Another very insightful article. Perhaps your ability to once dunk a basketball might be the most impressive thing you have ever written. As one of those greybeards you referenced, and one that only reached just 5”8” on my best day, I caught a lot of elbows to the head misguidedly thinking I could snag a rebound against much taller opposing players. I learned that my skills were best suited to inbounding the ball, passing it to more talented players and sticking my 12-15 foot jump shot when better alternatives fell through. I knew that baseball, tennis and golf were much smarter sport choices for me and offered less chances to get physically injured as well. Getting an eight on a par five was injurious enough.
I have long bemoaned the lack of complete games these last several years when compared with the “good old days,” when throwing seven innings was expected from your starters and when relief pitchers were most often starters who could not cut it any longer but could muster up an inning or two of good pitching. Or perhaps they were just under contract and teams were more apt to throw them in the pen versus releasing them and eating the salary.
This past year, the Blake Snell light finally lit up in my head. I refused to consider the Mets signing him as a free agent because even though he had two Cy Young awards to his credit, he had become essentially a five inning pitcher. It was not until this season progressed that I understood that this is just the new normal and that we should be thrilled to get the five innings. Of course, in the playoffs, Snell shed that five inning tag and surprisingly pitched deeply into games. That is part of the reason why middle relief pitchers are now making millions of dollars to get three to six outs in 5th and 6th innings, and why there is a multi-million dollar market for both the 7th and 8th inning relievers. It is also a reason that teams sign multiple closers to be able to use them in various situations, versus relying on one main guy all the time.
And yes, the collection of pitchers that David Stearns started the 2025 season with were held together with twine and tape and required a Hail Mary each time they came out to the mound for the first inning. I share your desire to get our starters to go longer and to avoid alarm bells going off as a pitcher approaches 100 pitches as if their arm will fall off if they are not taken out. We also have to rely on the manager/pitching coach seeing something in the way the pitcher is throwing later in the game as to whether they stay in or get pulled. And of course, pitchers not being able to adapt and show batters a different pattern for the third time through the order has led to many pitchers being prematurely pulled with a lot left in the tank.
140 starts averages to 28 per man in a five man rotation and that’s not a bad goal. Hoping the season opens with a much stronger starting rotation as well strong bull pen pieces to follow them. Of course, more offense from the 7-8-9 spots in the order would take the pressure off a starter struggling to get through five innings and more than likely add to the win total.
Joura, once again u hit the nail on the head. It’s not the lack of complete games that’s frustrating, it’s the ridiculous modus operandi of taking a guy out who’s dominating simply because of pitch count. Not only are you doing the opponents a favor, you’re robbing your guy of a chance to grow as a professional.
Davey Johnson was frequently praised for letting his young talented staff battle through adversity in game situations. Old guys get pissed when they hear the announcers/manager/POBO talk about “getting a guy out on a high note”, “giving him a soft landing” or “building his confidence”. I think most of these guys are tougher than that and should be given the opportunity to prove it. Hopefully there is still some room today for some of Davey’s approach.
I'm a graybeard and I've accepted that starters average 5.1 innings per start. Statistics and trends should be used in game preparation and pre-planning. Once the game begins though, the manager should manage with his eyes and knowing the leverage situation. The GM should construct his bullpen very differently in modern baseball to compensate the reduced innings of the starters. A pitching staff should be comprised of five starters, a closer, four one inning men and three multi-inning relievers. Great article, Brian.
I never once mentioned complete games. As I said earlier, it is worth having an aspirational goal for starter IP. I am absolutely fixed that 1000 IP is a worthy target even if that doesnt happen…for a while. I also said 900 IP is acceptable. The problem with 16 out starts is simple - it invites that pile of rancid relievers that cover 11+ outs game after game. It’s easy to say this is the new reality, get over it. But the “old” game is still 27 outs. And last year demonstrated what a complete load of hogwash the 5 IP starts are *and* what the fallout is. Accepting it, rolling over and thinking this is the best it can be (until we’re down to 12 outs) means accepting failure, and accepting a style of baseball that stinks. No one wants to see relievers getting 10-12+ outs every game and burning through 10s of pitchers annually. You can call it the “new way” but quite a few of the new way directions have hurt the sport and made the game insufferable to watch. The problem is that acceptance of a failure leads to more accepting failure. Is there any limit to where starting pitchers should achieve? The fact is, starting pitchers are coddled and told to believe that cant throw 100 pitches let alone 115+. You all may enjoy 5 inning starts, but its never going to sit well with me.
