Mets were 14-18 when Degrom started for them

[1952boyntoncollector]

Whats also crazy is Degrom's mets won his last 4 starts and 3 of them he got the win.

those games were really when the mets were all but eliminated...the start before that his team scored 10 runs but lost..

so really if you take away the last 4 games which were against september call ups and teams with no incentive to win miami, ciny, arizona, dodgers , the mets were 10-18 in his starts..


...its not like he was facing the cubs/braves/washington/cardinals (he did in August face some of those teams and his team was 0-3 in his starts )

[nat]

Look at the games in post 10. Those losses were not his fault. Of course every pitcher every year has some tough luck losses, but not like that. Not that many. He just happened to be pitching on the days that the Mets got shut out or scored only one run over and over again. Sure, on other days he won 13-2 (or whatever), which will balance out the runs support, but if the offense doesn't show up you aren't going to get a win no matter how well you pitch.

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

Whats also crazy is Degrom's mets won his last 4 starts and 3 of them he got the win.

the start before that his team scored 10 runs but lost..

so really if you take away the last 4 games which were against september call ups and teams with no incentive to win miami, ciny, arizona, dodgers , the mets were 10-18 in his starts..

Every pitcher faces weak teams. deGrom pitched 28 innings in those last 4 starts and gave up 1 run. He should have been 4-0 but the team scored 0 runs for him in the Dodger game.

The 10 run game, Jake left up 10-4 and the bullpen gave up 7 runs in the bottom of the 9th.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Jake perhaps you should revive your posts about how Kershaw really is a good postseason pitcher.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Jake perhaps you should revive your posts about how Kershaw really is a good postseason pitcher.

he was when i was posting it...just said he didnt suck....didnt bring him up at all this year. at any point......im sure when degrom is 41 and getting rocked ill be sure to bring him up to you how he is doing..

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Jim65

Every pitcher faces weak teams. deGrom pitched 28 innings in those last 4 starts and gave up 1 run. He should have been 4-0 but the team scored 0 runs for him in the Dodger game.

The 10 run game, Jake left up 10-4 and the bullpen gave up 7 runs in the bottom of the 9th.

he still did win 3 of those last 4 games so he did cash in those starts even if he only gave up 1 run.. 3 out of 4 is not unusual..

and yes every pitcher faces weak teams but september starts and hitting stats are always taken with a grain of salt against non contending teams....but yeah degrom was dominate in those meaningless games against non contending teams..... we have a very large sample size which shows that the mets were a losing team when he took the hill when they otherwise were a winning team and by a very large margin a winning team if take away the minus 4 with degrom

he still averaged over 4 runs of run support for Cy Young pitchers on winning teams (and better than just 82-80) ..getting 4+runs a game should mean a winning record in terms of team wins... ... .

[packs]

I don't think either of his CY winning seasons were as impressive as Zach Greinke's in 2009. He went 16-8 on a team that only won 65 games. Not only did he win nearly 25 percent of all the games the Royals won that year, but his 242 strike outs accounted for about 20 percent of the entire team's total. His 229 innings were about 16 percent of all innings pitched that year too.

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by packs

I don't think either of his CY winning seasons were as impressive as Zach Greinke's in 2009. He went 16-8 on a team that only won 65 games. Not only did he win nearly 25 percent of all the games the Royals won that year, but his 242 strike outs accounted for about 20 percent of the entire team's total. His 229 innings were about 16 percent of all innings pitched that year too.

Nice year, not as impressive as Steve Carlton winning 27 games in 1972 for a Phillies team that went 59-97

[packs]

Originally Posted by Jim65

Nice year, not as impressive as Steve Carlton winning 27 games in 1972 for a Phillies team that went 59-97

Definitely not. But more impressive than deGrom.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Carlton is first on this list of great seasons for bad teams.

https://www.mlb.com/news/best-mlb-se...ams-c295838598

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Jim65

Nice year, not as impressive as Steve Carlton winning 27 games in 1972 for a Phillies team that went 59-97

right if his team won 14 of 32 games, i wouldn't question that at all, that would actually be impressive. His run support was 3.83 and he didnt cry about it

Of course from 1986 , 4 out of 5 teams he played for his era was over 5.00

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by packs

I don't think either of his CY winning seasons were as impressive as Zach Greinke's in 2009. He went 16-8 on a team that only won 65 games. Not only did he win nearly 25 percent of all the games the Royals won that year, but his 242 strike outs accounted for about 20 percent of the entire team's total. His 229 innings were about 16 percent of all innings pitched that year too.

