Pelf Not as Bad as You Might Think

An article by posted on April 9, 2009

I can only imagine what was going through the minds of some of you when Cincy took a 4-2 lead-Pelf pitched well enough to have been beaten 3-2 at that point. But Pelf was not all that bad, not as bad as that really high, 100-plus pitch count might indicate.

What I saw was a horrible first inning, followed by four mediocre to almost good four innings. Flashes of brilliance, stellar…decidedly not. Here were Pelf’s problems, and here also is my rationale for not fretting a bit.

Generally, I thought the home ump called an okay game; he did not give much on corners, and he rarely called “low” strikes. I think I counted four instances where Pelf should have had called strikes, three occurrences that could have been difference makers. Oh, well. Volquez didn’t get some calls either.

Pelf’s biggest problem was consistently missing the corners-sad to watch, really. That’s just not going to be the case every game. His velocity was there and he mixed up pitches pretty well. Mechanics at times seemed a little ungainly, almost as if Big P. wasn’t completely finishing follow-throughs. Wonder what Warthen will say, or saw. Again, in these early games it’s often just a little too cool for most pitchers, and that showed itself for Pelf.

In the end, I’m not fretting because his strength and repertoire looks good. He has to increase his confidence (no, I’m not a psychologist); still doesn’t look as if he trusts himself, but this is going to improve with the next three-four starts. Fear not, Mets fans, Big Pelf is going to pick you up way more often than he’s going to let you down.

Bats give me great confidence. I know it’s early, but we’re just gonna be tremendous at the plate this year.

Bullpen guys, you just about killed me tonight. I can’t take too many more of those situations. Ugh!

One hundred and sixty to go. LGM! LGM!

About the Author ()

Comments are closed.