Comments on: Read: Mike Pelfrey, Behind in the Count http://www.metsblog.com/2008/03/14/read-mike-pelfrey-behind-in-the-count/ Latest Mets News, Links, Rumors and Opinion Fri, 04 Feb 2011 21:22:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: VCarver http://www.metsblog.com/2008/03/14/read-mike-pelfrey-behind-in-the-count/#comment-113930 VCarver Fri, 14 Mar 2008 23:40:18 +0000 http://www.metsblog.com/2008/03/14/read-mike-pelfrey-behind-in-the-count/#comment-113930 Matt, you're absolutely right. I was reading the league ERA incorrectly there, and Marquis did in fact have a decent 2007. However, look at his 2006 season. He pitched 190+ innings and his ERA+ was just 74. IOW, he pitched worse in 2006 than Pelfrey pitched in 2007. If Marquis was a more consistent pitcher, he might be a good risk. But at this point he seems to be a below-average league starter (what his career ERA+ indicates). I'd still rather go with Pelfrey. Matt, you’re absolutely right. I was reading the league ERA incorrectly there, and Marquis did in fact have a decent 2007.

However, look at his 2006 season. He pitched 190+ innings and his ERA+ was just 74. IOW, he pitched worse in 2006 than Pelfrey pitched in 2007.

If Marquis was a more consistent pitcher, he might be a good risk. But at this point he seems to be a below-average league starter (what his career ERA+ indicates).

I’d still rather go with Pelfrey.

]]> By: Another Matt http://www.metsblog.com/2008/03/14/read-mike-pelfrey-behind-in-the-count/#comment-113821 Another Matt Fri, 14 Mar 2008 19:38:27 +0000 http://www.metsblog.com/2008/03/14/read-mike-pelfrey-behind-in-the-count/#comment-113821 You're not reading BR's 'league ERA' column correctly - that's already park-adjusted. ERA+ of 100 is defined as pitcher's ERA = park-adjusted league ERA, in other words, a league-average pitcher - which amounts to a good #5. Wrigley's park factor for 2007 was 107 for hitting, 106 for pitching. I don't quite understand the split on the park factor, but in both cases above 100 means more hitter-friendly than league average. ESPN lists Wrigley as the second most hitter-friendly park in baseball for 2007, after Fenway You’re not reading BR’s ‘league ERA’ column correctly – that’s already park-adjusted. ERA+ of 100 is defined as pitcher’s ERA = park-adjusted league ERA, in other words, a league-average pitcher – which amounts to a good #5.

Wrigley’s park factor for 2007 was 107 for hitting, 106 for pitching. I don’t quite understand the split on the park factor, but in both cases above 100 means more hitter-friendly than league average. ESPN lists Wrigley as the second most hitter-friendly park in baseball for 2007, after Fenway

]]> By: Danny1986 http://www.metsblog.com/2008/03/14/read-mike-pelfrey-behind-in-the-count/#comment-113766 Danny1986 Fri, 14 Mar 2008 18:49:56 +0000 http://www.metsblog.com/2008/03/14/read-mike-pelfrey-behind-in-the-count/#comment-113766 hence "pretty much" hence “pretty much”

]]> By: Paulysesq http://www.metsblog.com/2008/03/14/read-mike-pelfrey-behind-in-the-count/#comment-113687 Paulysesq Fri, 14 Mar 2008 18:08:07 +0000 http://www.metsblog.com/2008/03/14/read-mike-pelfrey-behind-in-the-count/#comment-113687 you are exactly right! His ball naturally moves low & too the right...How has he/Peterson not discovered this or made the appropriate adjustment?? I personally cannot stand Pelfrey at this point, b/c there is nothing i hate more than pitchers walking guys. you have to put the ball in play, and to be honest, if you are known as not throwing strikes you arent going to strike anyone out anyway b/c nobody is going to swing... If matt Morris or marquis are cheap, i would happily sign them as a #5 these guys were front end guys in the past...truly Mr. Pelfrey you have been a tremendous disappointment you are exactly right! His ball naturally moves low & too the right…How has he/Peterson not discovered this or made the appropriate adjustment??

