What? You were thinking something else?
The Mets starting pitching staff is in some ways “Johan Santana and the rest.” Santana is coming off what by many statistical measures (IP, W, K/9, BB/9, K/BB, BAA, WHIP) was his worst season as a full time starter, and even at his worst he was the best the Mets had to offer.
According to Fangraphs.com, based on WAR and Dollar Value (you may click here to learn more about how these metrics are calculated), Santana ranked 51st among qualified ML starting pitchers at 2.8 and $12.4 million respectively. So by these measures there were 50 people in the majors who outperformed our ace. Yes he made only 25 starts due to injury but he did throw enough innings to qualify for consideration.
The second highest ranked pitcher on the Mets starting staff was Mike Pelfrey, who made 31 starts and came in 66th at 1.8 and $7.9 million respectively. Considering that there are 30 teams in the major leagues, having your injured ace rank 51st and your young # 2 rank 66th doesn’t sound too bad right? Well, if you think so, you’ll probably want to stop reading now. Only 77 starting pitchers threw enough pitches to even qualify for the discussion.
Sorry, just kidding. Keep reading.
The Chicago Cubs and Colorado Rockies each had 4 starting pitchers rank higher than the 66th place Pelfrey, the Detroit Tigers, San Francisco Giants, Atlanta Braves, New York Yankees, Chicago White Sox, Los Angeles Dodgers and Tampa Bay Rays had 3, and the Arizona Diamondbacks, St. Louis Cardinals, Houston Astros, Los Angeles Angels and Minnesota Twins had 2. This does not include any player who pitched for more than 1 team in 2009, and even without including Cliff Lee the Philadelphia Phillies had 2 pitchers who out ranked Pelfrey.
That’s 15 of the 30 major league teams that had at least 2 starting pitchers ranked higher than the Mets second best starting pitcher. 13 of those 15 teams had winning records, the Astros won 74 games and the Diamondbacks, like the Mets, won 70. 6 of those 15 teams were among the 8 teams that reached the post season. 1 of them won the World Series.
A good 2 seamer yes, but a good # 2 starting pitcher?
On those teams Pelfrey would’ve been a 3rd-5th starter, and that is what he needs to be on the Mets. Will Oliver Perez, John Maine or some other in house option perform well enough to nudge Pelfrey down the depth chart? Will Pelfrey mature into the role? Perhaps. But these are not gambles I am willing to take.
We here at TRDMB have already had many spirited debates about who qualifies to fill the role of # 2 starting pitcher. In fact, we’ve also debated whether pitchers should even be ranked # 1, 2, 3 and so on, at all. I think the 13 teams with winning records including the 6 playoff teams that all had at least 2 pitchers rank higher than 66th in the league would agree that pitcher slotting is relevant and ranking them is a worthwhile endeavor. After all, 30 teams with 5 starters equals 150 starters. It’s wonderful to have Zack Greinke, who at 9.4 and $42.4 million ranked # 1 overall in the major leagues, but when the guys following him in the rotation are old friend Brian Bannister and Luke Hochevar, you win 65 games.
Kauffman Stadium, plenty of seats available
Please understand I’m talking about the pitcher’s overall rank as it relates to their role. I know Jeremy Guthrie is the Orioles “# 1″ pitcher in that he pitches Opening Day and every 5 days after. The problem with that is that he ranks 75th in the major leagues of the 77 qualifiers. He’s not a true # 1 in much the same way that Mike Pelfrey is not a true # 2. He is miscast in his role and the team, and he, suffers from it.
Sticking solely to available free agents, the person I covet most for the role of # 2 starting pitcher is John Lackey. I doubt the Mets will be the only team that might be interested in Lackey, and the competition may drive his price beyond the pale. I will now attempt to demonstrate further why the Mets need to go above and beyond to get him.
Based on 2009 WAR and Dollar Values, the following available free agents outperformed the injured Santana last season:
- Joel Pineiro, 4.8, $21.5
- John Lackey, 3.9, $17.6
- Jason Marquis, 3.8, $17.1
- Carl Pavano, 3.7, $16.5
- Andy Pettitte, 3.3, $15.0
- Randy Wolf, 3.0, $13.6
and the following available free agents were ranked between # 51 Santana and # 66 Pelfrey last year:
- Brad Penny, 2.5, $11.2
- Jon Garland, 2.4, $10.6
- Jarrod Washburn, 2.1, $9.4
Obviously we can’t base our choice(s) on simply what players accomplished, or didn’t accomplish, last year alone. Here are the same pitchers career average WAR and Dollar Values:
- Joel Pineiro, 2.2, $7.6
- John Lackey, 3.9, $14.4
- Jason Marquis, 1.2, $4.9
- Carl Pavano, 1.9, $6.5
- Andy Pettitte, 4.2, $14.8
- Randy Wolf, 1.8, $6.3
- Brad Penny, 2.5, $9.0
- Jon Garland, 2.7, $9.9
- Jarrod Washburn, 2.2, $7.6
Just for comparison:
- Johan Santana, 5.3, $18.8
- Mike Pelfrey, 1.3, $5.8
Something I gather from these numbers is something that many of you probably already knew before reading this, which is Pineiro, Marquis and Pavano noticeably out pitched their career norms in 2009. Will that prove to be an exception or a trend? I would prefer not to pay to find out.
Contemplating Pavano is a head scratcher
In my opinion Pettitte seems unlikely to become a Met, and while the rest of the gentlemen are to be applauded for their consistency, they’re not consistent at a high enough level for me to confidently stick them into the # 2 role. Should either Brad Penny, Jon Garland or Jarrod Washburn be added to push Pelfrey, Maine or Perez further down in, or perhaps out of the rotation, I won’t complain.
For me what it all boils down to is this: Lackey or bust; Lackey4Mets; Lackey Lack Lack, don’t talk back. I can’t suggest to you that signing John Lackey guarantees anything. But when 13 of 15 teams that do something have winning records, and 6 of 8 teams that do something make the playoffs, that something seems worthy of strong consideration.
