them. The farm was a little threadbare and it'll take a few years to recover. That's where the ability to buy what you need comes in handy. I agree it's not sustainable indefinitely but it doesn't have to be, if they do things right. big if. Happy as can be that we've signed some of these guys, but writing a check is the easy part. Two seasons in a row now...three really, but different leadership then (though plenty of the same people!)..they've failed to make the more complicated draft/deadline moves that very well could've been the difference makers. Coupled with the pathetic handling of promotions..

Edgy MD wrote: I would disagree with that. So someone who steals at a 75% rate, 30/40, is breaking even with 30 attempts (where he steals 20 bases) and netting you 10 bases on his other 10 attempts. How many runs is 10 bases? You know it's not 10 runs, not even close to that. Is it 5 runs? Doubt that very much. 3? 2? Something like that. in 2022: Stealing second with no outs, nets you 0.208 runs. Getting throwing at second with no outs nets you -0.611 So if you steal successfully 3 times but get thrown out the fourth, you'll have earned .624 and cost .611. So you're up 0.013. So if you steal 231 bases at a 75% clip, you'll have earned your team one extra run.

I don't know what's to agree with or disagree about. It's not the relative values of say second and no outs versus bases empty and 1 out are a secret. If the value added by stealing X amount of times is outweighed by being caught Y amount of times, you're not adding value to your team. You can quibble around the margins of that equation if you like, but it's not like there's some super secret sauce that you can't see that's making it more valuable. If you add in calculus that makes you think a guy might be a little more prone to injury, that just makes even less profitable to steal.

he saw the exact same percentage (61.9) of first pitch strikes at 2021. He swung at 1.4% more (30.9) first pitches than 2021, and 1.3% more overall, so pretty much didn't change his first pitch approach at all. It's like maybe a pitch more a month.

nobody gets "Screwed" by the shift. hit the ball hard and it doesn't matter. There are only 8 guys out there. As i said, Nimmo used the whole field more last year than ever, and as a result they didn't shift on him as much. his wOBA was .357 unshifted, .321 shifted. (103 shifts) The difference from 2021 is that when shifted in 2021 he was .415 wOBA versus .350 unshifted. I mean, all in all his 2022 was still really good. He just traded some OBP for soft contact, and it didn't really work out for him, though he did still crush a bunch of pitches. But he lowered his launch angle and missed the sweet spot more, because he was making a lot more bad contact at out of the zone pitches. Essentially he opted to softly ground out into the shift instead of taking a few pitches and striking out (but walking) more. His average HR trot though, increased from 18.29 in 2021 to lead MLB to 19.21 in 2022 which was merely 3rd.

Nimmo didn't particularly square up any more balls last year than previously. His power numbers, his barrel numbers, his "good contact" stuff, were all pretty on-par. He sacrificed a few walks and a few strikeouts for a few more ground ball outs and singles. His weak contact was up. His GD% up. his LD% down. Pull numbers down. Again, he sacrificed walks and strikeouts for ground ball outs and singles, but he sacrificed more value than he gained. I guess you could wonder if he's just not as attuned to the zone as he was previously, but the higher swing% makes me thing it was on purpose. Prioritizing contact does seem to fit with some of the things Buck and Chavez said, but it was detrimental here, which jibes with what we know about batting.

If anyone has an intelligent answer to my question, I'd be interested in hearing it. scroll up? I talked about it in my post. tl:dr Maybe it's an Eric Chavez philosophy thing. He's swinging at more pitches outside the zone and it's bad for his personal numbers. He should absolutely stop it. It's a problem, precisely for the reason's Eno describes in this tweet. But if it was a conscious choice to swing more, it's not a problem so much as an "easily" fixable approach thing. Especially going into a second year where advanced scouting is going to reflect him swinging at more pitches outside of the zone. He should readjust and set a career high BB%.

not gonna fret too much over like 2029. Nimmo's a good player and happy to have him around for a while. I'd like him to get his game more in-line with his pre-2022 metrics, feel like he adjusted a little too much last year and took fewer walks. He swung A LOT more, particularly out of the zone, which seems like a bad-ish habit to get into. Those are the kind of things that can hurt you in aging, swinging at hard to hit pitches and then suddenly you can't make the contact you wanted to. I think this might have been a team-philosophy thing last year, more contact. It hurt his numbers a bit. Maybe there's an argument to be made that team-wide adherence to this philosophy lifts team offense at expense of individual, but I'm not sure I buy that. Seems like Mets will lead the league in HBP again though. Brandon Nimmo is currently 34th in PA for the Mets, with 2368. Michael Conforto the "active" leader (also a guy I wouldn't mind bringing back, for the power) with 2980. David Wright has 6872. Nimmo would have to average 563 a year. Only 15 guys have gotten that many over the last 8 (and maybe 10 more prorated Covid year) 323 walks is 20th (9 behind Duda). Wright had 762. ~55 walks a season does that. His career BB% easily gets that done, his 2022, not so much. Already leads in HBP.

