Mike Pelfrey avoids release
Mike Pelfrey was on the hot seat. I realize that the “hot seat” is reserved for managers, GMs, and coaches, but there isn’t another way to describe how the New York Mets feel about Mike Pelfrey at this point. (Isn’t it odd that for the first time the phrase “hot seat” was uttered in the same sentence as “the Mets” and doesn’t involve a manager or GM? That’s progress or me misusing sports sayings). The Mets were discussing releasing the veteran starter to try and save a little bit of money, if Mike Pelfrey did not pitch well in Spring Training after a disappointing 2011 campaign.
The 28-year-old starter is a key cog in the Mets rotation, even though he would be a No. 4 starter on most other teams and was worth just 0.7 WAR last year. He owns a career 4.40 ERA, but none of that warrants a release. After all, he pitched well in 2010 and is serviceable pitcher who will most likely be worth just below the league-average next season.
No, the real reason is that the Mets wanted to save $4 million. Mike Pelfrey is under a one-year deal worth $5.7 million with $4 million of that being non-guaranteed (does that sound right?). Which basically means that the Mets front office was thinking about getting rid of their second best starting pitcher for pocket change. I mean, $4 million isn’t even worth a win on the open market. You can’t be too selective when your rotation is as bad as the Mets, and it would have made no sense to release a key pitcher- who might even be your best starter- for the sum of $4 million.
For as much hate as Mike Pelfrey gets, he isn’t all that bad. Sure he isn’t the prototypical No. 2 starter, but he still provides value (1.8 wins) for a 77 win ballclub that is starved of pitching. Remember, $5.7 million gets you 1.2 WAR on the open market. So, how is Pelfrey overpaid? He underperformed last season, but he was worth over 1.5 WAR in the three previous seasons including a 3 WAR and 2.8 WAR season.
His peripherals (a sure bet for five strikeouts and three walks per nine) are terrible, but he generates groundballs at an insanely high rate with a sinker that is starting to work again. Last season is an anomaly, and Pelfrey should be around the league-average next season (most likely a little below it). The Mets were worried that Pelfrey’s sinker wasn’t as effective, and Pelfrey was surprised that the front office was going to put so much stock into his Spring Training performance. Needless to say, he did well enough in Spring Training to keep his job.
“I think it’s stupid for spring training,” Mike Pelfrey said. “I take the ball for 32 starts a year and throw close to 200 innings, so I’m pretty dependable in that way. I’m thinking, ‘Hey, if you don’t want that . . . ‘ I’ve taken the ball every fifth day and I give you whatever I have. If I was terrible, or people didn’t expect anything, they wouldn’t be upset with me.”
It’s surprising to see a team toss around the idea of releasing a decent starter who has importance to their team on the basis of practice games. It’s baffling, and I completely understand why Mike Pelfrey is surprised. He isn’t a good pitcher and severely underperformed in the regime’s first look at him last year, but he’s better than a rotation filled with subpar starters.
Check this article for some more quotes from Pelfrey, and you’ll see that his answers are both fair and thoughtful.
Be sure to check out all of Call to the Pen’s transaction breakdowns for the 2011-12 offseason. You can follow Call to the Pen on Twitter at @FSCalltothePen or like us here on Facebook.
Follow Joe Soriano on Twitter here, and be sure to check out Rising Apple for everything about the Mets.