I believe that if the Mets don’t come out of this off season with a viable # 2 starting pitcher their 2010 season may resemble # 2. I think the numbers suggest that the only viable # 2 starting pitcher available through free agency is John Lackey. E-Harmony has matched up the Mets and John Lackey. The question is, are the Mets willing to commit?
I hope the Mets feel the same way about you John
UPDATE: Through discussion in the comments section below, we’ve come up with a more concise way of expressing the most important point that I’ve failed to make clearly here. So below is a list of the teams that based on 2009 WAR rankings had “two aces” or two starting pitchers who ranked in the top 30 overall. They are listed by team, pitcher, ranking.
- Cardinals (Wainwright 11, Carpenter 13, Pineiro 16)
- Marlins (Nolasco 14, Johnson 19)
I somehow overlooked them in my initial research so make it 14 of 16 teams with winning records
- Red Sox (Lester 8, Beckett 15)
- Angels (Lackey 22, Weaver 23)
- Braves (Vazquez 7, Jurrjens 24)
- Rockies (Jimenez 12, Marquis 26, Hammel 28, De La Rosa 30)
and if I’m allowed to count Cliff Lee for the Phillies (but I understand that may not be fair as some of his work was done for the Indians)
- Phillies (Lee 6, Hamels 27)
All 7 teams with at least “two aces†had winning records and 5 of the 7 made the playoffs.
144 comments
Kingman 26
11/10/2009-9:10am at 9:10 am (UTC -4)
Grave, thank you for this incredibly well-conceived and extremely informative piece.
You da man.
You are clearly TRDMB’s number 1.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-12:05pm at 12:05 pm (UTC -4)
You are very kind. I am not sure what criteria we are using to determine that I am number 1. If we use total number of posts written since the inception of the blog, I am number 2 (Dirty is our ace). Perhaps the Mets should sign me.
CaseStreet
11/10/2009-9:21am at 9:21 am (UTC -4)
Lackey4mets.com
we should work on a 30 minute lackey infomercial and a weekly lackey update
seriously, I’m hoping the Yankees let us get lackey. Imagine if the phils had a #2 behind lee. Like c.c and Burnett. As much as I like halladay he’s not needed if we get lackey. Imagine how much he would want, maybe cc money
great, now I’m underground so I can’t click on submit
I thought the penny idea was interesting. If we do get lackey, I bet Omar doesn’t guarantee another sp, there will be a few livans and Garcias
out if subway
wannybackstra
11/10/2009-9:51am at 9:51 am (UTC -4)
I think Cole Hamels qualifies as a pretty darn good #2.
CaseStreet
11/10/2009-10:06am at 10:06 am (UTC -4)
no this year, and def not in the playoffs
trs86
11/10/2009-10:16am at 10:16 am (UTC -4)
If Hamels stats last year are a #2 then we should just sign Wolf because he is an ace.
However, we know Hamels has a ton of talent and MAYBE will get back to what he was.
wannybackstra
11/10/2009-12:02pm at 12:02 pm (UTC -4)
Come on, you two. He’s 25, already has a Conn Smythe trophy, had two great years in a row before this one (not good but extremely good if not great), has an ezxcellent minor league track record, and was probably just feeling the effects of a either a WS hangover or a bit of the Verducci effect after going from 180+ innings two 223+ and postseason in innings from 2008-2009.
And even in his bad season he still managed 193 IP, with a 1.29 WHIP and a 4:1 K:BB ratio.
Holy Janet Jackson and “what have you done for me lately.”
CaseStreet
11/10/2009-12:11pm at 12:11 pm (UTC -4)
wanny, I’m saying that if the PHils had someone better than Pedro or Blanton like a healthy Hamels, they might’ve won the WS. I’m not digging on Cole. He had a bad year. He is a good pitcher.
wannybackstra
11/10/2009-12:20pm at 12:20 pm (UTC -4)
Sorry, Case. I misread that to imply that Hamels is no longer of that type of quality going forward.
However, the astonishment in my post still applies to TRS’s skepticism.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-2:29pm at 2:29 pm (UTC -4)
Even in a bad year he ranked 27th in the league in WAR.
whataputz
11/10/2009-12:16pm at 12:16 pm (UTC -4)
exactly, I hate seeing everyone constantly trashing Hamels. I’d take him on our team in a heartbeat.
metsfan4decades
11/10/2009-9:29am at 9:29 am (UTC -4)
LOL – ‘E-Harmony has matched up the Mets and John Lackey’.
Great piece and I couldn’t agree more. Anyone reading this blog regularly knows I’m all about ‘pitching, pitching, pitching’. I’ve been disappointed reading on all other blogs, tweets, etc. that the Omar seems to be making a LF bat his #1 priority this off season. Not that we don’t need a LF, but a solid #2 behind Johan is an absolute necessity, IMO.
This statement along: ‘I think the 13 teams with winning records including the 6 playoff teams that all had at least 2 pitchers rank higher than 66th in the league would agree that pitcher slotting is relevant and ranking them is a worthwhile endeavor.’……points to the fact that without solid pitching, teams generally are going nowhere.
I’m with Grave on this. Get it done, Omar.
udontmesswthejohan
11/10/2009-9:37am at 9:37 am (UTC -4)
Well done Grave, and I agree that Lackey should be a priority for this team this winter. My one small quibble, and it is small one, would simply be to caution about basing the argument too much on the WAR and Dollar Value since, as you said, the competition might “drive his price beyond the pale.” I admit to being a bit naivee about these stats, but if he ends up getting a mega K from the Mets or anyone else, then doesn’t that mean, in all likelihood, that he moves on down the list.
CaseStreet
11/10/2009-9:50am at 9:50 am (UTC -4)
IIRC, WAR and Dollar Value have nothing to do with what contract a player has.
udontmesswthejohan
11/10/2009-9:54am at 9:54 am (UTC -4)
My bad. Guess I’m going to have to spend a few hours reading that link today. Oh well.
stickguy
11/10/2009-10:16am at 10:16 am (UTC -4)
yeah, WAR basically says how much better he is than a replacement player, and DV is essentially what his performance should be “worth”.
