Is 200 Innings The Be-All-End-All For Starting Pitchers?

50 Comments + Add Comment

• jessep January 9, 2012 at 11:45 am

  First, I’m not high on Pelfrey. I do think part of the problem with him is that unfair expectations consistently get set for him based on Santana’s injury status. He’s not a #1, not a #2, not even a #3 probably. Yet words like “he’s our ace now,” get tossed around.

  I will say this about him with regards to this piece “The difference showed up in the win columns; 7 wins in 33 starts for Pelfrey, 11 wins in 26 starts for Niese.”

  That’s where I take exception with the way some people use W-L for pitchers

  If you look at Pelfrey’s actual games he pitched good enough to win a game in probably 15 starts.

  If you want to just look at the runs he gave up compared to innings pitched
  4-22: 7IP 1ER (Took Win) 4-1
  5-5: 7.2IP 1ER (Took Win) 5-2
  5-10: 6.2IP 3ER (Took Win) 4-3
  5-16: 7IP 1ER (ND) 1-2
  5-28: 7.2IP 2ER (ND) 2-5
  6-8: 6IP 2ER (ND) 6-7
  6-13: 7IP 2ER (Took Loss) 1-3
  6-18: 9IP 1ER (Took Win) 6-1
  7-5: 6IP 0ER (Took Win) 6-0
  7-10: 6IP 2ER (Took Loss) 2-4
  7-27: 9IP 2ER (Took Win) 8-2
  8-1: 6IP 2ER (ND) 3-7
  8-24: 6IP 3ER (Took Win) 7-4
  9-9: 6.2IP 3ER (ND) 5-4
  9-14: 7IP 0ER (Took Loss) 0-2

  Now you can start to disect it even more if you want. Hits, K’s etc. But Pelfrey is a big guy who doesn’t strike people out. Even if I do not like it, he’s the kind of pitcher who lives and dies by putting the ball in play.

  I’m not saying I love Pelfrey, I’m just saying to use his Wins as a reason to get all over him is unfair.
• metsaddict77 January 9, 2012 at 11:24 am

  if they’re 200 crappy innings what’s the point.i thuoght as a pitcher the purpose is to prevent the other team from scoring and winning games.
• Alex68 January 9, 2012 at 11:35 am

  a little inside information, RANGERS OFFERING DICE K MONEY TO DARVISH.. might very well be $102 million or so after all, instead of the $125 million some idiot suggested:

  http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/01/rangers-offering-dice-k-money-to-darvish.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_
  • jessep January 9, 2012 at 11:49 am

    Alex:

    I like how you ignore the bottom of the link you posted

    “I polled five agents and one team executive and most predicted a five or six-year deal in the $72-75MM range for Darvish”

    Further, nothing is done yet… and I don’t get how you can call me an idiot when you claimed victory after the posting fee was announced because at the time you didn’t even understand the posting fee+contract = $ commitment

    I also don’t get why making a prediction that $125 mil is going to be what I expect and then he maybe gets less makes me an idiot. You didn’t make a prediction at the time

    You also should not call people idiots and then say

    “because the jays won the bidding”

    Since you know, Texas won the bidding
    • jessep January 9, 2012 at 11:57 am

      To be clear here is EXACTLY what I said on December 15th

      “I think Dice K got something like 6/60 with incentives so you know right there Darvish is going to get more $.

      For people complaining the Mets didn’t bid, yeah it stinks but you can’t be surprised. In order to sign Darvish, the Mets likely would have to gamble $55mil that they COULD sign him and then get him to sign something like 6/75. That’s more $ than Reyes signed for… so why people even had a slight thought the Mets would be in on this is beyond me”

      I also said I believe the total investment would be around $125mil.

      On December 19th:
      http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas/texas-rangers/post/_/id/4876722/rangers-post-high-bid-for-yu-darvish

      “(some reports say Darvish wants a five-year, $75 million deal, which would edge the total toward $125 million).”