At 18, my vertical leap was two inches. Now it may be 1/4 of an inch.
Players today are bigger, stronger, throw harder, hit further and we have all kinds of analytics that have turned baseball into a science project.
Your article as always is fantastic. I agree with you on the 100 pitch limit, or in some cases the 80 pitch limit. I would like to see metrics on the pitchers fatigue factor. Next, there will be sensors on the players bodies to measure all kinds of stuff.
Our starting rotation last year did not pass the sniff test in spring training. How were we going to get quality starts from the cast of characters we had. It is simple, it all fell apart. So now, we need to add two solid starters. I think with two new starters, we can have a solid staff. But, what are the realistic expectation for innings from Peterson, Manaea, Senga, Holmes and McLean? With two new starters, two of these guys end up in the bullpen. Maybe what we do is guage how many innings can each pitcher realiticall give? So maybe we have Holmes start the year in the rotation and pitch a half season then go to the bullpen. Peterson starts in the bullpen and when Holmes goes to the pen, Peterson moves into the rotation. I think that a couple of these pitchers may get traded, so the math may work out better.
I just hope that Stearns has learned a lesson in that his strategy did not work and I hope that he can pivot without over correcting and creating gaps in other areas.
My gut reaction, is that we need to be aggressuve early with his plan. Dont want it to turn to 2026 and we still need two starters, a first baseman, a center fielder and two relievers.
What is the realistic expectation for innings? Well, that depends on health, as last year so clearly showed us. We saw that Holmes and Peterson, the two guys who made the most starts, averaged 5.1 and 5.2 innings per start, respectively. That's a pretty good ballpark estimate - multiply 5.2 by however many starts you think they'll make.
FWIW - Not a fan of planning to have Holmes and Peterson be in the bullpen for a chunk of the season. They earned starting spots way more so than Manaea and Senga. And both navigated huge jumps in innings. They should be better prepared to pitch 160 innings in 2026.
Maybe this is why Senga is being dangled in trade talks. He ties Stearns hands with needing a 6 man rotation which ( perhaps) messes with the other starters rhythm and routine? Maybe Stearns prefers a traditional 5 man rotation.
My opinion is that it's not that the Mets are calling up teams and saying - What will you give us for Senga? Rather, my take is that teams are contacting the Mets and Stearns isn't telling them - Sorry, he's not available.
I've read that teams consider Senga a good buy-low candidate. I just find it difficult to believe that Stearns is going to make a trade like this.
Another opinion of mine is that the extra day of rest actually helped the other pitchers, especially Holmes. But it's certainly possible Stearns doesn't feel the same. Or that he felt that way last year when Holmes was first transitioning back to the rotation but doesn't feel that way now.
I think it would he foolish to trade Senga whose upside ia enormous. But i can understand the rationale. Hard to trust him getting through a season and its inefficient to have to handle him so differently than other pitchers.
Senga has a two year , $15m per year contract that has a club option that for another $15m. It is a bargain contract for a SP3. Starting pitching is expensive. His contract was a value last year even though he was non-existent in the second half. It would be foolish to trade him.
With the extended playoffs it would be prudent to rest your starters in the regular season. The starters should have a five days rest between starts. This would mean that the SP6 would be scheduled approximately 12-13 starts. This would benefit all starters not just Senga.
Senga will have the off season and all Spring Training to work to his mechanics to be ready for season. They should be concerned with Manaea and his loose particles in his elbow and the $50m remaining of his contract.
Two times through the order is what is hoped for the 3,4,5 starters. I imagine the stats bear this out. Injuries to pitchers making 20 million + also lays a role. If you have an 8 man BP why risk injuring a starter? Fresh arms and different types of pitches are often effective.
With all of the needs, the plan has to be really complicated. The good thing is we will have a reasonable amount of money to spend and assets to deal. Its just, which ones and who we get. Just wondering what we will get from McLean. Hey at least we got him. Add two starters and McLean, that would be a good one, two, three. We do have to find teams that are will ing to deal, like the Twins. Buxton and Ryan.
