Has Mike Pelfrey Finally "Turned The Corner"?
There is no doubt in anyone's mind that the Mets rushed Mike Pelfrey to the big leagues WAY before he was ready. He never got the chance to develop his secondary pitches, and he never really learned how to pitch.
Fast forward to 2008 and though Pelfrey still has problems with the consistency of his slider, and can't throw his changeup AT ALL, he's beginning to get results. The difference (watching his starts) has been Pelfrey using his 4-seam fastball more often. He went through a period of throwing his 2 seamer/sinker going for location, and really seemed to lose his good hard fastball that he could just throw past hitters.. But he's been using that good 4-seam fastball along with his hard sinker and has been able to get the job done.
so far this season Pelfrey is 4-6 with a 4.30 ERA. In June, Pelfrey is 2-0 in 4 starts with a 2.81 ERA in 25.2 IP.
Here's my question.. Looking at his other numbers, K/9 ,his walk rate, hit rate, is this just a fluke, or do you believe Pelfrey has truly turned a corner?
I'd like to see John do an update on Pelfrey to see his thoughts on his progression.. I thought I remember hearing that John was big on Pelfrey out of college and bla bla bla..
PS: and to John, Mets new pitching coach has told Pelfrey he's open to him throwing his curveball again.
0 recs |
35 comments
Comments
Pefrey=overrated,
like you said, he was rushed before ever really learning his potential in the minors. He should have been developed better and most times when this happens, these guys don’t pan out for the best. I wish him luck, cause he is gonna need it.
The bloggerformelyknownasBigBaddBubbaJ
by NYTXFAN on
Jun 23, 2008 1:39 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
explain.
How could someone who has taken as much heat has he has STILL be overrated?
Remember: baseball guys... baseball...
by Metty5 on
Jun 23, 2008 1:50 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
+1
Heading into the season, many were writing him off.
Pelfrey WAS overrated, but IMO, he is underrated right now and many teams would love to have him.
Now raise your goblet of rock. It's a toast to those who rock!
by Dewey Finn on
Jun 23, 2008 2:45 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
What is it with the Mets and rushing prospects?
Doesn’t make any sense to me. You would think that a big-money team would be conservative with its prospects, if anything. Is it a Minaya thing? Did he do this when he was with Montreal, too?
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jun 23, 2008 1:42 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Bernazard
I’m not sure, but Tony Bernazard is the Mets Director of Minor League Development, or something like that. I don’t know if he’s the one who likes to rush prospects, but he already has a bad reputation.
As a Mets fan, I hate it.
by supermets on
Jun 23, 2008 5:27 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
What exactly is the point of leaving prospects in a level to dominate? Which is exactly what Pelfrey was doing to the lower levels of the minors. You have to bring the guy up to a level where he is actually challanged for some progress to occur IMO.
by adropofvenom on
Jun 23, 2008 7:52 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I dunno, giving them time to learn pitches?
Or for that matter, giving them time to unpack their stuff in an apartment?
IMO, there’s no way a guy should have to play at 4 levels in one season. That’s ridiculous.
Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.
by PaulThomas on
Jun 23, 2008 11:00 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Response
Pelfrey’s development track should’ve gone more like this:
2006: A+/AA, spends September pitching in relief in the majors
2007: starts out in AA/AAA based on how he looks in spring training, spends the entire year in the minors unless he’s totally dominant, promoted to the majors again and pitches in rotation/pen depending on inning count
2008: first full season in the majors
If you view 2008 as being the first year that we can fairly evaluate Pelfrey as a major leaguer . . .then he’s not doing too badly for himself. I’m skeptical that he can fulfill the old expectations of becoming a true frontline starter, but at the very least I think he can probably be a decent piece of a rotation. Just don’t ask him to pitch to a left-handed batter, please.
by mrkupe on
Jun 24, 2008 12:13 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Performance
Pelfrey had a great pedigree as the consensus best arm in the 2005 draft and he was dominant in 12 AA starts in 2006. He then moved up to AAA for a bit, and while the Mets probably could have let him adjust to the level, they pushed him because he was needed in the big leagues. This is defensible because the Mets were trying to win and they thought Mike Pelfrey was one of the 5 best starters in their system at the time.
