It has three overarching themes: fundamental skills, physical conditioning, and mental and emotional toughness.

And there you go. The reason why Heilman isn't a starter.

Heilman looked really good today and actually has pitched very well in his last 16 appearances.

17 IP, 16/3 k/bb, 2 hr, 1.18 WHIP.

Maybe he can go on a nice little run.

I thought he can fix major pitching problems in 10 minutes.

Rick Peterson is comfortable discussing everything from art to Fortune 500 companies.

Not surprising.

It has three overarching themes: fundamental skills, physical conditioning, and mental and emotional toughness.

And there you go. The reason why Heilman isn't a starter.

Really? And you know this how? Because Heilman was given a legitimate opportunity as a starter and failed. I must have missed that.....

Because Heilman was given a legitimate opportunity as a starter and failed. I must have missed that.....

You know, it's hard to quarrel with success. The fact is, Heilman does not have a compelling record as a starter, was not having consistent success, and the Mets made him a reliever. He has had solid success in that role. We can argue (and in fact, I have) that there have been moments where the Mets would have been well-served by moving Heilman back into the rotation -- those times when they've resorted to the Limas and the Gonzalez's of the world. But the counter-argument was at least pretty good that (a) the 2006 Mets had a backbone strength of a magnificent bullpen, (b) that Heilman was a very important part of that, and (c) that there was a decent chance you would weaken the bullpen and NOT help the rotation by moving Heilman.

Now, as to whether the Mets' thinking has more to do with an assessment of Heilman's mental toughness, or a view of his limited arsenal of pitching being better suited to relief, or whatever, I have no idea. But they've gotten valuable service from a guy who -- for a while there -- was looking like he might be a bust as a # 1 draft pick. I'm not gonna complain.

The fact is, Heilman does not have a compelling record as a starter

He has 25 major league starts. All but 7 coming in his first 2 seasons in the league. 7 coming the next season. And none coming the last 2 years after Heilman turned 26. Hardly a legitimate opportunity.

Depends on what you consider "success" I guess. It isn't really a reach IMO to think the Mets are wasting Heilman. But to each his own.....

He has 25 major league starts. All but 7 coming in his first 2 seasons in the league. 7 coming the next season. And none coming the last 2 years after Heilman turned 26. Hardly a legitimate opportunity.

My argument wasn't that he's had such an opportunity, haven. My argument was that the Mets have a legit POV for why they have deployed him in the bullpen instead, once having moved him there and once he found success out there. I think there is room for a legitimate difference of opinion on this issue, and I can honestly see both the Mets' and Heilman's views on it.

I overplayed my emphasis in my first post, but it is my belief that Heilman lacks the mental toughness that the Mets are looking for. I don't like his mound presence, I don't like how he seems to sulk, I didn't like how he was still talking about being a starter last year. And I personally find much I agree with in Peterson's triangle philosophy and from in Heilman's case, what else would it be? He's been durable. He's has pretty good stuff.

And judging by the way Willie and Peterson have treated him as a reliever, it shows that they don't think too highly of him. He's never really been the primary setup man, except when forced into it at the end of last year, and even then Willie (or Peterson) would seem to favor Mota over him. And Mota and Heilman are almost carbon copies stuff wise. Mota has a bit more zip, Heilman has a bit more movement. So once again, he seems to be in good condition, he has plus stuff...

Basically, what I'm saying is I think Peterson thinks that Heilman is a baby and that it will impact his pitching. And I agree.

It's just my pet theory. You can disagree. And you probably should.

I guess I just haven't always understood the Mets POV given some of the players they have started over Heilman in the last 3 years. My argument really only started with the idea that Heilman had somehow proven he didn't have the mental and emotional toughness to succeed as a starter. Which I know is not an argument you have extolled Sam. But I am honestly not sure why the Mets haven't tried Heilman as a spot starter when needed to see what would happen since he was moved to the bullpen full time in May of 2005.

It makes no sense to think that Heilman is mentally weak and then use him as a high leverage reliever. Personally, I think it's a bunch of baloney and that Heilman would be a very effective starter.

I really really really would love to see Peterson fix the Tampa Bay pitching staff in 10 minutes. Heck, I'd give him 10 days.

Even Rickey Henderson can be a great pitching coach for a team that plays its home games at Shea stadium and enjoys the best defense in the National League. The Mets pitching staff FIP is run of the mill in the NL, about the same as the Rockies, Dbacks, Pirates and Reds. However, the team DER is way above any other team's in the NL, by quite a margin. Color me skeptical that the current Mets rotation would be enjoying the same success pitching in front of the Reds or Marlins defense.

But anyhow, am sure Peterson has a lot of really cool photos of sweaty Zito in a dark parking lot.

However, the team DER is way above any other team's in the NL, by quite a margin. Color me skeptical that the current Mets rotation would be enjoying the same success pitching in front of the Reds or Marlins defense.

I think there is some interaction between the two. What I mean is part of the reason the Met pitching is good is because their defense is good, but part of the reason the Met defense is putting up such good numbers is the type of staff they have. Seriously, how many good defenders do the Mets have on their team?

1b- Delgado isn't a bad defender but he isn't really good either.
2b- Stache is awesome when he's healthy but he only played a month healthy. The rest of the time, the defense at second has been only OK between a hampered Stache, Easley, and Gotay.
SS- Reyes is a gold glove calibre defensive SS.
3B- Wright's been better this year and I would say he has been above average overall.

Outfield: Beltran, Gomez, Endy are all amazing. Milledge is a step below those guys. Green and Alou aren't good.

Overall, I'd say the Mets are very good team defensively but part of the reason they have an amazing DER is because Omar Minaya et al. have brought in a flyball staff.

Isn't it a little early to be saying that Milledge is a step below Gomez? Honestly, that doesn't even seem right to be putting Betran, Endy, and Gomez together as a comparable group of outfielders.


edit: WHOOPS you were talking about defense.

RTFP!

I really don't think Gomez's defense was that good though. The potential to be amazing was there obviously, but I'd say he was only a bit above average overall at the moment. He's not in Beltran's or Endy's class yet.

Which part of the triangle was pointed at Zambrano?

Rick Peterson is comfortable discussing everything from art to Fortune 500 companies.

Which Primate is he?

Which Primate is he?

Go back and saerch archives, whatever Mets fan was defending teh Kazmir deal, taht would be it.

Even Rickey Henderson can be a great pitching coach for a team that plays its home games at Shea stadium and enjoys the best defense in the National League.

How is San Diego's defense? That's a staff that looks a tad over its head.

I love Peavy and I've always liked Young, but I never expected this.