Value then becomes contract – DV, so some guys are worth more than they got paid, and many (including Johan this year) are worth “less”
CaseStreet
11/10/2009-10:19am at 10:19 am (UTC -4)
here’s a quickie:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/bullpen/Wins_Above_Replacement_Player
Dollar Value:
In general, we can say that the market price of a win is the mean of the dollars per win handed out to free agents in any given year. If you approached CC Sabathia this winter and offered him $12.65 million because he was a 5.5 win pitcher and the league average cost per win is $2.3 million, you wouldn’t have gotten very far. If you want to compete in the market for available wins, you have to know what the going rate for a win is, and the easiest way to calculate that is to look at the free agent market.
trs86
11/10/2009-10:33am at 10:33 am (UTC -4)
So Dollar value is still based on salary to an extent.
CaseStreet
11/10/2009-10:56am at 10:56 am (UTC -4)
kind of, but the only way a player’s Dollar Value would go down would be if the league spent less on wins
wannybackstra
11/10/2009-9:50am at 9:50 am (UTC -4)
Amen.
DNDJohan aka kistics
11/10/2009-10:12am at 10:12 am (UTC -4)
Great post. I agree with all of you here that Lackey should be the Mets #1 priority. But Omar and the Mets FO do not agree. From what I’ve been hearing, their #1 priority is OF.
But IF Lackey is signed, do the Mets need to sign another SP? Someone like Livan last year. Maine will be injured at some point of the season and Ollie… you just never know.. There’s always Figgy, but will he be enough? I don’t think so. So who will be the Livan of this year?
Penny sounds interesting
DNDJohan aka kistics
11/10/2009-10:17am at 10:17 am (UTC -4)
Just saw Heyman’s twitter. He said that Mets are concerned about Lackey’s arm. But will be looking at Halladay and AGonz. Also will be looking for a power hitter.
http://twitter.com/SI_JonHeyman
Who would you guys rather have? Lackey or Halladay? Say Halladay renews his contract similar to Lackey’s 4-5 years 80-90MM. If given the choice I like Halladay better. I know he’s a year older, but he’s more durable and efficient.
CaseStreet
11/10/2009-10:22am at 10:22 am (UTC -4)
Halladay would want CC money.
trs86
11/10/2009-10:27am at 10:27 am (UTC -4)
But maybe not the years. I would expect Halladay to get something like 5/100-120 or 4/100 with an option for 20 million. Again just basing it on age.
DNDJohan aka kistics
11/10/2009-10:38am at 10:38 am (UTC -4)
Even with that contract, I would think Halladay is the better option. Mets have the money to get him. The question is does Halladay want to come to NY?
trs86
11/10/2009-10:39am at 10:39 am (UTC -4)
That’s the kicker. If he does then it will happen. If not then it will not. LOL.
stickguy
11/10/2009-10:21am at 10:21 am (UTC -4)
well, for 1 I am not sure Maine will be hurt this year. Could happen, but he really had 1 problem (the shoulder spur) that seems to have finally been resolved. So, it is not unreasonable to expect him to have a normal yar, after a full off season of rehab and strengthening. I expect at least 25+ starts.
To your question, if they get lackey, then maine/ollie/pelf are likely the rest of the rotation, with eise #6. So, I would peg Neise as the conceptual Livan, although I would love to see Penny on a cheaper (make good) deal.
CaseStreet
11/10/2009-10:26am at 10:26 am (UTC -4)
yeah, I can’t imagine Omar signing two pitchers and improving other positions
trs86
11/10/2009-10:34am at 10:34 am (UTC -4)
Unless you went with the get two midrotation guys for the same price as Lackey such as Garland and Wolf and then you would still have money for other areas.
However, you are right if we get Lackey then the only other pitcher we would get would be Redding 1.1 or if we did get a Garland type then there would be NO hitters.
metsfan4decades
11/10/2009-10:36am at 10:36 am (UTC -4)
I seem to remember Maine admitting, in ’08, he pitched with a hip problem he had that started in ST. Never did hear anything more on that though.
So question remains, for such a young guy, is he really healthy and this off season surgery solved his current problems – or is he a pitcher that’s constantly going to have injury problems?
I’m leaning towards Maine having a good year in ’10. When healthy, he’s got some very good stuff. If he remains on the mound all year, no reason he can’t win 13 games.
trs86
11/10/2009-10:25am at 10:25 am (UTC -4)
I don’t think these stats tell us anything we don’t know. It’s great work but we all know there is a large drop off in talent and consistency between Lackey and the next guy on the list. However, what we keep missing for some is that he also is going to get paid for that as well. If this were last year, you could argue that he would be the 3rd best pitcher on the market and would have been paid accordingly. He would not have gotten 5/90 with CC and AJ off the board. Perhaps the Yankees go with Lackey for that money instead but then Burnett would not have gotten that money. You get my point. Lackey as the premier FA pitcher COULD get vastly overpaid. I still think he should be our number one target but perhaps Omar playing it shy is him doing what he did last year with KRod saying they were comfortable with Fuentes. Perhaps the Mets saying Wolf will be fine is a negotiating tool. What will really determine if Lackey ends up with the Mets is who else gets involved. If he does approach the 5 years 90 million I still do not think the cost per year and commitment is warranted on a team with so many other holes.
Also looking at stats this way, would it not be again just as much of an advertisement to get 3 pitchers in the top 66 including Johan instead of just one? Bringing in Garland who was valued at 10.6 last year and 9.9 for his career and a guy like Penny/Washburn/Marquis? Thus assuming a rebound from Pelfrey and perhaps Maine or Perez you get 4 pitchers from 66 up?
CaseStreet
11/10/2009-10:34am at 10:34 am (UTC -4)
hmm, very interesting point. not very sexy, though.
trs86
11/10/2009-10:37am at 10:37 am (UTC -4)
It would be if you then signed Holliday or traded Pelfrey for Halladay.