In 2007, the Mets jerked Pelfrey around and it showed. However, they’ve obviously done well in developing him thus far this season. The biggest problem that Pelfrey encountered once he was drafted into the Mets organization wasn’t being pushed to the big leagues too quickly; it was having Rick Peterson as his pitching coach. The Jacket did a great job reviving older relievers and working out the kinks in Oliver Perez, but he simply was not the right coach for Pelfrey. I believe Peterson’s efforts towards changing Pelfrey are what helped to retard his development. That having been said, Pelfrey is performing well and is steadily improving (albeit in fits and starts, if that makes any sense). When his stuff is considered, I don’t think it’s wholly irrational to say that Mike Pelfrey may yet become a frontline, no.1-2 type starter down the line.
by GuyinNY on
Jun 24, 2008 12:32 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Response
Actually, you are wrong. He was actually promoted from AA to the majors, and then was sent down to AAA at the beginning of August 2006. They evidently did not think he was one of the best 5 starters in their system, or even one of the 6-7 best options to fill a pen spot – if they had thought otherwise, especially given that “win now” mood you speak of, he wouldn’t have been sent back down in the first place.
The biggest problems that Mike Pelfrey has encountered after being drafted have been a maddening inconsistency to throw a quality strike with anything other than a 2 seam fastball and a tendency to get wrecked on by anybody standing to the right of home plate.
Career stats vs. LH batters: 76 2/3 IP, 102 H (.329 BAA), 54 BB, 34 K
2008 stats vs. LH batters: 33 2/3 IP, 50 H (.350 BAA), 23 BB, 9 K
I don’t doubt that Rick Peterson hasn’t helped matters, but lefties hit the ball hard against Pelfrey long before Peterson even got his hands on him. Against right-handed batters, no real complaints – he may not be spectacular, but he’ll be solid as long as his defense doesn’t let him down. Not great, mind you, but solid.
by mrkupe on
Jun 24, 2008 2:58 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Pelfrey
You’ve got me on the AAA demotion. My point still stands that Pelfrey was kicking the crap out of the minors and was hotshotted to the majors because Pedro was breaking down and the rotation needed help. At the time, yes, the Mets thought he was one of the 5 best arms in the system and with a new network, they were very much a “win-now” team (which is why I don’t understand why they didn’t deal for Zito that summer.). Guess what? Pelfrey didn’t work out in 2006.
This doesn’t change the fact that when he was brought up, Mike Pelfrey was a top prospect and was widely regarded as better than anything the Mets had in AAA. That demotion coincides with the acquisition of Oliver Perez, so the Mets had to go outside the system to bolster their rotation.
In general, I do agree with you that Pelfrey needs to work on his breaking stuff, but everybody knows that. Right now, the Mets are watching Pelfrey develop in the majors and I still believe that it’s not out of the realm of possibility that Pelfrey could develop into a frontline starter given time and experience.
by GuyinNY on
Jun 24, 2008 11:13 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Response
Out of the realm of possibiliity? Of course not . . .he’s a 24 year old with a good fastball. And I never suggested otherwise, saying only that I was “skeptical” he could reach such a level of consistent performance.
Right now, regardless of what he might do over the course of a single game (and I’ve seen games where he’s spotted his secondary pitches reasonably well for short periods, do not get me wrong), he’s still a guy who consistently brings one good pitch and a bunch of below-average pitches to the table. And the fact that he’s been pretty good in June doesn’t mean we can ignore his mediocre April and his terrible May.
by mrkupe on
Jun 24, 2008 11:48 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Weight
No, we can’t ignore May or April, but we should weight them properly. Pelfrey’s clearly still a work in progress, and it’s important to observe his progress. He seems to have hit his stride. While I don’t think that Pelfrey can maintain his current level of performance for the rest of the season, I do think he might have figured something out which will lead to a sustained level of performance above what we saw in April/May.
by GuyinNY on
Jun 24, 2008 11:55 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Big Pelf
For him it has always been consistency and confidence-both that he has lacked.
Now he has a lot more of both of them and he is showing signs of becoming a good pitcher. Clearly the positives have been a small sample size but I’d love to see him continue to progress.
He has been throwing his slider a lot better, using his change more, and also working in the four seamer as well. I think he also had bad luck against the LAA the other night.
We’ll see but I think this is the start of some REAL progress.
Remember: baseball guys... baseball...
by Metty5 on
Jun 23, 2008 1:52 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Metty I agree
And like you probably do, I watch his every start, and see the progression. But when I looked at his other numbers they really jumped out at me. I’m hoping “Big Pelf” is here to stay because if the Mets are going to turn this thing around they need everyone to contribute.
by Duece on
Jun 23, 2008 2:02 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Sadly...
I have not had internet nor TV since June 1st! Time Warner cable’s appointments take forever.
So I listen on the radio. Or watch at the bar. Its sad, but I’m definitely going to watch TONIGHT! Santana vs. the King. Can’t wait.
I’m currently at work.