      That is AFTER I threw out the $75mil number. Are we calling Richard Durrett who has covered the Texas Rangers for 11 years an idiot also?
    • Alex68 January 9, 2012 at 12:08 pm

      Point is, i had my prediction and you disagree with it and went on a rampage just because you don’t think he’ll get dice K money, everything is gotta be your way or the highway, also, thanks for letting me know it was the rangers, i posted the link and by mistake kept thinking jays… for someone who is still a kid you need to be more humble about other’s opinion is my point, noone gives you sh** after making you’re stupid asss statements about craig kimbrel being the best closer in the game or after you disapeared when the braves choked away the wild card, you’re a “man” whenever you need to be.. face to face meeting will be available this year as well in case you’re interested…
      • jessep January 9, 2012 at 12:27 pm

        Alex: why does everything with you turn into a drama fest?

        http://metsmerizedonline.com/2011/12/rangers-win-rights-to-negotiate-with-darvish.html

        “Point is, i had my prediction and you disagree with it and went on a rampage just because you don’t think he’ll get dice K money, everything is gotta be your way or the highway”

        “To get Darvish you’re talking $125mil commitment most likely” – Me

        Closest thing you ever said to a prediction in that thread was after I made my prediction

        “To get Darvish you’re talking $125mil commitment most likely. Once again YOU WILL BE WRONG… and btw, where is my gift i won when i predicted reyes ending up with the marlins????”

        Then 5 days AFTER I gave my prediction you said “He’ll get the same treatment dice K got. make it 6 years at around $50 to 60 million… unlike the $125 some idiot suggested..”

        Proving you didn’t even understand the posting system. So if he got $60m contract, that’d be $111mil commited. Hardly a reason to call somebody an “idiot”

        “stupid asss statements about craig kimbrel being the best closer in the game or after you disapeared when the braves choked away the wild card, you’re a “man” whenever you need to be.. face to face meeting will be available this year as well in case you’re interested…”

        When we discussed Craig Kimbrel here is exactly what I said http://metsmerizedonline.com/2011/07/why-trade-francisco-why-not.html

        “If you look at the collection of baseball’s top closers in baseball you have players like: Mariano, Bell, Papelbon, Kimbrel, Hanrahan (in no order and just to name a few).”

        “Alex do you want 13 closers in 2011 better than KRod or do you want 13 closers better than KRod since 2006? See, the problem is… you’re assuming that what KRod has done in the past matters at all. In 2011, I want Kimbrel closing a game instead of KRod”

        Alex: “so gimme 13 closers better than krod RIRGHT NOW!!???????”

        Right now:
        Kimbrel, Wilson, Hanrahan, Bell, Street, Storen, Mariano, Perez, Putz, Walden, Feliz, Farnsworth have all pitched better than KRod on a nightly basis.”

        If you’re assuming that because I just spouted off names that I also think Huston Street or Joel Hanrahan is better than Mariano, you’re sadly clueless.

        I never said he was the best closer in baseball, I said he was better than KRod. And he is.
      • Alex68 January 9, 2012 at 12:38 pm

        you know, now you’re backtracking?!?! you DID say he was the best closer in the game, this discussion took part on the chat when it was still up, and again, after winning the bidding right how much the red sox paid dice K was what i was refering to… which they ended up payin around $106 million and up to $111 with incentives which he didn’t received due to health issues and what not.. again, about krod, he wasn’t the best closer, but he was a pretty decent one for us during the time he was here, he was at a percent rate of 88% save rate, which donal called terrible, but kimbrel’s was 85% and he’s better.. i don’t get it..
        • jessep January 9, 2012 at 12:58 pm

          Alex: I’m sorry bt you’re either a liar or just have a bad memory. You need to drop it.

          I’ve never in my life thought any closer was better than Mariano Rivera. Thus I’d never say Craig Kimbrel is the best closer in the game.

          Was Kimbrel the best closer in the NL at the time we likely discussed it? Probably since we discussed Kimbrel in the late summer when he was ranked #1 among closers in the NL.

          Darvish hasn’t signed a contract yet. So calling anybody an idiot for guessing how much $ the team who gets him will spend to get him is idiotic.
          • Alex68 January 9, 2012 at 1:12 pm

            the thing is, i gave my opinion, and you said i was wrong for stating an OPINION, this is not the first time you’ve done this, and yes, you did SAY KIMBREL was the best closer in the game, based on numbers and body of work
            • jessep January 9, 2012 at 1:34 pm

              Alex: Give it a rest. I never said that about Kimbrel. I’ve PROVEN that my quotes about Kimbrel never claim he’s the best closer in baseball. You’re saying I said something with no evidence… give it a rest.

              As for Darvish, I’m the one who made the prediction and you came out and called me an idiot. You didn’t predict anything about is $ or the teams $ until I did. And since no results have been posted you’ll notice only 1 of us is calling the other an idiot

              Give it a rest. If the best comeback you have towards me is to say I’m an idiot for guessing $125 by an MLB team for darvish or use made up comments of things I never said then you need to sit down before you fall down.

