News broke yesterday that the Mets were planning on promoting top prospect Christian Scott to start Saturday, with plans to run a six-man rotation during a stretch where the team has 26 games in 27 days. It’s always exciting when a team gives a player a promotion from the minors on talent, rather than an injury. And Scott’s 36 Ks in 25.1 IP in his first exposure to Triple-A certainly speaks to his talent. Still, despite the buzz around the move, there are a bunch of questions that this promotion creates.
Question 1 – Why run a 6-man rotation?
The Mets have four starters doing very well, with ERAs ranging from a low of 2.31 to a high of 3.48, when the league average is 3.98 for starting pitchers. And Adrian Houser has an 8.16 ERA and a 1.849 WHIP. Why keep giving him starts? It’s one thing to say that you want to keep from burning out the other starters during this stretch. But that seems to be an idea that makes sense on the surface, even if there’s zero evidence that it’s actually effective – not much different than the 100-pitch cap. The Mets should be looking at reasons to boot Houser from the rotation, not ways to let him keep walking guys and giving up loud contact. Yesterday’s five-inning outing included four walks and a homer.
Question 2 – How does the bullpen work with a 6-man rotation?
It’s an MLB rule that the most pitchers allowed on a roster during the months where the overall limit is 26 (pre-September) is 13. Most teams – including the Mets – have five starters and eight relievers. If the Mets run a 6-man rotation, they’ll have to go with one fewer reliever. And that wouldn’t be a problem if the starters were going seven or more innings each time out. But that simply hasn’t been the case so far in 2024. After 31 games, relievers for the Mets are averaging nearly four innings per game, an average of 3.86 innings each time out. It’s been challenging at times with eight relievers. You wonder if an attempt to save the starters will result in burning out the relievers. And the Mets have already seen one reliever go down. Brooks Raley is on the shelf with an elbow injury and might miss the rest of the year.
Question 3 – Is this the best thing for Scott’s development?
Earlier this year it was mentioned that the Mets didn’t want to bring Scott up for just one start, only to send him back down. How much better is it to promote him for three or four starts? If he pitches well, how do you justify sending a top prospect down? If he gets knocked around, what does it do for his confidence? Ideally, you promote a top prospect when he’s ready to stay in the majors for good. Scott, primarily a reliever in college, where just four of his 55 games at the University of Florida were starts, has just 174.2 innings pitched in the minors. Is it too aggressive to promote a guy with this few innings pitched? It seems to me that the risk-reward proposition here slants too much to the risk side.
Question 4 – Why not promote Joey Lucchesi, instead?
Lucchesi has pitched better at Syracuse this year than Scott. Here are their numbers:
JL – 32 IP, 2.25 ERA, 4.33 FIP
CS – 25.1 IP, 3.20 ERA, 5.14 FIP
He simply has more innings, a better ERA and better peripherals, despite Scott’s crazy-good strikeout numbers. Additionally, Lucchesi has MLB experience under his belt and there’s no concern about the moment being too big for him. Finally, if the idea is for this to be a temporary thing until this 26-game stretch is over, why not call up the veteran who’s used to being jerked around by the organization? It’s next to impossible to consider Scott a better candidate for this promotion than Lucchesi.
Question 5 – What’s the long-range plan for the rotation?
Last year, the Mets tried to give Kodai Senga an extra day off whenever possible. They did this with a combination of off days and promoting pitchers to make one start and then sending them back down. Now they want to run a full-blown 6-man rotation, even with Senga still on the IL. What’s the plan when he returns? Is this a test run to see how the pen does with only seven relievers, with an idea of doing it for the rest of the season?
My preference is to run the team the way that makes the most sense for the talent on hand, rather than the way that the other 29 teams do. It makes perfect sense to me to utilize Senga by giving him an extra day of rest whenever possible. Does it make sense for the other pitchers? Maybe. The one good thing in this regard is that there’s no starter here with enough juice to squash it. Matt Harvey was adamant about pitching with regular rest. It’s pretty clear Jose Quintana doesn’t hold the same power that Harvey once did.