Garland and Wolf would cost around 17 million give or take and both on 1-2 year deals 3 max for Wolf. That leaves another 15 million even if you don’t go over budget.
stickguy
11/10/2009-10:42am at 10:42 am (UTC -4)
that is pretty much my arguement from yesterday that a team can win a lot of games with a rotation of an “ace”, then 4 #3+/- guys (say 3 guys that if they really click could be #2s for a while, and 1 guy that is a borderline 3/4).
What that does is give you at least a solid, ML quality guy every outing, and avoids the crap #5/filler/innings eater types (livan mostly, Lima time, etc.)
My perception from reading the comments is tht the Mets are closer to that than you might think, If (of course it is a big if) they get the injured guys back form mostly full (25+ start) seasons.
Pelf had a poor year (verducci? defense?), but most seem OK with him as a 3, and recognize he has the “stuff” (and has performed in stretchs as) to act like a #2, but he is a decent 3. Ditto with Maine, if his shoulder really is recovered. Ditto with Ollie and his knee, but he would be the guy I call a 3/4.
So, adding a 5th guy that is a very good 3 at worst, and if they have a year like they are capable of, a solid #2 performance (like Wolf last year, or lackey)gives them potentially a very, very strong rotation.
heck, the Phils had 1/2 year of Lee, an erratic hamels, blanton, happ and crap, and they made the WS!
And you really can’t discount the impact the crappy D had on the pitching staff last year. COmbined with a weak offense, a recipe for failure.
stickguy
11/10/2009-10:31am at 10:31 am (UTC -4)
One thing that jumps out to me from this analysis is exactly how unreliable pitching is. Every year, lots of guys have unexpected big years, and others fall off the charts. A lot of it, of course, is related to helath (or lack of same), but quite a bit also seems to be somewhat random (IOW, “luck”).
So, a big part of GMing is evaluating and projecting which guys you think will be having the up year (a combo of situation, talent, expected health, and of course, blind luck!)
A lot of us last off season advocated for getting Wolf on the 1 year deal. In hindsight, we were certainly right, but he could have easily pulled something in ST with the Mets, and then missed 1/2 the season.
Pitchers, especially ones with some injury histroy (and miles on the arm) are a crapshoot. Some certainly have more talent, and some have better reliability trackrecords.
But any time you are talking about guys up in their 30s, that have missed significant time due to arm problems, a LT (4-5 year) big money (15mill+) contract is a huge, huge risk.
So while lackey is certainly the “best” (statistically) pitcher on the FA market, the Mets are certainly justified in being wary of the potential contract.
Now, if he ends up falling to 3/45? then you gotta do it. 5/85? Don’t think so.
I am still amazed AJ got 5 and Lowe 4 years last off season. So far, 1 team greatly regrets that move it seems, and the Yankees got lucky to have a full year out of AJ with his track record.
Wasn’t Omar the one that had a policy (broken of course for Johan) of not wanting any SP on more thana 3 year deal (a wise policy for guys 30+ probably).
trs86
11/10/2009-10:39am at 10:39 am (UTC -4)
Yeah I think I said I was willing to give him a Lowe deal tops. Lowe should have NEVER got that much money and I am glad Omar made 1 good decision. 4/60 is the most Lackey should get but in this market I am not so sure.
DNDJohan aka kistics
11/10/2009-10:53am at 10:53 am (UTC -4)
Good point. But if Halladay wants to get traded to the Mets right now with LT contract, wouldn’t you want him? There has to be some exceptions to your point. Does Lackey fall in that exception? I don’t know. Given the market this year, I’m sure he’ll get what he wants.
CaseStreet
11/10/2009-10:40am at 10:40 am (UTC -4)
something else that can be taken from this is that this FA class sux.
the avg WARP is 2.5 runs for a pitcher.
stickguy
11/10/2009-11:08am at 11:08 am (UTC -4)
Mr. lackey has very good timing hitting FA this year, even with a slow economy. As TRS often oitns out, the “best” guy often gets overpaid (see Lowe)
fongy2
11/10/2009-10:57am at 10:57 am (UTC -4)
Just so I understand, the 25y/o Hamels who was clearly the ace of 2 division wins and had been looked at
as an ace since the moment the phils
signed him is no longer even a #2.
This because of various nagging injuries and obvious negative effect
due to the number of innings he pitched last year? Okay.
Count on that,Case.
Its funny that sometimes the arguments
made here are make either just to argue or to fit and already arrived
at opinion.
But I understand, heck I’d love to get rid of Castillo b/c I don’t like
him and don’t trust his ability to
stay healthy going foward and nothings
going to change my mind about that.
RE: Lackeys health, if our FO has concerns over his long term health
and won’t sign him, fine.
Problem is we heard that about Vlad a few yrs ago BUT were not put off by
that potential with guys like Pedro, Alou, Castillo, Redding or Putz.
So if true, its good to see us finally
paying attention to what you would think is a kinda important detail
to signing someone long term.
trs86
11/10/2009-11:16am at 11:16 am (UTC -4)
Pedro the deal made sense only in the fact that he put butts in the seats much more so than Lackey could. The other deals you mention while dangerous did not cost anywhere near as much as 5/90 and only Castillo was signed longterm. The rest were on one year deals with options.
fongy2
11/10/2009-11:22am at 11:22 am (UTC -4)
I don’t disagree about Pedro and I wanted him
signed BUT it wasn’t just about putting fannies in seats but
changing a losing culture so It was forgivable.
The othe signings however were not since
they were looked at as putting the finishing touches on what we all
hoped would be a championship team
following the tough finish to the 2006 season.
trs86
11/10/2009-11:19am at 11:19 am (UTC -4)
I just don’t understand the constant need to defend the Phillies. Of course there is a need on a Mets blog to bash them but what is the need to defend them?
