Remember's Ramblings –
Volume 2, Article 8
February 18, 2025
Score Early, Score
Often!
Remember's Warning: My numbers brain got loose for this article – there is a lot here, but interesting to me. I really hope I don’t lose you before you have a chance to get to the end.
There was something about the Mets in 2024 that bothered me as the year progressed that I was feeling, but didn’t know the specifics or even if my feelings were valid. It just seemed to me that the Mets did not get off to an early lead very often and it seemed that they played a lot of catch-up late in games.
The common knowledge is that a baseball game is nine innings and the team that has the most runs at the end of those nine innings is the winner. If that was all there was to it, it would seem that it did not matter when all the runs were scored. But there are games within the games.
To
drill down into those games within the game, I broke the scoring down into
three-inning segments, plus segregated the first inning by itself, just to see
how the team did after one inning, three innings, six innings and nine innings
(or the final score if it happened to go into extras).
The common information that is readily available is the final score record. The Mets were 89-73 in their 2024 162 game season for a .549 winning percentage.
Three Inning Games
If games had been just three innings, their final record would have been 63-58-41, or a .521 winning percentage. This tells me my feelings of playing catch-up were real. They did play (score) better in innings 4-9 than in innings 1-3.
As a further breakdown to see how much scoring early in the game matters, in games they were winning after 3 innings (63 games), they went on to win 46 of them (vs. just 17 losses), or a .730 winning percentage.
In games they were losing after 3 innings, they finished them off at 18-40, or a .310 winning percentage. That tells me that there is a huge advantage to scoring early and grabbing the lead after the first three innings.
Six Inning Games
If games had been six innings, their record would have been 78-60-24 for a .565 winning percentage. By the time they got to the sixth, they had caught up more often than not and they should have quit then. Their six-inning scores yielded a better record than their full game scores – their late inning bullpen work needed to be a little better.
In games they were winning after 6 innings (78 games), they finished them at 61-17 (.782). Unfortunately, that was less than half the games they played.
In games they were losing after 6 innings, their winning percentage was a predicable .200 (12-48). Fortunately, that scenario occurred in just over one third of their games.
Score early for best final score results! The Mets won a creditable 41 games when they came from behind, but wouldn’t it be nice to get that early lead and hold it more often so they didn’t have to do the late game comebacks?
Starting a Game Strong
And just because I was curious and it was a snowy weekend with not much else to do, I did a deeper dive to look at just the first inning results.
The Mets scored at least one run in 39 games in the first inning, not quite one in every four games, (which seems a little low to me), although they only gave up runs in the first in 33 games, so they were better than .500 in that regard.
When they did not score in the first inning (123 games), they finished those games with a 62-61 (.504) record.
When they scored at least one run in the first they finished those games 27-12, or a .692 pace, well above their .549 year-end percentage. It did not matter whether or not the opponent scored in the first inning to attain that winning percentage. In fact, their winning percentage was only .008 higher (21-9 or .700) when the Mets scored in the first and they held the opponent scoreless in that same frame.
When they gave up a run in the first, they were 14-19, or .424, even if they also scored in the first. In fact, if both teams scored at least one run in the first, the Mets ended those games 6-3, much better than the 8-16 (.333) in games they gave up a run in the first and did not score.
When they scored more than one run in the first (15 times), they ended the games at 11-4, or .733.
Addendum: And the extremely good news is that they now have Juan Soto in the line-up with guaranteed at bats in the first inning. Soto in 2024 had an OBP of .455 and OPS of 1.041 in the first inning. To contrast that (add to?) the Mets hitters, Francisco Lindor as a leadoff batter most of the year turned in a .351 OBP and .784 OPS, by far the best of the Mets. Brandon Nimmo’s ugly first inning numbers were just .247 OBP and .456 OPS. Pete Alonso was marginally better at .267 OBP/.665 OPS. The team as a whole in the first inning hit to a BA of just .221, with an OBP of .309 and OPS of .677. Soto should help immensely if the goal is to get off to a better game start so they have a better chance to have the best end result.
Filling in more of those diamonds on the left side of that scorecard means more victory celebrations!
Remember's Reminiscing: February 18 Birthdays
Today we wish a Happy Birthday to Jerry Morales, Kevin Tapani, John Valentin, and Shawn Estes. Two Mets that have passed away were also born on February 18 - one of the two named Bob Miller and Jeff McKnight.
19 comments:
The easy stuff first: Shawn Estes… I don’t boo often. In fact, I don’t remember booing much at all. But I was at the game when Estes pitched against Clemens and refused to hit him, sitting first base LOGE level at Shea. I let him have it. I don’t care about the homerun, he can stick it up his butt.