My oft-stated goal is for a team to run a 4-man rotation with 21st Century pitch limits. Most teams struggle to find a good fifth starter, which makes this idea appealing to me. But with guys like Lucchesi, Tylor Megill, David Peterson and Scott available – or soon available – the Mets have the starters to run a 6-man, especially with the way Jose Butto has been pitching.
There’s comfort in doing things the way every other team does. You won’t get criticized for running a 5-man rotation. But if you run a 6-man (or 4-man) and the slightest thing goes wrong, well, the media and fans will rake you over the coals. Are the Mets, with a new PoBO and a first-time manager, ready for that type of scrutiny?
My football team, the Vikings, were faced with some decisions in the just-concluded NFL Draft which opened them up to this type of scrutiny because they didn’t act the way that most teams do. They traded up twice in the first round, overpaying by the various draft charts both times. But there were players at key positions available and they risked overpaying to get guys they viewed as game-changers.
Before the draft, Vikings GM Kwesi Adofo-Mensah said this:
“Just because something is risky doesn’t mean you have to stay away from it,” Adofo-Mensah said. “It’s something that is hard to grasp, but if you grasp it, you know what the rewards are, right? And that’s something you have to weigh and measure. … You can look at countless examples of other teams who’ve made decisions, but maybe the decision you thought was going to be the decision, it was a different decision that ended up being right and the outcomes were good….
“I think our odds will be better than the margins. How good are those odds? I think it’s still a pretty risky thing, but just because something’s risky doesn’t mean you’re scared from it, you’re scared of it — you just have to believe. It’s uncertain, right? It’s uncertain and we have to take our swing, but that doesn’t give us any pause, I would say.”
Promoting Scott and running a 6-man rotation are both risky yet that’s what the Mets are doing. The question we should ask before either happens is if the team should stay away from these risks. The easiest thing in the world is to be a Monday Morning QB and claim you knew it was a good/bad idea after it already happened.
My opinion is that it’s not a good risk to promote Scott now. However, it’s much less clear to me about running a 6-man rotation. On one hand, the innovation is appealing and the Mets have the starters to make it work. On the other hand, it seems like a big risk to take with a bullpen that has up until this point been a team strength.
Ultimately, my view is that the Mets are taking unnecessary risks in both cases. Yet it will be fascinating to see how it works out.
Yes to Lucchesi, no to Scott. No to a 6 man rotation until Senga comes back and needs the extra time. I was so disappointed that the Mets pitched Houser this last time out, while Lucchesi pitched the day before that in Syracuse. I really don’t understand the reluctance to have Lucchesi up.
1. I don’t know but it may have to do with the stretch of games
2. The Mets are probably expecting their starters to be stretched out a bit more and pitch regularly into the sixth inning. Also, they will use their long guys for two innings or try to get more outs per reliever, like Buck did when he would start an inning with the previous inning’s reliever.
3. Yes, he get MLB exposure while knowing it’s a three week deal. Like Vientos, going into the start hoping to do his best will allow him to not get ahead of himself while letting the Front Office gauge their depth and who they can move.
4. They know Lucchesi, they want to see Scott. Also, Lucchesi wasn’t on the right pitching schedule.
5. Long range: Senga, Severino, Manaea, someone (Megill/Peterson/Scott/Lucchesi), Quintana. I see Stearns trading in July.
I like the Vikings approach. What’s better, an ok player and a marginal drafted player, or a good player and a free agent signing? If you do your homework, those free agents should be just as good as the marginal drafted player, therefore it’s a net benefit. As you mention, teams don’t take risks because those making the decisions want to protect their butt more than they want to try something unique.
FWIW – I believe that question was asked of the GM in regards to trading multiple first-round picks to move up to the top 3 to take a QB. I was 100% against that idea because I thought it’s too much to give up for Drake Maye. But I liked the two trades they did make. My opinion is that JJ McCarthy, Dallas Turner and whoever they take in the first round next year is better than Maye and whatever they would have gotten in round 2 & 3 next year.
I think this is as much about MeGill and Peterson on the horizon as it is about Scott. Hauser is likely to get one more start and if he tanks, he’ll be in the pen as the long man or he’ll be DFAd.