I personally cannot stand Pelfrey at this point, b/c there is nothing i hate more than pitchers walking guys. you have to put the ball in play, and to be honest, if you are known as not throwing strikes you arent going to strike anyone out anyway b/c nobody is going to swing…

If matt Morris or marquis are cheap, i would happily sign them as a #5 these guys were front end guys in the past…truly Mr. Pelfrey you have been a tremendous disappointment

]]> By: rockets212 http://www.metsblog.com/2008/03/14/read-mike-pelfrey-behind-in-the-count/#comment-113682 rockets212 Fri, 14 Mar 2008 18:05:12 +0000 http://www.metsblog.com/2008/03/14/read-mike-pelfrey-behind-in-the-count/#comment-113682 The problem is that pelfrey always puts to much pressure on himself, he needs to know hes in the big leagues for the entire season, so he can calm down get into a rythm work with rick peterson for an entire year. If all of that happens then pelfrey can be productive. And Duque was in the pen for white Sox in 05 when they won the world series and he was exteremly effective. If Pelfrey pitches in the rotation all of 08 then in 09 he can really start to push up the rotation but that will never happen if hes being bounced back and forth all the time (which he will be because if Duque starts he will be in and out of the rotation all year). The problem is that pelfrey always puts to much pressure on himself, he needs to know hes in the big leagues for the entire season, so he can calm down get into a rythm work with rick peterson for an entire year. If all of that happens then pelfrey can be productive.
And Duque was in the pen for white Sox in 05 when they won the world series and he was exteremly effective. If Pelfrey pitches in the rotation all of 08 then in 09 he can really start to push up the rotation but that will never happen if hes being bounced back and forth all the time (which he will be because if Duque starts he will be in and out of the rotation all year).

]]> By: VCarver http://www.metsblog.com/2008/03/14/read-mike-pelfrey-behind-in-the-count/#comment-113661 VCarver Fri, 14 Mar 2008 17:53:43 +0000 http://www.metsblog.com/2008/03/14/read-mike-pelfrey-behind-in-the-count/#comment-113661 Correction: Wrigley did not play as a pitcher's park in 2007 but it played as somewhat neutral as evidenced by the fact Marquis' ERA+ was not adjusted upward to any significant degree. Correction: Wrigley did not play as a pitcher’s park in 2007 but it played as somewhat neutral as evidenced by the fact Marquis’ ERA+ was not adjusted upward to any significant degree.

]]> By: VCarver http://www.metsblog.com/2008/03/14/read-mike-pelfrey-behind-in-the-count/#comment-113649 VCarver Fri, 14 Mar 2008 17:47:51 +0000 http://www.metsblog.com/2008/03/14/read-mike-pelfrey-behind-in-the-count/#comment-113649 Except that last year, Wrigley played as a pitchers park, according to baseball-reference.com. The league ERA was 4.66. And Marquis ERA was 4.60. His ERA+ was only adjusted to 101 which confirms that they viewed Wrigley as more neutral than anything. Except that last year, Wrigley played as a pitchers park, according to baseball-reference.com.

The league ERA was 4.66. And Marquis ERA was 4.60. His ERA+ was only adjusted to 101 which confirms that they viewed Wrigley as more neutral than anything.

]]> By: VCarver http://www.metsblog.com/2008/03/14/read-mike-pelfrey-behind-in-the-count/#comment-113639 VCarver Fri, 14 Mar 2008 17:42:24 +0000 http://www.metsblog.com/2008/03/14/read-mike-pelfrey-behind-in-the-count/#comment-113639 Doesn't matter. Whatever breaking or off-speed pitch he's trying to develop, he'll be able to refine it better on the ML level. Doesn’t matter. Whatever breaking or off-speed pitch he’s trying to develop, he’ll be able to refine it better on the ML level.

]]> By: Mister Koo http://www.metsblog.com/2008/03/14/read-mike-pelfrey-behind-in-the-count/#comment-113633 Mister Koo Fri, 14 Mar 2008 17:38:46 +0000 http://www.metsblog.com/2008/03/14/read-mike-pelfrey-behind-in-the-count/#comment-113633 How do you explain the fact that his K rate in the minors was very high, then after they tinkered with him in early 07 and he went back to the minors (after failing at the big league level), the K rate never came back in the minors? How do you explain the fact that his K rate in the minors was very high, then after they tinkered with him in early 07 and he went back to the minors (after failing at the big league level), the K rate never came back in the minors?

]]> By: Another Matt http://www.metsblog.com/2008/03/14/read-mike-pelfrey-behind-in-the-count/#comment-113614 Another Matt Fri, 14 Mar 2008 17:22:24 +0000 http://www.metsblog.com/2008/03/14/read-mike-pelfrey-behind-in-the-count/#comment-113614 Have to challenge the assertion they have the same pitch selection, when Heilman's putaway pitch is the change, which is the pitch that's been getting Pelfrey bashed up this spring. Have to challenge the assertion they have the same pitch selection, when Heilman’s putaway pitch is the change, which is the pitch that’s been getting Pelfrey bashed up this spring.

]]>