Anyway, to your point on Hamels, do you think the Phillies are concerned? I would say yes. Will he still be a quality pitcher most likely, will he become a #2 again good chance, will he return to ace maybe? Each step to me brings up more questions. To me his case is very similar to Pelfrey only saying that Hamels can be a #1 and Pelfrey can be a #2.
fongy2
11/10/2009-11:28am at 11:28 am (UTC -4)
I kinda get your point but a few things,no ones”defending”the phillies.Just stating a point.To say hes either a question as
a number two is absurd.
As far as the phillies being concerned……
no more so than us being concerned about
any number of health issues involving just about all our key guys
based on 2009.
Further to say hes not a legit 2(atleast) is
like saying Zambrano isn’t@28 based on what
he did in 2009,again
while banged up(and in his case on a bad team)
Lastly,while again,I get your point,mostly,
lets not compare Pelf to Hamels.
wannybackstra
11/10/2009-12:17pm at 12:17 pm (UTC -4)
How can you possibly compare Hamels to Pelfrey?
Hamels “bad season” this year is probably better than Pelfrey’s 2008 season that earned him promise as the team’s #2.
Pelfrey has never pitched as well in his professional career as Hamels did in 2007 and 2008 and probably 2009 for that matter. Until he does, I don’t see any basis for comparing these two.
Anyway, do you question whether Johan is a true #1 anymore? Of course not. Because you usually know better than to judge players on one season and ignore their track records.
trs86
11/10/2009-1:07pm at 1:07 pm (UTC -4)
READ Wanny. The only reason I am comparing the two is they both underperformed based on what was expected. Hamels is expected to be an ace and performed like a #3. Pelfrey was expected to be a #2 by the Mets (#3 by me) and perfored like a #4/5.
I am sure the Philles are concerned that Hamels may not just magically come back to #1-2 status just as much as the Mets are concerned that Pelfrey will not return to #3-4 status.
wannybackstra
11/10/2009-3:37pm at 3:37 pm (UTC -4)
Hamels’s 4:1 K:BB, 1.29 WHIP and 193 IP probably don’t cause them as much concern as you think. It would hardly be “magical” for Hamels to have “come back” to be a #1-2 type pitcher. It was be just as magical for Santana.
And I’ve READ. I READ all the time. Sometimes I READ just to READ. And the problem with what you WROTE is that there is no basis to even compare their expectations. It is much more foolish to expect Pelfrey to be a front of the rotation starter than it is to have that expectation of Hamels.
CaseStreet
11/10/2009-11:25am at 11:25 am (UTC -4)
“Imagine if the phils had a #2 behind lee.”
What is it that offends you from that sentence?
Obviously Hamels is supposed to be their #1 or 2 pitcher. Anyone can tell that from all the Cole commercials.
If you didn’t get my point, it was that had the Phillies had someone who ACTUALLY performed like a Ace along w/ Lee (this year), they wouldn’t have had to throw Pedro or Blanton out against the Yankees.
I know he was injured (damn Verducci), and I wasn’t pissing on your California Boy parade, I was simply stating that after Lee, the Phils had squat.
Sorry to affend you and all the other Phillie fans.
fongy2
11/10/2009-11:31am at 11:31 am (UTC -4)
And I attack people here?
With all due respect Case,do you have any
idea how absurd and
childish this post
sounds? C’mon man
grow up a little.
CaseStreet
11/10/2009-11:38am at 11:38 am (UTC -4)
grow up?
I still don’t get what I said that you had to call me out. Can you answer that?
You seem to have some thing for defending the Phils, even when it’s not necessary. Why?
Are you saying I attack you? Bcuz I said you have a love for Hamels and ur a Philly fan? Come on fongy, sorry you can’t take a joke.
Anyway, my point still stands. If Hamels pitched like he has in the past, the Yanks might not be the WS champs. Do you disagree?
fongy2
11/10/2009-11:51am at 11:51 am (UTC -4)
No I don’t.
But we can look at things more broadly. I’m not
worried and don’t care about
what Hamels problems were/are.My point is that
when projecting,
hes gotta be projected aswhat hes been overall in his career,given his age,usual improvement for
a still very young pitcher less injuries ofcouse.
I’m not offended,I’m a pretty tough guy
and it takes alot to offend me. I was more aggrevated by being called
a phillie fan(again)by you.
Mostly because its just dumb.
To further the point on Hamels,
we can’t worry about them but also can’t convince ourselves that
it may not be as hard to catch
them b/c a bunch
of bad things will happen
which will favor us.
When projecting,
You’ve got to look at likelyhoods
not hopes and ifs.
To make it clear,that was my beef all along with Omars signing of Alou(and again the reason for my screen name),
Yes,if healthly
he could be the final piece to a great line-up
BUT who could count on that given his injnury history and age.
You understand what I mean?
CaseStreet
11/10/2009-12:04pm at 12:04 pm (UTC -4)
sure, but what does have to do w/ anything I said?
We all know ur not a Phillie fan Or has ur wife converted you? (J/K). It was done tongue-in-cheek, partly bcuz you called me out when IMO I didn’t say anything wrong.
fongy2
11/10/2009-12:18pm at 12:18 pm (UTC -4)
I was calling you out guy,I was just trying to say that unless and until Hamels or in another example Zambrano repeat this season both should be looked at as top of the rotation type pitchers.Thats all.
trs86
11/10/2009-1:09pm at 1:09 pm (UTC -4)
So should Pelfrey be looked at as garbage #5 or a #3 with #2 potential?
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-12:21pm at 12:21 pm (UTC -4)
I apologize for jumping into your discussion but I just want to say two things that I think are related.
1 – Fongy you don’t have to prove your Met bonafides to me, I believe you are a long time Met fan who isn’t shifting allegiance.
2 – Fongy you do in my subjective opinion sometimes bring up the Phils when there seems to be little or no provocation to do so, and it makes me scratch my head. It seems (again, my opinion) that it goes deeper than simple respect. But fandom? No, I don’t believe you are their fan, I just enjoy poking you with that stick since you bring them up so often.
