Degrom to Rangers

Discuss all things Cardinals Baseball
User avatar
Big Amoco Sign
Master of Hyperbole
Posts: 13251
Joined: December 1 17, 11:05 am

Re: Degrom to Rangers

Post by Big Amoco Sign »

Great signing. Strikeout pitchers are needed in the shift ban era.

He’s about as productive as Cardinals top pitchers in 1/3 the innings.

User avatar
Popeye_Card
GRB's most intelligent & humble poster
Posts: 29468
Joined: April 17 06, 11:25 am

Re: Degrom to Rangers

Post by Popeye_Card »

Big Amoco Sign wrote:
December 3 22, 1:26 am

He’s about as productive as Cardinals top pitchers in 1/3 the innings.
The problem with pitchers is that you can’t be productive for your team in the innings you are not pitching.

The rest of this post has nothing to do with deGrom or your post. Just random philosophical thoughts on baseball on a Saturday morning.

Pitchers have an upper limit for how valuable they are to team performance in a given game. 0 runs. In the vast majority of their innings, they are going to achieve that top performance. For most good starting pitchers, they are going to be quite close to that best performance in most games - they’ll give up 0-3 runs. They have no lower limit for how bad they can be. Other than the manager is going to pull the plug at a reasonable point.

Hitters have a limit for how bad they can be. Contribute to 0 runs. Never reach base. Even the best hitters hit the lower limit in the majority of their plate appearances. Most don’t contribute to a run scoring in over half of their games. Their upper bound of performance is limited by how many times they can bat in a game, and only being able to contribute to a maximum of 4 runs scoring in a given at bat.

None of this is groundbreaking. I’ve just never really thought about it from that angle before. The curve of pitching value to a team win is skewed toward the upper limit, and the curve for hitting value is heavily skewed to the lower limit.

cardstatman
AAA Minor League Player
Posts: 55
Joined: December 28 17, 4:29 pm

Re: Degrom to Rangers

Post by cardstatman »

Batters can win games. Good batters win more games.
Pitchers can lose games. Bad pitchers lose more games. Bad fielding fits here, too, but to a much lesser degree.

Degrom has started 38 games in the past 3 years. (2020 was a short season.)
The Mets went 25-13 (.658) in Degrom's games and 179-167 (.517) in their other games.
They probably won 5 or 6 more games over 3 seasons by having him on the team. They paid him around $80M for this or $15M per win.

Correspondingly, Degrom's WPA was 5.1.
I believe WPA is an excellent measure of how much a pitcher contributes to a team.

Also, other interesting concepts which I believe may be true...

Great players are less valuable to great teams since those teams often would have won many games even without the great performance from the great player? but I guess bad teams can lose even though the player had a great performance.

All players are great on the days they are great. Great players have more of those days. They have no control over whether their team needed that great play on the days they produced it.

User avatar
Big Amoco Sign
Master of Hyperbole
Posts: 13251
Joined: December 1 17, 11:05 am

Re: Degrom to Rangers

Post by Big Amoco Sign »

The injuries are why the deal is only 37m AAV.

Every year people love to scream about risks while Verlander, Harper, Machado, Scherzer, Freeman, etc. keep doing their thing. We can talk about the Corbin type deals too. Less of those. Degrom will post big numbers in Texas. He will get injured some. Big deal. All pitchers do. We have no idea if he won’t post a 150 inning season next year or not. There’s only assumptions here.

Elfin got a big deal too. Pitchers are getting paid and I love it. Owners are swimming in money and it’s time to cough it up.

User avatar
cardinalkarp
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 17957
Joined: May 4 06, 8:44 am

Re: Degrom to Rangers

Post by cardinalkarp »

Big Amoco Sign wrote:
December 3 22, 10:18 am
The injuries are why the deal is only 37m AAV.

Every year people love to scream about risks while Verlander, Harper, Machado, Scherzer, Freeman, etc. keep doing their thing. We can talk about the Corbin type deals too. Less of those. Degrom will post big numbers in Texas. He will get injured some. Big deal. All pitchers do. We have no idea if he won’t post a 150 inning season next year or not. There’s only assumptions here.

Elfin got a big deal too. Pitchers are getting paid and I love it. Owners are swimming in money and it’s time to cough it up.
Well, the problem is it won’t be the Cards brass doing the coughing.

User avatar
go birds
-go birds
Posts: 31528
Joined: February 5 10, 9:54 am

Re: Degrom to Rangers

Post by go birds »

I’ll set the over/under at 50 starts

phins
Sobbing quietly during Fox programming
Posts: 9389
Joined: June 9 06, 3:51 pm

Re: Degrom to Rangers

Post by phins »

Big Amoco Sign wrote:
December 3 22, 10:18 am
The injuries are why the deal is only 37m AAV.

Every year people love to scream about risks while Verlander, Harper, Machado, Scherzer, Freeman, etc. keep doing their thing. We can talk about the Corbin type deals too. Less of those. Degrom will post big numbers in Texas. He will get injured some. Big deal. All pitchers do. We have no idea if he won’t post a 150 inning season next year or not. There’s only assumptions here.

Elfin got a big deal too. Pitchers are getting paid and I love it. Owners are swimming in money and it’s time to cough it up.
++

dmarx114
Hall Of Famer
Posts: 22962
Joined: December 20 07, 2:45 pm

Re: Degrom to Rangers

Post by dmarx114 »

With the way the Mets are spending, either they have major medical concerns with deGrom, or deGrom really didn't want to play in NY anymore.

Or maybe both.

User avatar
Fan_In_NY
Perennial All-Star
Posts: 5085
Joined: April 18 06, 7:22 pm
Location: Birthplace of Baseball- Hoboken, NJ

Re: Degrom to Rangers

Post by Fan_In_NY »

dmarx114 wrote:
December 9 22, 8:39 am
With the way the Mets are spending, either they have major medical concerns with deGrom, or deGrom really didn't want to play in NY anymore.

Or maybe both.
I think its definitely both. deGrom wanted out of NY and I don't think has a love for the NY lifestyle and commitments. I think the Mets are actually much happier to get Verlander for 2 years because they don't want to commit years to older putchers with arm injury history.

User avatar
Big Amoco Sign
Master of Hyperbole
Posts: 13251
Joined: December 1 17, 11:05 am

Re: Degrom to Rangers

Post by Big Amoco Sign »

Mets are spending because they’re the Mets. deGrom went to Texas because of tax purposes.

Post Reply