              I said very clearly that I’d gladly take Kimbrel over KRod. I’ll stand by that.

              Kimbrel as a closer probably had as good of a season or better than ANY Mets closer single season that I can think of. He’s a product of their development. The Mets constantly have to go buy a closer, and he’s never as good as a rookie in Atlanta. The fact you consistently knock him is laughable.

              I’d take 2011 Kimbrel over any Mets single season closer. the closest thing is probably if you combined McDowell & Orosco into one pitcher in 86. The only reason you wouldn’t is because he’s not a Met.

              The fact that I think Kimbrel was very good in 2011 puts me in the majority, not the minority.
        • Donal January 9, 2012 at 12:58 pm

          I keep asking you where I said Rodriguez or his save rate were terrible, but you have yet to do so. Why do you insist on repeating that lie?
          • Alex68 January 9, 2012 at 1:10 pm

            Donal, again, MANIAC can back me up on that statement.. you DID say his rate % of saves was terrible….
            • Donal January 9, 2012 at 1:20 pm

              I’m sure Maniac will say you are right. That just makes him wrong with you.
      • Des January 9, 2012 at 12:59 pm

        Alex68 — “… everything is gotta be your way or the highway.”

        You’ve made my day, Alex. Are you referring to some of your friends? lol. Only kidding.
        • Alex68 January 9, 2012 at 1:15 pm

          Des, is well documented you’re dislike for a few guys in here, not need to say you’re kidding… i don’t like jesseP, donal, aggee, kay, etc..
          • Des January 9, 2012 at 2:41 pm

            Alex68 — Thanks for keeping me off of your ‘dislike’ list. As for my disliking anyone, that’s not so. I have different views than a couple of people but I don’t dislike them. For example, if one of our regulars asked to borrow $20 bucks or so, I’d give it to him/her with no questions asked.

            But Alex, none of the foregoing means that I share all their views of in some cases, their method of disagreeing. To mix policy or baseball views with like or dislike is mixing apples and oranges.
            • jessep January 9, 2012 at 2:43 pm

              Des, can I borrow $20?
              • Des January 9, 2012 at 7:09 pm

                Jessep — I was wondering who would be the first to plead poverty. Anyway, come visit me and we’ll go to some spring training practices and games. At the games, I’ll buy the beers. Actually I like the practices more, because of my proximity to the field and the players. With the games, I’m seldom as close.
  • Donal January 9, 2012 at 11:38 am

    “and there is no evidence the deal is close”

    You really should read what you are linking to
  • Alex68 January 9, 2012 at 11:43 am

    again, my prediction is he will get that kind of money, dice K range, of course is not close because the jays won the bidding and will use Dice K as to say see what happened to him? the won the bidding and got the upper hand, they don’t have to budge, the agent for yu does..
    • Donal January 9, 2012 at 11:51 am

      The Rangers won the bidding, not the Blue Jays. And they have a need that Darvish fills. In case you didn’t notice, their #1 starter from last year went to a division rival (who was on their tail all of last season) along with the best hitter in the game.
• Donal January 9, 2012 at 11:37 am

  Meh, Pelf isn’t so bad if you think of him as a 4th or 5th starter.

  As for the concept of “innings eater”, I’d rather go to a 4 man rotation than give 200+ innings to a guy who can’t maintain an average performance (at the very least) for a major league starter.
• NJstuckinTX January 9, 2012 at 11:42 am

  Yeah, I’ve never liked the “but he pitched 200 innings” argument. If most of those 200 innings sucked, then as addict77 stated, what is the point?
  • Alex68 January 9, 2012 at 11:43 am

    Don’t tell that to the saber heads, numbers mean a lot to them….
    • NJstuckinTX January 9, 2012 at 11:45 am

      Honestly, the numbers do support this. Pelf (and his numbers) are not good.
      • Alex68 January 9, 2012 at 12:10 pm

        there’s always gonna be some idiot try to justify a player with numbers… ohh, well, look below…
        • trs86 January 9, 2012 at 2:49 pm

          So let me get this straight. You never justify a player with numbers?
    • Donal January 9, 2012 at 11:53 am

      Actually, most “saber heads” (ie people that understand statistics better than you) disagree with the idea of an innings eater. 200 crappy innings doesn’t help anyone.