Last night I mentioned that I thought their manager did a poor job by not adjusting his lineup despite how successfully the Yankees were working against his back-to-back lefties, and rather than discuss that point you made the rather considerable leap to “wouldn’t you want 3 division titles etcetera.”
It just seemed like I said I didn’t like a cup of coffee I had and you responded with “what the hell don’t you like about Columbia?”
fongy2
11/10/2009-12:32pm at 12:32 pm (UTC -4)
Its actually Colombia…Just kidding! But it is.
Maybe my problem is I have too much respect for them,seeing them everyday,given the market I’m in.
My point is though as I stated above, we need to look at them and realize it won’t be easy taking the Division and League from them and no amount of down talking them is gonna do that.
We have to get better both talent wise but (yes it is a cliche) heart wise.
B/C they have championship levels of both.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-12:35pm at 12:35 pm (UTC -4)
Very good point, it is important for me to remember that, like it or not, you’re in their market and you are going to be saturated with them.
I will try to do a better job of keeping that in mind when debating things with you.
fongy2
11/10/2009-12:47pm at 12:47 pm (UTC -4)
Yeah,I’m almost exactly half-way b/t Philly and Pittsburgh which is great for me as a 35+yr Steeler fan,no more sports bars,having to buy the NFL package etc..And while I’ve gained alot of respect for this current Phillie team, I also have no respect for the Pirates who I also see everyday. Bad,bad team,FO etc.,No direction,constantly changing plans etc.. Positive is that,I pretty much don’t have to deal with 1%
of the yankee nonsense I had to all my life in NYC.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-12:52pm at 12:52 pm (UTC -4)
Regarding the Pirates, do you get any sense that this newest regime is an improvement or just more of the same?
IIRC you were not pleased with their Chavez/Iwamura trade.
fongy2
11/10/2009-1:02pm at 1:02 pm (UTC -4)
RE: The Buc, NO. I don’t get what they’re doing. But I’m not alone. The few Pirate fans who I know, ones you read etc. also think they’re still lost.Far as the trade…Didn’t make sense tome. You finally have a young pitcher who doesn’t get hurt(they’ve had terrible luck w/that) And you trade him for a pretty ordinary 2Bman AFTER just having traded another one who,b/t/w was your most popular player.
Nyer Morgan for Milladge? AND best of all was keeping McCutcheon down to start a 2nd yr in AAA despite him being their best prospect for yrs now. They sort of did an anti-FMart w/him.
The Kid likely could have contributed in 2008 and they could have traded Mclouth then and gotten even more for him.
DNDJohan aka kistics
11/10/2009-11:06am at 11:06 am (UTC -4)
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/mets/2009/11/10/2009-11-10_insider_says_mets_wont_pay_top_dollar_for_pricey_free_agents.html?r=sports%2Fbaseball%2Fmets
I wonder if this is true. This is coming from a guy who hopes to work for Players Development.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-11:55am at 11:55 am (UTC -4)
Thank you to everybody for taking the time to read and to add your comments, I appreciate it.
Specifically regarding the idea of simply adding two pitchers that rank higher than 66th, therefore pushing Pelfrey down in the rotation, I understand the concept and I agree it has merit.
Where I separate myself from that is my wondering aloud whether the improvement is “enough” of an improvement. Is pushing the 66th ranked pitcher back in the rotation by adding, say, the 49th and 57th ranked pitchers, enough?
Clearly those in favor of such a strategy believe so. I do not, hence my thesis.
fongy2
11/10/2009-11:59am at 11:59 am (UTC -4)
Agreed and since Wolf is now listed as a “class A” FA
anyone else think we should
back off that?
Also, how the heck does Billy Wags get a “type A” FA listing?
fongy2
11/10/2009-12:02pm at 12:02 pm (UTC -4)
I thought and please correct me if i’m wrong,it was based on the past two yrs of production.
If thats the case,how does Gado get a “type B” listing?
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-12:11pm at 12:11 pm (UTC -4)
To the best of my knowledge Elias uses a secret formula (you’re old enough to remember “ancient Chinese secret” right?) that a gentleman named Eddie Bajek has roughly reverse engineered and he offers predictions based on that which MLBTR publishes.
But as far as I know, laypeople such as ourselves do not know what the formula is. When I google the phrase “Elias free agent ranking formula” I don’t get the formula, just the results.
fongy2
11/10/2009-12:23pm at 12:23 pm (UTC -4)
So its kinda like a Free-Masons
type thing?
Just kiddin’…….
Calm down Masons.
Jeez…
I don’t wanna end up like Pope John Paul the 1st.
No…
I keed,
I keed!
trs86
11/10/2009-1:12pm at 1:12 pm (UTC -4)
It really does not account for injury and overvalues HR and saves for their respective parts. Thus based on relievers Wagner still has better stats than most even if only pitching for a year.
trs86
11/10/2009-1:17pm at 1:17 pm (UTC -4)
Not really, here is my point. You said the following:
“That’s 15 of the 30 major league teams that had at least 2 starting pitchers ranked higher than the Mets second best starting pitcher. 13 of those 15 teams had winning records, the Astros won 74 games and the Diamondbacks, like the Mets, won 70. 6 of those 15 teams were among the 8 teams that reached the post season. 1 of them won the World Series.”
Basically as a qualification of if you have more pitchers ranked higher than 66th then you will see results in wins. So in turn if we had 3 players ranked ranked ahead of Pelfrey we would be in good shape right?
A better question would be too look to see how many teams had multiple pitchers inside the top 30 basically meaning they had multiple aces or guys who would be aces on other teams.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-1:28pm at 1:28 pm (UTC -4)
An assumption of mine which in hindsight I regret not stating plainly in the piece is that I believe Santana will return to not just the top 30, but high up in the top 30.
My preference is to add someone as a second pitcher who is high up in the second 30.
We already have Pelfrey who has in a small sample demonstrated an ability to be high up in the third 30.
