Degrom to Rangers
- Big Amoco Sign
- Master of Hyperbole
- Posts: 14402
- Joined: December 1 17, 11:05 am
Re: Degrom to Rangers
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.
He’s about as productive as Cardinals top pitchers in 1/3 the innings.
- Popeye_Card
- GRB's most intelligent & humble poster
- Posts: 29877
- Joined: April 17 06, 11:25 am
Re: Degrom to Rangers
The problem with pitchers is that you can’t be productive for your team in the innings you are not pitching.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 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.
-
- AAA Minor League Player
- Posts: 60
- Joined: December 28 17, 4:29 pm
Re: Degrom to Rangers
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.
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.
- Big Amoco Sign
- Master of Hyperbole
- Posts: 14402
- Joined: December 1 17, 11:05 am
Re: Degrom to Rangers
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.
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.
- cardinalkarp
- Hall Of Famer
- Posts: 17991
- Joined: May 4 06, 8:44 am
Re: Degrom to Rangers
Well, the problem is it won’t be the Cards brass doing the coughing.Big Amoco Sign wrote: ↑December 3 22, 10:18 amThe 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.
- go birds
- -go birds
- Posts: 31896
- Joined: February 5 10, 9:54 am
Re: Degrom to Rangers
I’ll set the over/under at 50 starts
-
- Sobbing quietly during Fox programming
- Posts: 10247
- Joined: June 9 06, 3:51 pm
Re: Degrom to Rangers
++Big Amoco Sign wrote: ↑December 3 22, 10:18 amThe 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.
-
- Hall Of Famer
- Posts: 24006
- Joined: December 20 07, 2:45 pm
Re: Degrom to Rangers
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.
Or maybe both.
- Fan_In_NY
- Perennial All-Star
- Posts: 5184
- Joined: April 18 06, 7:22 pm
- Location: Birthplace of Baseball- Hoboken, NJ
Re: Degrom to Rangers
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.
- Big Amoco Sign
- Master of Hyperbole
- Posts: 14402
- Joined: December 1 17, 11:05 am
Re: Degrom to Rangers
Mets are spending because they’re the Mets. deGrom went to Texas because of tax purposes.