Remember: baseball guys... baseball...
by Metty5 on
Jun 23, 2008 2:11 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Pelfrey...
has no control or quality secondary pitches (no matter how often he throws them). He’s got a 1.60 WHIP, and walks nearly as many guys as he strikes out. He’s lucked himself into a decent ERA so far, but anybody who thinks he can keep that up without drastic changes in his peripherals is only kidding themselves.
by DrunkIrish on
Jun 23, 2008 3:15 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Completely Untrue
Pelfrey has been INCONSISTENT. I’m not looking at the numbers right now, but in his good starts, he did not walk guys, and his slider was good.
by supermets on
Jun 23, 2008 5:30 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Looks like consistency:
April: 9.7%BB/9.7%K
May: 9.6%BB/12.2%K
June: 11.2%BB/13.1%K
Consistently Bad.
You don’t get to throw out a pitcher’s bad starts, though it would be great if you could. With the fastball Pelfrey’s got, he’d be striking out 20% of batters if he had any kind of off-speed or breaking pitch.
Hope like crazy he has Aaron Heilman’s career.
by DrunkIrish on
Jun 24, 2008 2:30 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Not necessairily….Pelfrey has the ability to get a groundball in key situations which is an excellent skill for him to navigate innings. Runners get on base? No problem because he can get a double play at an well above-average rate.
His FIP is actually below his current ERA, his BABIP is high as well, which indicates that he’s actually been unlucky so far.
by adropofvenom on
Jun 23, 2008 7:59 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Nope.
His HR/F is less than half of what it should be, which is pretty significant at this point in the season. FIP doesn’t pay any attention to that, which is why his xFIP is over 5.00.
His 47% GB% is above-average, but by no means dominant. For a guy with his command to be a good pitcher, it’d need to be more like 67%. You’re right in that when you put more than four guys a game on first base, and don’t strike anybody out, you’re going to see a fair number of double plays.
by DrunkIrish on
Jun 24, 2008 2:23 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
RE: Nope.
Shows how much research you did prior to the arguement.
There is ONE pitcher with GB% higher than 60 and that is Webb at 65.5%. The next highest is Hudson at 58.1%. There are only 14 pitchers ABOVE 50.0% in all of baseball.
Pelfrey is the has the 36th highest GB rate in baseball. Higher than Lee, Blanton, Kuroda, Sheets, Shields, Lincecum, Santana, Greinke, CC, Verlander, McGowan… The list goes on.
His ground ball to flyball ratio is 24th best.
The home run rate isn’t all that crazy either. It isn’t a huge outlier and while it will regress he does have a heavy fastball which results in less home runs.
You also fail to mention that he has one of the Highest BABIPs in baseball coming in as the 16th worst with a .325.
He is in the middle of the pack on LOB% so he won’t see a regression there.
He needs to improve his K and Walk rates. But given what they are, he has done well. For a young guy who has been messed with a lot, I’m happy with the progress I have seen.
His
Remember: baseball guys... baseball...
by Metty5 on
Jun 24, 2008 9:56 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
err
I think he was saying that with command as bad as Pelfrey’s, you’ve got to get more ground balls than anyone else in the league if you want to be “a good pitcher”....
by mraver on
Jun 24, 2008 11:16 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
RE:err
then its a nonsensical comment and I wasted my time. Regardless of command, I assume anyone with a GB rate of 67% would be rather successful.
His command really isn’t bad though if you watch his starts. He just doesn’t have the confidence in his second offering to go after hitters when he is behind in the count.
Remember: baseball guys... baseball...
by Metty5 on
Jun 24, 2008 11:41 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yeah, thought that was obvious.
Nobody who walks four a game and strikes out 4.5 can expect to be a good pitcher, unless they are crazy good in some other area.
by DrunkIrish on
Jun 24, 2008 11:42 AM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
The thing is you don’t have to have ‘crazy good’ ratios to be good in that particular area…..he’s not someone like a Chien-Ming Wang who is entirely reliant on his sinker, he only ‘relies’ on the pitch to force groundballs in situations that call for it (Such as double play situations). So he’s not going to have a top G/F ratio or anything like that, but he’s only forced 3 less GIDP’s then Wang has.
I wish I had the Batted Ball information broken up in Runners On / None On splits to illustrate my point, but sadly I don’t.
by adropofvenom on
Jun 24, 2008 12:19 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
The reason...
that Pelfrey has anywhere near the GIDP total that Wang has is because so many guys get on base against him, and he therefore has way more opportunities. That’s not a plus.