Thus bonafide 1st, 2nd and 3rd starting pitchers.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-2:14pm at 2:14 pm (UTC -4)
I don’t have the time to do the work to make this determination over multiple years, but based strictly on 2009, these teams had more than one pitcher in the top 30:
Cardinals (Wainwright 11, Carpenter 13, Pineiro 16)
Marlins (Nolasco 14, Johnson 19)
I somehow overlooked them in my initial research so make it 14 of 16 teams with winning records
Red Sox (Lester 8, Beckett 15)
Angels (Lackey 22, Weaver 23)
Braves (Vazquez 7, Jurrjens 24)
Rockies (Jimenez 12, Marquis 26, Hammel 28, De La Rosa 30)
and if I’m allowed to count Cliff Lee for the Phillies (but I understand that may not be fair as some of his work was done for the Indians)
Phillies (Lee 6, Hamels 27)
So while we may like to compare the relative undewhelming performances of Hamels and Pelfrey, Hamels at 27 far outperformed Pelfrey at 66 in the context of WAR).
All 7 teams with at least “two aces” had winning records and 5 of the 7 made the playoffs.
Mr North Jersey
11/10/2009-12:10pm at 12:10 pm (UTC -4)
How about a 1 – 2 punch of
Cliff Lee & Roy Halladay
followed by J.A. Happ or Cole Hamels
That is the rumor being reported over at Phillies Phandom
http://www.nleastchatter.com/philliesphandom/2009/11/10/report-phillies-are-pursuing-halladay/
I’d rather not think about that ever becoming a reality.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-12:15pm at 12:15 pm (UTC -4)
Well I don’t want to think about it either, but if we as Met fans are going to be honest with ourselves I think by many measures the Phils have more to offer Toronto than we do. It’s just a matter of “do they want to?” I have read a few articles that seem to suggest Ruben Amaro grasps the concept of “window of opportunity” very well and is strongly considering seizing that opportunity while his core players are young enough and cheap enough.
I can certainly envision what for me is a nightmare scenario in which the Phils both add Halladay and a viable 3B such as Adrian Beltre, and a set up man with closer experience (Putz?) who could step in if Lidge falters. It would cost a lot but they’re at the pinnacle of their money making and could strike while the iron is hot.
DNDJohan aka kistics
11/10/2009-12:16pm at 12:16 pm (UTC -4)
Phillies weren’t looking to trade away what Jay wanted last summer. This winter will be no different.
Mr North Jersey
11/10/2009-12:23pm at 12:23 pm (UTC -4)
Nothing is ever etched in stone DND. Time has a way of changing what one considers valuable or a priority.
fongy2
11/10/2009-12:25pm at 12:25 pm (UTC -4)
Also losing the series in 6 gms
And thus preventing a
repeat.
DNDJohan aka kistics
11/10/2009-12:35pm at 12:35 pm (UTC -4)
That is true. But consider Phillie’s budget and Halladay’s contract, IMO it is highly unlikely. I’d be very surprised if Doc goes to Phillies, but you are right, nothing is ever etched in stone.
trs86
11/10/2009-1:18pm at 1:18 pm (UTC -4)
Agreed all that basically means in my opinion is for one year they have those 2 and after that they have 1 or none.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-12:29pm at 12:29 pm (UTC -4)
Regarding free agent Type A & B rankings, if you click on the link below it will take you to a page that has 3 links on it, and through reading all 3 of those links we may develop a better understanding of how the rankings are roughly calculated.
It’s a lot of reading, but if you’re curious it’s a must read.
http://tigers-thoughts.blogspot.com/2008/08/projected-elias-rankings.html
fongy2
11/10/2009-12:34pm at 12:34 pm (UTC -4)
Thanks I’ve read much of this before but it still seems pretty arbitrary to me.
Again, Wags A & Gado B ?????
DNDJohan aka kistics
11/10/2009-12:37pm at 12:37 pm (UTC -4)
I agree. Though I didn’t read the article, Wagner type A doesn’t make sense at all.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-12:42pm at 12:42 pm (UTC -4)
I have only skimmed so far but my first guess is it’s very relative to the other players around them and their accumulation of stats over 2 years.
Delgado has a line of .275/.358/.519 with 42 total HR and 138 total RBI during that time.
Wagner has an ERA of 2.15, a WHIP of 0.926 and 27 saves with only 2 losses during that time.
I am not even sure that all of those stats are used in the process but when looking at the numbers I can roughly understand how they wind up where they do.
I was reading just the other day, I’ll try and find it again, someone’s complaint that Elias needs to adjust their formula for relievers. IIRC the article went on to suggest that the formula is subject to collective bargaining so who knows how slowly it might change.
wannybackstra
11/10/2009-1:24pm at 1:24 pm (UTC -4)
Type A free agents are the top 20% at a given position in his league based on the formula analyzed for a two year period. Type Bs rank from 20%-40%.
That means his numbers would have to be in the top 40% of NLers for the two year period. When you consider that his competition includes Nick Johnson, Chad Tracy, I don’t even know who in Pittsburgh, Todd Helton (no power numbers) and Travis Ishikawa (plus whatever adjustment is made foe DL time) it is not hard to see how Delgado is a B.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-12:45pm at 12:45 pm (UTC -4)
For relievers Bajek’s guess at the formula is this:
RP: Total Games (Games Relieved +2*Games Started), IP**, Wins+Saves, IP/H, K/BB, ERA
*Defensive statistics are only accumulated at the player’s designated position.
**Innings Pitched are given just 75% of the weight of the other relief categories.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-12:48pm at 12:48 pm (UTC -4)
He adds that “their is an adjustment in counting stats made for time spent on the disabled list” and later comes up with a theory as to how that works but I’m not even going to try to communicate how it works, you’ll have to read the links for that.
fongy2
11/10/2009-12:53pm at 12:53 pm (UTC -4)
Have we signed Matt Holliday yet?
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-12:55pm at 12:55 pm (UTC -4)
My exclusive source for information like that is TRDMB so I’m going to have to say no, not yet.