Another very insightful article. Perhaps your ability to once dunk a basketball might be the most impressive thing you have ever written. As one of those greybeards you referenced, and one that only reached just 5”8” on my best day, I caught a lot of elbows to the head misguidedly thinking I could snag a rebound against much taller opposing players. I learned that my skills were best suited to inbounding the ball, passing it to more talented players and sticking my 12-15 foot jump shot when better alternatives fell through. I knew that baseball, tennis and golf were much smarter sport choices for me and offered less chances to get physically injured as well. Getting an eight on a par five was injurious enough.
I have long bemoaned the lack of complete games these last several years when compared with the “good old days,” when throwing seven innings was expected from your starters and when relief pitchers were most often starters who could not cut it any longer but could muster up an inning or two of good pitching. Or perhaps they were just under contract and teams were more apt to throw them in the pen versus releasing them and eating the salary.
This past year, the Blake Snell light finally lit up in my head. I refused to consider the Mets signing him as a free agent because even though he had two Cy Young awards to his credit, he had become essentially a five inning pitcher. It was not until this season progressed that I understood that this is just the new normal and that we should be thrilled to get the five innings. Of course, in the playoffs, Snell shed that five inning tag and surprisingly pitched deeply into games. That is part of the reason why middle relief pitchers are now making millions of dollars to get three to six outs in 5th and 6th innings, and why there is a multi-million dollar market for both the 7th and 8th inning relievers. It is also a reason that teams sign multiple closers to be able to use them in various situations, versus relying on one main guy all the time.
And yes, the collection of pitchers that David Stearns started the 2025 season with were held together with twine and tape and required a Hail Mary each time they came out to the mound for the first inning. I share your desire to get our starters to go longer and to avoid alarm bells going off as a pitcher approaches 100 pitches as if their arm will fall off if they are not taken out. We also have to rely on the manager/pitching coach seeing something in the way the pitcher is throwing later in the game as to whether they stay in or get pulled. And of course, pitchers not being able to adapt and show batters a different pattern for the third time through the order has led to many pitchers being prematurely pulled with a lot left in the tank.
140 starts averages to 28 per man in a five man rotation and that’s not a bad goal. Hoping the season opens with a much stronger starting rotation as well strong bull pen pieces to follow them. Of course, more offense from the 7-8-9 spots in the order would take the pressure off a starter struggling to get through five innings and more than likely add to the win total.
Joura, once again u hit the nail on the head. It’s not the lack of complete games that’s frustrating, it’s the ridiculous modus operandi of taking a guy out who’s dominating simply because of pitch count. Not only are you doing the opponents a favor, you’re robbing your guy of a chance to grow as a professional.
Davey Johnson was frequently praised for letting his young talented staff battle through adversity in game situations. Old guys get pissed when they hear the announcers/manager/POBO talk about “getting a guy out on a high note”, “giving him a soft landing” or “building his confidence”. I think most of these guys are tougher than that and should be given the opportunity to prove it. Hopefully there is still some room today for some of Davey’s approach.
Mendoza’s favorite phrase
I'm a graybeard and I've accepted that starters average 5.1 innings per start. Statistics and trends should be used in game preparation and pre-planning. Once the game begins though, the manager should manage with his eyes and knowing the leverage situation. The GM should construct his bullpen very differently in modern baseball to compensate the reduced innings of the starters. A pitching staff should be comprised of five starters, a closer, four one inning men and three multi-inning relievers. Great article, Brian.
I never once mentioned complete games. As I said earlier, it is worth having an aspirational goal for starter IP. I am absolutely fixed that 1000 IP is a worthy target even if that doesnt happen…for a while. I also said 900 IP is acceptable. The problem with 16 out starts is simple - it invites that pile of rancid relievers that cover 11+ outs game after game. It’s easy to say this is the new reality, get over it. But the “old” game is still 27 outs. And last year demonstrated what a complete load of hogwash the 5 IP starts are *and* what the fallout is. Accepting it, rolling over and thinking this is the best it can be (until we’re down to 12 outs) means accepting failure, and accepting a style of baseball that stinks. No one wants to see relievers getting 10-12+ outs every game and burning through 10s of pitchers annually. You can call it the “new way” but quite a few of the new way directions have hurt the sport and made the game insufferable to watch. The problem is that acceptance of a failure leads to more accepting failure. Is there any limit to where starting pitchers should achieve? The fact is, starting pitchers are coddled and told to believe that cant throw 100 pitches let alone 115+. You all may enjoy 5 inning starts, but its never going to sit well with me.