I’d be interested in finding some kind of “situational” ball-in-play numbers, but I’m not sure if any exist (or if they’d be anything more than random). It’s a cool idea though. My problem with Pelfrey is that the only thing he does well at all is get more ground balls than average. He doesn’t strike people out, and he doesn’t have good control. If he can somehow get grounders at will, why isn’t he doing it all the time?
by DrunkIrish on
Jun 24, 2008 12:26 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Arguement
I’m not sure anyone is arguing that Pelfrey has been anything more than project or a 5th starter this year.
What people are saying is that he has made some significant progress with his confidence and pitching ability.
I don’t think anyone is expecting him to go 11-3 with a 2.20 ERA in the second half. But I think you’ll see slight a increase in his K rate, and decreases in both walks and era. I don’t see why he couldn’t go 8-5 with a 4.20 ERA. I’ve liked what I have saw (when I’ve been able to see it).
Remember: baseball guys... baseball...
by Metty5 on
Jun 24, 2008 12:41 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Also...
It seems the only people not doing research are Pelfrey supporters. The more you look into Pelfrey’s numbers, the uglier it gets.
A .325 BABIP is actually LUCKY for Pelfrey, given his ball-in-play rates. Ground ball pitchers typically run much higher BABIPs, as flyballs turn into hits (at least in play) at a much lower rate than any other kind of ball. Batters are also hitting line drives against Pelfrey 23.2% of the time, which is a very high total. It’s also not a fluke, as that number has been freakishly consistent throughout his major league career.
According to the expected BABIP forumula proposed in this Fangraphs article, Pelfrey deserves a whopping .366 BABIP this season based on his terrible ball-in-play splits. That it is .325 shows he’s been getting quite a bit of help from his defense (as you’d expect from a guy with terrible command and dominance who ISN’T getting torched every game).
Pelfrey’s .325 BABIP this year is the lowest number for his career.
by DrunkIrish on
Jun 24, 2008 12:00 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
sounds intresting
Fix the link so I can check it out please
Remember: baseball guys... baseball...
by Metty5 on
Jun 24, 2008 12:43 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Seems like every time I post a link in HTML...
it changes it to a link of the current post. I previewed it, and it was fine.
Anyway, here’s the link:
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/expected-babip-for-pitchers
by DrunkIrish on
Jun 24, 2008 3:23 PM EDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
pelf
I noticed the same thing, that when he started using his 4 seam more in late May, he got much better results. Getting the first strike with the 4 seamer, then working the 2 seam in more. At least he can get a called strike one now with the 4 seam, which was his biggest problem in my opinion.
lets face it, his slider sucks. Mostly becuase he can’t throw it for a strike, but also because his 2 seamer breaks more than the slider (see the Pfx stats). I have yet to see the change up for a strike.
I am rooting for him, and intrigued to see if the previous post is true that he may start playing with the curve.
by davidsabin on
Jun 23, 2008 7:23 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Servicible
Pelfrey has progressed – from a below-average pitcher to major league average.
I’ve watched a bunch of his starts. He’s throwing his 4 seamer early in the count and its well spotted. His 2 seamer has a ton of movement still and is staying lower in the zone. His slider is better, but still not good by any means.
Right now, he’s at least a league average starter right now, irregardless of his BB/K rate. He’s getting an enormous amount of groundouts. The problem remains though that his off-speed stuff remains so inconsistent that they are merely “show me” pitches.
In his last start in Colorado (which i watched). His slider always was off the plate to righties and rarely did they offer at it. But, he was still using the slider as a set up for his hard sinker, which made the sinker slightly more effective. And yes, he did walk a ton of guys that day, but the strike zone was inconsistent (which you could see on the faces of both pitchers).
Pelfrey is getting better and more confident, but he still needs to refine his off-speed stuff to be anything more than league average.
by thudean on
Jun 24, 2008 11:33 AM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Last 5 starts
32 2/3rds, 31 hits, 10 earned runs, no homers allowed, 20 Ks and 13 BBs.
The k rate is slightly low. The k/bb not quite there. Take off 2 BB and add 2Ks and you have the makings of an ace.
I think folks are being a little k rate and k/bb obsessive. Historically, there were TONs of pitchers who used to get the job done for years with horrible rates. And acknowledging their value and predictive capabilities,. Actually, Pelfrey’s numbers are becoming fairly Wang like.
Or, uh-oh, Daniel Cabrera like. This year’s low K version. Where is the guy who kept touting cabrera’s break through this year in the Fan posts?
Anyway, Pelfrey is obviously a work in progress, but to me he definitely has the stuff to ultimately be an ace. It took Ryan and Koufax years to harness their stuff. Randy Johnson too. Not saying he has their stuff, but he is getting better, learning to handle adversity. Give it some time.
by wobatus on
Jun 24, 2008 5:58 PM EDT
reply
actions
0 recs