not those guys maybe. Those are solid pickups. trade a prospect for them. They're both likely better than Quintana and much younger. but hey, it's not clear the Mets prioritize finishing first anyway, given the last two years. Quintana is fine to coast to a wild card spot.

right, but Quintana himself is on the older side. I'd like to be shuffling those mediocre league average-ish innings bet to someone younger. As much as we can predict anything about player injuries, age has got to be one of the leading factors. I'm thinking like "Mike Pelfrey type". Quintana's a bit better than Pelfrey was, but there have to be like meh starters approaching large arb raises that some of the cheap teams wouldn't much rather shuffle off for some AA longshot prospect or something. Germán Márquez is making $15m with the Rockies this year. He's got a team option for 2024 for $16. He had a down year last year, so they might be looking to move on anyway. Lucas Giolito is due for a bump up to 10+ million this year, last year before free agency with the White Sox. Also had a down year last year.

He might be replacement level working at Boston Market, but anything above that is a stretch.

free agent at 30 DH? I don't think you worry too hard about keeping Alonso. He was 8th in isolated slugging last year, it's elite power, but that's one tool. by fWAR he was 40th. by wRC+ (so ignoring defense) he was 12th. Another wrinkle is that there's some concern Álvarez won't be able to be a major league catcher, but will still be able to hit. So there's more competition for the DH (and maybe 1B?) spots. Anyway, let's get back to MLB cheating for Judge and the Yankees.

he's fine I think? We can hope for average, last year was mostly a mirage I think, pitch changes and stuff. 4 starters at 34+ is ..a choice. You've got Megill and Peterson as depth I guess, but there seems to be some overall roster constructions issues to address here, particularly, some more good pitchers, probably some that you use as relievers. You'd like one really top-flight (or two, platoon wise) guys that you can throw at emerging messes as these starters hit the middle innings and wear down or exit early.

might be a good deal, might be a bad one. depends on how much more MLB cheats for him.

Yeah, I like Verlander. But still should've kept deGrom (too!) But at least this helps the "top-flight talent to have in short series in 2023" problem that was one of the biggest issues with losing deGrom. I figure they're probably got MeGill and/or Peterson slotted into a 5th spot, you'd still like one above average starter to add in I'd think.

I probably won't see dominance like that again. That' rough. Most recent thing that sticks out in my mind was counting swinging strikes on his slider during that start last year, where they just could NOT make contact, and could NOT lay off it.

it was fine. I think the same as I thought of Breaking Bad tbh. Well run shows, well made episodes, but some of the overarching plots weren't great, or downright boring. This is especially true of Saul, as you know what's going to happen, who doesn't die, etc. I also found the second half of the last season of both a bit tiresome in a "GET ON WITH IT" way. They'd crossed the threshold to the climax and spend like 6 episodes wrapping things up. I could've done without the like..3? 4? different timelines too. I found Saul's post-BB cover story/life unconvincing (much like Dexter New Blood) And really, as good a show as it was, It wasn't what I was expecting/wanting from a prequel. I expected a few seasons of SAUL doing "friend of the cartel" type stuff. A few seasons of living large at the top of his career arc so to speak.

Of those guys, Beltran is in my hall. Wagner too, and A-Rod, and Helton. Probably Manny. would have to do a little more research in some of the others, but might be a few others.

=ashie62 post_id=113097 time=1668706183 user_id=90] Jim Bowden of The Athletic predicts Jake will sign with the Braves on a two year 90 million dollar deal with Jake getting a one year opt out clause

=smg58 post_id=113089 time=1668694493 user_id=62] Martino probably gets a raise for all the hits the SNY website is getting right now.

Always reads like it's added to proposals like "GMO free!" and "Organic!". A smokescreen to get the other stuff approved and then somehow it's never as much, or as affordable, or buildable as it was pitched.

Frayed Knot wrote: "100% privately financed, plus affordable housing, plus hotel..." -- sez NYC's new-(ish) Mayor. so probably anything but, if it's coming from that scumbag.

A Boy Named Seo wrote: Curious to know more about the housing angle in the deal... but NYCFC finally has a home! And maybe this means Queensboro FC finally becomes a team? they'll cut it at the last minute I'm sure.

It's probably simple "best offer" stuff, because Manfred would literally add a 4th strike if someone paid him enough, but I wonder if taking these offers from these grifting companies helps MLB raise the benchmark of what they get for sponsorships from other companies. Like, "Hey Bank of America, we got $$$ for patches on the Umps uniforms last year, don't think you can come in less than that." Plus you don't get locked into long term deals. Now that Umps wear sponsorships, maybe there's more of a market for it. One of the regular Mets mound ads was some grifting crypto company I think, but I never bothered to look further into it.

I'm in just on name alone.