Now to the meat and potatoes: Bill, I believe the Dodgers figured this out, which is why they grouped Ohtani, Betts and Freeman at the top. After all, have you ever heard of a 40+ HR guy leading off?
I can see how this puts pressure on the other team and relaxes your own pitcher. Interesting concept. Would the Mets version be Lindor, Soto and Alonso?
The Mets ought to score like mad in the first inning. Call it the Soto Effect. Don't run to the kitchen to get popcorn in the first inning. And if going to the game, do not get stuck in traffic.
How did they do when tied after 6 innings?
As you might expect, the Mets had a very good 16-8 record when tied after 6 innings. They were a good comeback team last year.
All of these number probably suffer from a bit of the SSSS - small sample size syndrome, but I think the basic premise would hold for pretty much any team. As Gus alludes to above, it is much easier for pitchers to pitch with a 3-0 lead in the fifth than in a tight scoreless game.
The Dodgers definitely did figure this out with stacking those guys at the top. I was actually thinking about going through this exercise with the Dodgers, but haven't done that (not sure if I will - it takes a few hours to crank the data) .
I would actually like to see one other guy in there between Lindor and Soto - perhaps Nimmo with an emphasis on using his OBP skills, even though his first inning metrics were terriible last year (SSS). I don't think there is anything wrong with dropping Alonso to 4th - chances are with LIndor, Nimmo, and Soto, the clean-up guy will be getting a lot of first inning at-bats and chances to do some real damage on the scoreboard.
Since no one hits 1.000, you need your best three at the top to give each a chance. Nimmo isn’t in the top three. Debatable if Alonso is.
I want my best OBP (other than Soto) hitting second to draw some walks and hit singles. Lindor, Alonso, and Nimmo (tied with Marte) were the top three OBP guys last year. Nimmo was by far the best at drawing walks. (Ben Gamel actually led the team in OBP, followed by Iglesias, but I don't see them on the roster this year)
Yesterday was fun. PETE arrived.
Speaking of ramblings...
78 years ago today, a train derailed in the Allegheny Mountains, killing 27 and injuring more than 120.
It also was the last day of the first Viet Nam was when the French drove what was left of the Vietnamese army into the mountains.
Oh.
And on a cold morning, a baby boy came into the earth at Mary Immaculate Hospital, in Jamaica NYC... named John Mackin Ade
Happy Birthday Mack!
Happy birthday John… very well presented.
Notice that NOTHING derails Mack. The Mack Train is chugging. Happy birthday.
Funny Jamaica story. When I was around 14, I was over by the Jamaican bus area, heading home to Bellerose Queens, and a group of several youts of a “different persuasion” surrounded me and asked me for money. I probably had 50 cents. I tried to walk on and one of them punched me on the side of my face. Two things happened…I gave them the 50 cents, pragmatist that I already was, and at the same time I thought, wow, that didn’t hurt at all. Had that guy been there by himself and did that, he would have needed a good dentist.
That was followed by many years of LIRR rides where I “changed at Jamaica.” No one ever punched me there. They just punched my RR ticket.
Jamaica then, and now, is dangerous
By the way
That LIRR station is now filled with homrless
Happy birthday Mack. I' only have 6 years on you.
Rds
Which will remain for infinity
I got jumped too by two 14 year olds for my money when I was going to buy bread for our family’s dinner, but I was 10. They didn’t mess me up too much, but enough so I remember it to this day. One had the fun while the other laughed about it. Their names were Pat and Chris.
Happy Birthday, Mack! And thanks for all you do and have done to create and nurture this community.
I agree that stacking the best hitters up top is the way to go. That said, I might hit Vientos 2nd. He wasn’t a big OBP guy last year, but he IS a patient hitter, and the power bat with the most upside. And I feel like hitting between Lindor and Soto would guarantee him a lot of pitches to hit. In that scenario, I’d probably hit Winker 4th and Pete 5th vs righties, with Nimmo 6th, and hit Pete 4th vs. lefties.
Adam the line up is gonna thunder, as long as the hitters avoid Montas Syndrome. I am always puzzled, if a guy is throwing in the off season, how they pull obliques. My brother Jim, who is a Yankee fan, told me, "you're not going to like Montas." So far, I don't.
Mack, you've reached the 3rd speed on the record turntable...33, 45, then finally 78 RPM. Spin that any way you'd like. :)
My brother Steve getting 3 heart stents today. He will probably be throwing 95 next week.
Ya know
Back way in the day there actually was another speed to
16 1/2
Huge record
I don't remember that day. I was only 6 at the time. But HBD anyway, Mack!
That was probably before my time, or in a past life. 33.33 is the slowest I remember. I was at least a teenager (I think) before that, as well as 45, was created.
Post a Comment