We've bantered about how the lack of Jake deGrom wins (now exacerbated by the COVID dilemma in 2019) could damage his Hall of Fame chances.
Part of that is the lack of win-loss decisions in his starts.
Arguably, the best pitcher on the planet the past two seasons doesn't get enough of them. 64 starts, 21 wins, 17 losses, 26 no-decisions for the Jakester. A win or loss in just 59% of his starts. Enough no decisions in 2 years to cover every start in a single year, from April thru August.
This is no longer an era where a guy like Nolan Ryan, in the three seasons after the Mets dumped him, completed 72 games. (Yes, 72 in 3 seasons).
As I understand it, help me if I am wrong, when you compete a game, you either win or lose. There aren't any no decisions for you in those cases.
Ryan, in those 3 seasons, went 62-48 an average of 37 decisions per season! He had only 13 no-decisions, an average of 4 per season! A win or loss in 90% of his starts!
If Jake got decisions in 90% of his starts the past two seasons, Jake would have had 32 wins and 26 losses, and just 6 NDs.
Nor do other 2019 Mets starters get a lot of decisions. Mets' overall starters went 54-46, or 61.7% of starts. Relievers got 62 W/L decisions!
"Back in the summer of '69", the Mets starters by comparison went 73-52, with 37 NDs. So, in 1969, 78.3% of decisions accrued to starters, 21.7% to relievers.
The starter decision rate would have been a pinch higher, but the 3 swing men (Ryan, McGraw, and DiLauro) went just 4-7 in 18 starts, a 61% rate. The designated everyday starters (Seaver, Koosman, et al) were at 79.1%.
I like that ratio better. I can't expect a Ryan decision rate - no one can - he was clearly the Freak we let get away.
But our starters get too few decisions for my liking, because a 62% decision rate or your starters mean that when you go to 81 home games a year, 30 times a reliever is getting the win or loss, kind of like kissing your sister.
I want my starters to win or lose! Heck, in 1903, Jack Chesbro went 41-12 with 48 complete games in 51 starts. 454.2 innings - now THAT'S more like it!
And anyway, it is only logical to assume that low decision rates in a pitcher's starts result in lower chances for any Hall of Fame quests.
OK, enough - I just made a decision - this article is OVER. Isn't that a relief? Don't get me started.
5 comments:
So the question is whether the Mets' bats are impotent or its bullpen are flamethrowers that deGrom got so few decisions?
Jake is a unique issue - the Mets' offense hasn't been impotent the past two seasons - except when he pitches.
The bullpen has not helped either.
Also, it seems that opposing teams, especially the Nats with Scherzer, have their best starter go up against Jake.
Jake just needs 72 complete games over the next 3 seasons, said Nolan Ryan, and he should be all right.
Oh, geez, not this again.
You keep repeating the same thing over and over and over again. You want it to be 1975 again, we get it.
You need to make comparisons within the context of the era, the same time period, or else it's all meaningless.
But we've done this dance a dozen times at least.
Times have changed. The game has changed. Jake isn't going to three 130 pitches. He's already had one TJ surgery. You are barking up the wrong tree.
Jimmy
Jimmy, two things. You seem to lack a sense of humor. Obviously, Jake will not throw 72 complete games - heck, he won't have 72 career games of 8 innings or longer. And no one else will have 72 complete games. Ever. Heck, all of MLB had 45 complete games last year in 4,858 starts.
It allows readers other than you, and perhaps less universally knowledgeable than yourself, to marvel at Ryan's incredible feat, not expect Jake to do anything like it.
Second, there are other readers besides you. Read it and move on, brother.
My point here was largely, I like it when starters get the decisions. Especially W's. I think most fans do. Ryan's 90% decision rate over 3 seasons was utterly remarkable. Especially in the light of today's game.
That said, I'm going to shelter in place now.
You probably hope Jake goes 2-1 and win another Cy Young award. Have fun with that.
Jimmy, two other things:
3) You read it
4) You reacted to it
Works for me
Post a Comment