Terry Almost Blew It, But he got lucky Options

[angy]

Today Terry removed Pelphrey who was pitching one of his rare best games. However Terry recovered his blunder by removing his closer who with a 3 run lead couldn't throw strikes. Gutsy and good move Terry. Fortunately Terry faced another guy who also overmanages and got lucky. Let's try Parnel or Rauch as our closer.

[mikevailrules]

Today Terry removed Pelphrey who was pitching one of his rare best games. However Terry recovered his blunder by removing his closer who with a 3 run lead couldn't throw strikes. Gutsy and good move Terry. Fortunately Terry faced another guy who also overmanages and got lucky. Let's try Parnel or Rauch as our closer.

Taking Pelf out was the farthest thing from a "blunder". It was the right move. By far.

Sure, let's move Francisco. Where were the second guessers when he was lights out the first series? It's easy to manage the day after. first time Rauch or BP blow one they'll be srying for FF back and that Collins is an idiot

[Milner60]

I will never like removing starters who are essentially cruising (26 pitches over last 3 innings), but that's today's baseball. It sucks but it is what it is. Did Pelfrey deserve to go out there? Sure! However, the Mets have not had this approach in years. They didn't have it with Santana when he was healthy. We still have the Rick Peterson anti-CG approach, the Bobby V. manage-every-pitch approach (see how well that worked yesterday), and the Minaya focus-on-the-bullpen-not the starter approach. Once you do this, you are forced to keep your relievers sharp by pitching them often (even when you could avoid it) because you will need them later on. The risk is missing the balance and overworking them but that's the downside of this strategy.

As for replacing Francisco, the Mets don't really have better options. They have a bullpen made up of arms that historically put lots of guys on base, giving up lots of hits. The only one with a better pedigree in this sense is Ramirez but he has never closed. They are all pretty mediocre which is why we got them cheap, so you might as well as stick with Francisco who has more experience as a closer. Rauch would be a terrible option. Francisco will probably do what he's always done, alternate good stretches with poor stretches. He won't be bad overall just not great, which is where this roster is as a whole. Parnell? Well, the Mets do not have a good recent history at developing youth so they mix rushing them to the majors with protecting them emotionally (just listen to Terry's justification for removing Pelfrey yesterday - nothing about mechanics or stamina but all about which move would hurt Pelfrey's psyche the least..and Pelfrey's been in the majors for years). Parnell "failed" in previous tests so they will hide him for now. Plus they are stuck between their "rebuilding" movement and playing meaningful games in September to attract fans to the stadium...never a good scenario....

[mikevailrules]

I will never like removing starters who are essentially cruising (26 pitches over last 3 innings), but that's today's baseball. It sucks but it is what it is. Did Pelfrey deserve to go out there? Sure! However, the Mets have not had this approach in years. They didn't have it with Santana when he was healthy. We still have the Rick Peterson anti-CG approach, the Bobby V. manage-every-pitch approach (see how well that worked yesterday), and the Minaya focus-on-the-bullpen-not the starter approach. Once you do this, you are forced to keep your relievers sharp by pitching them often (even when you could avoid it) because you will need them later on. The risk is missing the balance and overworking them but that's the downside of this strategy.

As for replacing Francisco, the Mets don't really have better options. They have a bullpen made up of arms that historically put lots of guys on base, giving up lots of hits. The only one with a better pedigree in this sense is Ramirez but he has never closed. They are all pretty mediocre which is why we got them cheap, so you might as well as stick with Francisco who has more experience as a closer. Rauch would be a terrible option. Francisco will probably do what he's always done, alternate good stretches with poor stretches. He won't be bad overall just not great, which is where this roster is as a whole. Parnell? Well, the Mets do not have a good recent history at developing youth so they mix rushing them to the majors with protecting them emotionally (just listen to Terry's justification for removing Pelfrey yesterday - nothing about mechanics or stamina but all about which move would hurt Pelfrey's psyche the least..and Pelfrey's been in the majors for years). Parnell "failed" in previous tests so they will hide him for now. Plus they are stuck between their "rebuilding" movement and playing meaningful games in September to attract fans to the stadium...never a good scenario....

I think the bullpen is well constructed. I liked the move yesterday- very few managers would have replaced Francisco. I don't really think naming a "closer" is such a big deal except for players contracts. I think Bobby could do it, Francisco could, Rauch could...depending on the situation.

I liked Terry's explanation. bottom line is Pelf had done his job and you want to bring your best reliever in w nobody on base. You should be able to depend on any ML pitcher to get 3 outs w a 3 run lead 95% of the time. yesterday was one of the 5%. If that's on Collins, that's silly.

[Milner60]

I think the bullpen is well constructed. I liked the move yesterday- very few managers would have replaced Francisco. I don't really think naming a "closer" is such a big deal except for players contracts. I think Bobby could do it, Francisco could, Rauch could...depending on the situation.

I liked Terry's explanation. bottom line is Pelf had done his job and you want to bring your best reliever in w nobody on base. You should be able to depend on any ML pitcher to get 3 outs w a 3 run lead 95% of the time. yesterday was one of the 5%. If that's on Collins, that's silly.

Never said that anything was on Collins. I said I hate this style of baseball, but it is what is played today. Collins has every right to expect Francisco - as his closer - to do the job. What we have seen of Francisco so far is his pedigree, as it is of most closers. I don't get excited when he's lights out nor do I cringe when he's not. I don't like closers. I like starters, and I like them to go deep. I no longer moan when a closer is brought in even when a starter could go deeper. It is what it is. As for the Mets bullpen, it might be well constructed but it is made up of arms that tend to put people on base, opening up more easily to scenarios that at times will lead to blown wins. It happens.

[angy]

Taking Pelf out was the farthest thing from a "blunder". It was the right move. By far.

Sure, let's move Francisco. Where were the second guessers when he was lights out the first series? It's easy to manage the day after. first time Rauch or BP blow one they'll be srying for FF back and that Collins is an idiot

I made my decision to leave Pelf in while watching the game. I'm not a second guesser!!!!

[angy]

He blew it again tonight. The way he's using the pen they will tired out by middle June. Didn't we experience that with a previous Mgr. And how do you sit Kirk down after his performance to date. Sit Davis or Duda but not Kirk. Sorry Terry but the only difference between you and Jerry Manuel is I can understand you in your post interviews.

[Batman Forever]

Sorry Terry but the only difference between you and Jerry Manuel is I can understand you in your post interviews.

What do you mean?