His run support was 3.78, 6 complete games and 3 shuthouts

his team also lost at least 5 games when he gave up zero or 1 run...some of them the 7 and 8 inning 0 earned run variety..

[familytoad]

Ya, I wasn't saying that deGrom was a bad pitcher or was worse than someone 21-5 with a 5.00 ERA.
I'm just saying that its obvious that wins don't matter for individual pitchers and I'm indifferent.

Nothing was ever wrong with winning before. But those days are gone.
If a team decides to use a new pitcher every inning then no starting pitcher will ever earn a win ( Frank posted about this previously)
I think its foolish. But whatever...

There were plenty of pitchers winning Cy Young awards by winning games. And plenty of batters winning MVP awards by having high batting average and driving in a lot of runs. Suddenly that doesn't apply anymore.

Please consider removing thine self from my lawn.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by familytoad

Ya, I wasn't saying that deGrom was a bad pitcher or was worse than someone 21-5 with a 5.00 ERA.
I'm just saying that its obvious that wins don't matter for individual pitchers and I'm indifferent.

Nothing was ever wrong with winning before. But those days are gone.
If a team decides to use a new pitcher every inning then no starting pitcher will ever earn a win ( Frank posted about this previously)
I think its foolish. But whatever...

There were plenty of pitchers winning Cy Young awards by winning games. And plenty of batters winning MVP awards by having high batting average and driving in a lot of runs. Suddenly that doesn't apply anymore.

Please consider removing thine self from my lawn.

I also not addressing getting the W, whats interesting to me is whether the team gets the W. Afterall thats what you pay your pitcher for...for whatever reason if your team doesnt get wins when a certain pitcher starts and it happens over and over with a cy young winner....just wondering if that should matter

yes if SP is not getting deep into games that could matter, but then why pay them so much money. Running backs in the NFL just arent valued like they used to be pay wise...if Cy Young pitchers dont net their team wins and its more of the bullpen deciding everything..that would be interesting in terms of future value....

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by packs

I don't think either of his CY winning seasons were as impressive as Zach Greinke's in 2009. He went 16-8 on a team that only won 65 games. Not only did he win nearly 25 percent of all the games the Royals won that year, but his 242 strike outs accounted for about 20 percent of the entire team's total. His 229 innings were about 16 percent of all innings pitched that year too.

Greinke's 2009 Cy Young-winning season:
ERA 2.16
ERA+ 205
FIP 2.33
WHIP 1.073

deGrom's 2018 Cy Young-winning season:
ERA 1.70
ERA+ 218
FIP 1.98
WHIP 0.912

I don't know. deGrom's first Cy Young season seems more impressive than Greinke's.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

Greinke's 2009 Cy Young-winning season:
ERA 2.16
ERA+ 205
FIP 2.33
WHIP 1.073

deGrom's 2018 Cy Young-winning season:
ERA 1.70
ERA+ 218
FIP 1.98
WHIP 0.912

I don't know. deGrom's first Cy Young season seems more impressive than Greinke's.

Its not how many runs you give up, its when you give up the runs. If you give up 20 runs in 6 games...but 15 runs in one game in a loss and the other 5 games you give up 1 run and win all five and are 5-1....thats better to me then giving up 15 runs over 6 games but losing all 6 by 1 run.......this is just the theory....

Degrom's team was well over .500 Zack's team was well below .500...yet Zach's team won a large portion of his starts... to me team wins matter ...stats matter too of course.....but putting all together...i like Grienke's season much better...imo i havent checked but will assume the run support was more or very close for DeGrom as well. adjusted for NL/AL..

[packs]

I think Greinke's season was remarkable because he was able to put together a season like that in spite of his team. The 2018 Mets had three other starting pitchers who threw 150 innings or more with sub 4.00 ERAs. The 2009 Royals had Greinke and then Brian Bannister, who went 7-12 with a 4.73 ERA. No other starting pitcher threw 150 innings or more in 2009 for that team, or had a lower ERA than Bannister's.