      But, since when can you be expected to know what the hell you are talking about?
      • Des January 9, 2012 at 1:04 pm

        Donal — If a guy throws 200+ innings, he can’t be all that crappy unless the bullpen is even more crappy. A guy with a lot of innings is typically having some success. If he’s not, look at the front office for populating the team with doofus players.
        • Donal January 9, 2012 at 1:18 pm

          I don’t know, good pitchers do rack up lots of innings, but there is something wrong when the go to compliment about a pitcher is “innings eater”. That sounds like telling someone their blind date has “a great personality”. A guy can have an ERA of 6 and still be an innings eater.

          I think “innings eaters” exist because teams are so scared of trying something new (or rather, different). Teams are so married to 5 man rotations that they are giving mediocre pitchers 30 starts a year.

          Is the extra day of rest really that important? Wouldn’t you rather your ace getting half a dozen more starts? You can take that innings eater and use him as a swing man in the pen or something.
          • Des January 9, 2012 at 2:20 pm

            Donal — You said “A guy can have an ERA of 6 and still be an innings eater.” NOT SO.

            Last year in the majors, no pitcher who pitched 200 innings or more had an ERA greater than 4.80.

            More innings eaters had ERA’s in the “TWO’s” (Thirteen) than in the “FOUR’s” (Seven).

            There is no evidence that high ERA pitchers are big time innings eaters.
            • jessep January 9, 2012 at 2:42 pm

              I think innings eater doesn’t need to be defined as 200+

              I mean Arroyo threw 199 and had an ERA of 5.07

              I think Donal was probably being a little funny when he said “A guy can have an ERA of 6 and still be an innings eater”

              I doubt you can really name a SP who hit 200+ innings and had a 6 ERA right? Maybe you can…
              • Des January 9, 2012 at 2:46 pm

                Jessep — “I doubt you can really name a SP who hit 200+ innings and had a 6 ERA right? Maybe you can…”

                I just showed guys who pitched 200 or more innings don’t have high ERA’s. I’m not sure who you’re addressing.
                • jessep January 9, 2012 at 2:49 pm

                  No I’m sayig that historically not just 2011, I doubt if you looked over say the last 10 years you will find a 6.00 ERA with 200 IP. Meaning, I think Donal was exaggerating the point on purpose.
              • Des January 9, 2012 at 2:54 pm

                Jessep — The guy with the most innings who had an ERA over 6.00 was John Lackey. He pitched 160 innings and had a 6.07 ERA. He was Number 98 in total innings pitched. So on average, each major league team had more than three guys with more innings pitched. Lackey had less innings than Mike Pelfrey and Dillon Gee.
                • jessep January 9, 2012 at 2:58 pm

                  Des: I’m not disagreeing with you lol… I’m saying I think Donal was exaggerating his point on purpose.

                  A pitcher with a high 4 ERA and 190+ innings could be an innings eater no? A High 4 ERA isn’t that good is it? If you go over the last 10 years you’ll find some guys who fit that criteria.
            • Donal January 9, 2012 at 3:02 pm

              You’re right, I exaggerated a bit for effect. Also, if you expand your search to 190+ innings, you get 18 more pitchers, 2 of whom are Mike Pelfrey and AJ Burnette.

              Anyway, perhaps I am misstating my point. Obviously, the best pitchers are getting the most innings but no one calls Justin Verlander an “innings eater”. Its just that we also have a group of pitchers who are racking up 180-200 innings who aren’t that good and seem to have a reputation of “innings eater”. Pelfrey is apparently among this group. Kevin Millwood and Livan Hernandez have been in that group in recent years.

              “innings eater” seems to be another one of those ways of describing a player who isn’t very good but people talk up for whatever reason.
              • Des January 9, 2012 at 3:22 pm

                Donal — Who was the last pitcher who threw 200+ innings and had an ERA over 6.00?

                It was in 1998 and the guy was Pedro Astacio of Colorado. He pitched 209.1 innings and had a 6.23 ERA. He allowed 245 hits. It hasn’t happened since. By the way, 200 or so innings pitched represents about 14% or 15% of a typical team’s total innings. So it’s a big deal that saves a lot of wear and tear on a bullpen.
                • Donal January 9, 2012 at 3:32 pm

                  I said I exaggerated a bit. But, look at the guys who get just under 200 IP last year.

                  Also, no one calls good pitchers with lots of innings “inning eaters”. “Innings eaters” seems to refer to back of the rotation guys who aren’t that good but can not die on the mound for 180+ innings.
                  • Des January 9, 2012 at 3:44 pm

                    Check out the definition and meaning of “persuasive definition.” I think our dialog is heading in that direction.