Scott has more upside than Luchessi. Maybe they view him – as I do – as a Degrom type. Someone who will actually improve and pitch better in the majors against a higher level of competition than in the minors.
Let’s not discount the fan factor. Fans want this. Stearns is a fan and has a good hand on the pulse. The team needs some energy and promoting a top prospect is one way to manufacture that.
The starting rotation is starting to pitch deeper into games of late – and they are being pushed and allowed to as the weather warms up. They have multiple multi-inning guys in the pen with SRF and Garrett.
The team has clearly stated they want to see what they have in their prospects this season. I feel for Luchessi – but they know what they have there. They need to see what they have in Scott before the deadline comes.
I hate a 6 man rotation, but as you say – that’s the staff they have especially when Senga comes back.
Think it is meant to be a message to Lucchesi to be better prepared for spring training than he was this year? His velo is still around 90, but they do have a couple of more years of control of him and maybe he needs a sharpening of the focus?
I don’t know if they’d send a message that way or not, or if they feel they need to. My instinct is just that they want to see what Scott can do, he’s got more upside/potential, and 31 games in, they are starting to tinker with // fine tune the roster.
I was wondering where his velo was at this point and whether or not that was a factor. But is it really still only 90?? He was at 88-89 in his one ST start in late March and Mendoza expressed confidence that it was not an issue and that Lucchesi would be back to his regular 92-93 within a few starts. Adding only 1 MPH in five weeks leaves me SMH over what else is going n here.
Why wouldn’t Scott stay up if he pitches well? And a 6 man rotation might mean th starters could make into the sixth. And what’s wrong with Luchessi and Megill as two inning relievers?
Severino,Quintana,Manaea,Butto,Scott and Senga if he comes back might be fun.
Looks like we have at least one answer for now.
Mendoza says: 6 man rotation for at least the next turn through, but non committal beyond that. Hauser to the pen for this next turn. Meaning Megill is probably ready to come back and to take the mound for Hauser’s next turn.
SNY said this:
“Mets manager Carlos Mendoza told the media before Friday’s series opener against the Tampa Bay Rays that the team will not use a six-man rotation this time through. With Houser pitching Thursday, the team expects the veteran hurler to be available out of the bullpen either Monday or Tuesday.
snip
The Mets are not committing to a six-man rotation moving forward, but Mendoza says when they get to their next off day (Thursday, May 9) they’ll have to make a decision on how to proceed.”
https://sny.tv/articles/mets-adrian-houser-bullpen-six-man-rotation-christian-scott
5/3 – Quintana
5/4 – Scott
5/5 – Severino
5/6 – Manaea
5/7 – Butto
5/8 – Quintana
5/9 – day off and evaluate
I believe that’s when Drew Smith is first eligible to come off the IL, too. Sounds like the Mets are unsure right now which path to go by. There may not be a 6-man rotation at all. If nothing else, getting Houser out of the rotation is a positive.
No worries, let’s get a look at him, he’s earned the shot.
Moreover, Scott threw only about 90 innings in 23; he’s conservatively good for 130-140 in 24.
Why waste all those bullets in Syracuse?
Lastly, Stearns can’t lay out all the possibilities. He’s not going to say, “We might DFA Houser,” for example.
Pitch Scott, see how things unfold.
It’s all good. No hand-wringing here.
Brooks Raley was mentioned briefly in this piece. Here’s the latest update from SNY:
Mets reliever Brooks Raley, who suffered a setback while attempting to return from an elbow injury, will continue to throw after the inflammation in his elbow improved, manager Carlos Mendoza said.
Per Mendoza, surgery is not on the table at the moment.
Raley will not be activated from the IL on Sunday when he’s first eligible, and a possible timeline to return is unknown.
https://sny.tv/articles/brooks-raley-mets-injury-improved-throwing-5-3-24
There isn’t a need for a 6 man rotation. If they are doing a 6 man for the next 26 games then promote Scott and Lucchesi otherwise the bullpen will be overworked. Put Houser , Garrett and SRF as long relievers ( 5th-7th inning) with Diaz, Ottavino, Lopez and Diekman as short relievers.