Not everything is about you.
At 18, my vertical leap was two inches. Now it may be 1/4 of an inch.
Players today are bigger, stronger, throw harder, hit further and we have all kinds of analytics that have turned baseball into a science project.
Your article as always is fantastic. I agree with you on the 100 pitch limit, or in some cases the 80 pitch limit. I would like to see metrics on the pitchers fatigue factor. Next, there will be sensors on the players bodies to measure all kinds of stuff.
Our starting rotation last year did not pass the sniff test in spring training. How were we going to get quality starts from the cast of characters we had. It is simple, it all fell apart. So now, we need to add two solid starters. I think with two new starters, we can have a solid staff. But, what are the realistic expectation for innings from Peterson, Manaea, Senga, Holmes and McLean? With two new starters, two of these guys end up in the bullpen. Maybe what we do is guage how many innings can each pitcher realiticall give? So maybe we have Holmes start the year in the rotation and pitch a half season then go to the bullpen. Peterson starts in the bullpen and when Holmes goes to the pen, Peterson moves into the rotation. I think that a couple of these pitchers may get traded, so the math may work out better.
I just hope that Stearns has learned a lesson in that his strategy did not work and I hope that he can pivot without over correcting and creating gaps in other areas.
My gut reaction, is that we need to be aggressuve early with his plan. Dont want it to turn to 2026 and we still need two starters, a first baseman, a center fielder and two relievers.
Hope Santa is good to us.
What is the realistic expectation for innings? Well, that depends on health, as last year so clearly showed us. We saw that Holmes and Peterson, the two guys who made the most starts, averaged 5.1 and 5.2 innings per start, respectively. That's a pretty good ballpark estimate - multiply 5.2 by however many starts you think they'll make.
FWIW - Not a fan of planning to have Holmes and Peterson be in the bullpen for a chunk of the season. They earned starting spots way more so than Manaea and Senga. And both navigated huge jumps in innings. They should be better prepared to pitch 160 innings in 2026.
Maybe this is why Senga is being dangled in trade talks. He ties Stearns hands with needing a 6 man rotation which ( perhaps) messes with the other starters rhythm and routine? Maybe Stearns prefers a traditional 5 man rotation.
My opinion is that it's not that the Mets are calling up teams and saying - What will you give us for Senga? Rather, my take is that teams are contacting the Mets and Stearns isn't telling them - Sorry, he's not available.
I've read that teams consider Senga a good buy-low candidate. I just find it difficult to believe that Stearns is going to make a trade like this.
Another opinion of mine is that the extra day of rest actually helped the other pitchers, especially Holmes. But it's certainly possible Stearns doesn't feel the same. Or that he felt that way last year when Holmes was first transitioning back to the rotation but doesn't feel that way now.
I think it would he foolish to trade Senga whose upside ia enormous. But i can understand the rationale. Hard to trust him getting through a season and its inefficient to have to handle him so differently than other pitchers.
Senga has a two year , $15m per year contract that has a club option that for another $15m. It is a bargain contract for a SP3. Starting pitching is expensive. His contract was a value last year even though he was non-existent in the second half. It would be foolish to trade him.
With the extended playoffs it would be prudent to rest your starters in the regular season. The starters should have a five days rest between starts. This would mean that the SP6 would be scheduled approximately 12-13 starts. This would benefit all starters not just Senga.
Senga will have the off season and all Spring Training to work to his mechanics to be ready for season. They should be concerned with Manaea and his loose particles in his elbow and the $50m remaining of his contract.
Two times through the order is what is hoped for the 3,4,5 starters. I imagine the stats bear this out. Injuries to pitchers making 20 million + also lays a role. If you have an 8 man BP why risk injuring a starter? Fresh arms and different types of pitches are often effective.
With all of the needs, the plan has to be really complicated. The good thing is we will have a reasonable amount of money to spend and assets to deal. Its just, which ones and who we get. Just wondering what we will get from McLean. Hey at least we got him. Add two starters and McLean, that would be a good one, two, three. We do have to find teams that are will ing to deal, like the Twins. Buxton and Ryan.