                    I’m ready for a different discussion now.
                  • Donal January 9, 2012 at 3:52 pm

                    Well, that assumes there is an actual definition of “innings eater”. Which is part of what I am contending.
• any January 9, 2012 at 12:08 pm

  I would rather have 2 guys split the role during the year and each pitch effectively. 200 bad innings are, well, bad!

  Hell, have 6 Chris Youngs split the role.

  anyway, I think it is more important that the SPs pitch deeper into games, even if they don’t have as many starts.
• USMF January 9, 2012 at 12:28 pm

  There is one thing that gets easily overlooked when you look at a starters innings pitched and how much that leads to saving the pen.

  200 innings is great, but in Pelfs case because he always seems to be in trouble, the pen always seems active. Guys are getting up and down warming up. Sure, he may only pitch 2/3 an inning that game, but warming up a couple of times or warming up and not pitching still wears down the pen.

  Also, leaving the game in the middle of an inning with runners on base stresses the pen out a lot. First, there is a good chance that you have two guys warming up, plus they have to warm up quickly and once they come into a game, it’s a high pressure situation where they have to pitch their best stuff because the game is on the line. If the reliever then finishes up the inning, he’s usually done and a new pitcher has to be ready for the next inning.

  Now, a different pitcher may be only be good for 5 innings a game, but those are solid innings that he finishes up and the pen doesn’t have to get ready fast. The starter finishes the inning, the manager knows he’s done, knows how’s gonna be up in the next inning, finds the pitcher that matches up the best…the reliever has a full half inning to get ready and knows what who he has to face and doesn’t have to make every pitch perfect because the game isn’t on the line…even if you give up a HR, it’s only one run….a broken bat hit of the end of the bat won’t score two…

  Plus…if a starter gives up three runs in the first inning…then the rest of the game, the offense is forced into playing catch up…a starter gives up three runs in the first every other start, then the rest of the team gets the “here we go again” mentality…they’re defeated before the game is even half way over.
  • trs86 January 9, 2012 at 2:46 pm

    Good point, but Pelfrey seemed to be more bipolar than ever last year which is good and bad. You could tell early when he had it and did not have it. That was different from in years past where he could be rolling and give up 5 in the 5th.
• srt January 9, 2012 at 1:13 pm

  I’m trying to figure out how you can pitch 200+ plus innings and be totally crappy.
  If Pelf makes 30 starts and gets to at least 200 innings, then that’s an average of about 6 and 2/3s innings each game pitched.

  If he doesn’t get hurt and miss any starts likely he pitches 30-32 games. If he gets to 200 innings or better, then his year probably is more like mediocre – not totally crappy.

  Unless he’s left in the game going into the 7th each night losing by 1 or 2 runs, then just by virtue of getting into the 7th most times he will at least have kept the team in the game and spared the majority of the BP on most nights, plus come away with a fair number of wins.

  And that’s about the best thing I can say about Pelfrey heading into the 2012 season….
  • SaltyGary January 9, 2012 at 1:47 pm

    This team has not had a decent bullpen since ’06. So the Mets can let Pelf pitch that many innings because the alternative has never been better for him. Also they need Pelf to pitch that long just to give the bullpen guys a rest. Hell Capuano pitched almost 200 innings. Were those quality innings? Not all of them.
  • USMF January 9, 2012 at 2:01 pm

    But Mike didn’t reach 200 innings and he started 33 games.

    He reached 193.1 innings (excluding the inning he did in relief), that’s less than 6 innings per start.

    -He had 11 games of only 5 innings or less. That’s 1/3 of his starts he didn’t record more than 15 outs.

    -He had 7 games of 5 runs or more, that’s about 1 out of ever 4 starts.

    -He had 8 games of 7 innings or more, which means he’s more likely to go less than 5 than more than 7.

    -He struck out 4 or more guys 10 times. He walked 4 or more guys 7 times.

    -Mike averages about 17 pitches per inning.

    I could go on, but these are the numbers of a quality starter who’s an inning eater.
    • srt January 9, 2012 at 3:09 pm

      Not disagreeing with what obviously are the facts you provided.

      I’m was just commenting on the ’200 plus innings eater’ moniker they’ve tagged Pelfrey with.
• trs86 January 9, 2012 at 2:43 pm

  Here is the problem. Many of you guys try to view him as something more than a 5th starter. However, if you look at him just as that you would be much harder pressed to find a #5 with those kind of stats. Now if you want to say that the Mets viewed him as the ace… blah blah blah… point is that looking at what they have going into next year he is the #5 those numbers are comparable.