Excellent segue though.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-12:56pm at 12:56 pm (UTC -4)
The radio station I have on is playing “Girl, You’ll Be A Woman Soon.”
That would be a hilarious song for a closer to come out to.
fongy2
11/10/2009-1:06pm at 1:06 pm (UTC -4)
Everytime I hear that now
I think Pulp Fiction.
Strange,…the powers of music.
Kingman 26
11/10/2009-2:09pm at 2:09 pm (UTC -4)
Yep, that Urge Overkill version of that song is great….
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-1:13pm at 1:13 pm (UTC -4)
Above Fongy mentions about stepping away from Wolf now that he’s a Type A.
I’m torn on that. I certainly think Wolf can help. Not him alone, but him as a secondary SP pick up.
I guess I’m not concerned with the Type A thing because the Mets pick is protected this year (not that they’ll use it wisely anyway).
I’m more concerned with the idea that Wolf is much more likely to sign a longer, higher annual salary contract than he did last year.
In the same way TRS above suggests it’s bad for the Mets to sign Lackey THIS YEAR due to surrounding factors, I submit it’s bad for the Mets to sign Wolf this year.
wannybackstra
11/10/2009-1:15pm at 1:15 pm (UTC -4)
From Baseball Prospectus, here’s a quick snippet from its analysis of the Elias rankings system:
Now, let’s take a look at the 2007 Rankings for the AL and NL, courtesy of USA Today. The most spit-take-inducing ranking is in the AL Infielders group, which produce results as glaring and obvious as a slap across Scott Boras’s face:
Rk Player Grade AVG OBP SLG RBI HR Fielding Pct.
1 Michael Young 89.286 .314 .360 .439 197 23 .9768
2 Miguel Tejada 87.500 .315 .370 .473 181 42 .9716
3 Robinson Cano 85.714 .322 .358 .504 175 34 .9843
4 Derek Jeter 85.119 .333 .402 .468 170 26 .9729
5 Mike Lowell 84.857 .305 .359 .488 200 41 .9752
6 Alex Rodriguez 84.000 .302 .407 .584 277 89 .9508
The man who reportedly won’t come to the bargaining table for less than $350 million is nestled snugly behind fellow free agent third baseman Mike Lowell in the rankings. Since both men are comfortably Type A free agents, it doesn’t make much real-world difference, but it must be irksome for a man who’s being marketed as a historic talent, and who’s coming off a great year, to see that he doesn’t even crack the top five infielders here.
While the instinct is to use this result to decry the rankings as a farce, this result tells us quite a bit about the CBA’s secret formula. Lowell’s presence ahead of Rodriguez indicates that there is no VORP-style positional adjustment being applied, nor are the numbers adjusted for ballpark. The rankings also suggest that the two-year data isn’t weighted in favor of the most recent year, and that a qualitative judgment is being made about defense—because that’s the most significant place where Rodriguez’s performance has lagged over the last two years. Even though most advanced metrics agree that Rodriguez hasn’t been an exemplary defender at third, the most likely culprit in the CBA formula is its probable use of simple fielding percentage.
wannybackstra
11/10/2009-1:16pm at 1:16 pm (UTC -4)
One take away is that fielding pctg., regardless of position, is very important. That Michael Young was ranked 5 points better than A-Rod during this time period is absurd.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-1:20pm at 1:20 pm (UTC -4)
That’s stunning, thank you. And confirms sadly that it is indeed tied up in collective bargaining.
wannybackstra
11/10/2009-1:28pm at 1:28 pm (UTC -4)
Earlier in the article (which is too involved for me too really sink my teeth in to right now) it is mentioned that Elias is not to blame; it is following a formula it was provided by the league AND the MLBPA.
Imagine that. The league hires expert statisticians and decides that the league is more capable of formulating the analysis.
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=6911
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-1:41pm at 1:41 pm (UTC -4)
My God that’s even more stunning. You’re knocking me out of my chair today Wanny.
It’s like me hiring a contractor to build a deck and telling him I don’t want him to use fasteners of any kind. Well not really but I’m at the bottom of my well of analogies today.
wannybackstra
11/10/2009-1:45pm at 1:45 pm (UTC -4)
You could have gotten away with it. I don’t even know what a fastener is (other than something that fastens other things).
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-1:50pm at 1:50 pm (UTC -4)
You are 100% correct in your understanding of fasteners.
stickguy
11/10/2009-1:25pm at 1:25 pm (UTC -4)
I rambled this post at the “other” site (sorry, i still check, usually just to get some laughs). Can someone please slap me upside the head on this? Or does it make any sense at all? And heck, would the Cubs do it even up?
Castillo was a bit of a paper tiger (1 trick pony?) last year. He still had a respectable OBP, but zippo power, and his range (and overall D) is below average now. Plus, he gives up way too many outs, especially in the 2 hole. And as any regular knows, most importantly, he is my LFM.
IMO, there is no way he could improve next year, and it is more likely he declines rather than stays the same. So, if they can unload him for a usable piece, do it. Please!
But, pass on Hudson. he wil likely be just as bad as Castillo. Go after Felipe Lopez for the same money.
What really scares me though, is I am starting to try and justify a Bradley for Castillo swap, with the Mets keeping Bradley, if the Cubs even out the money.
Then, you have bradley for Castillo money (2/12), as part of a rotation in the corner OF (plus DH for the AL games). Carter, bradley, pagan and Frenchy manning LF and RF, all for ~10mill.
Assuming Lopez gets ~5mill (ballparking here), then bradley + lopez = 11mill.
This leaves ~20 mill for a SP, BU C and the pen (lackey/olivo/?).
Now, if it just wasn’t Bradley, but for 2 years (and heck, you could always cut him!)
wannybackstra
11/10/2009-1:31pm at 1:31 pm (UTC -4)
it’s not crazy. but there’s just as good a chance that Castillo outproduces Bradley than vice versa. Or that they can get an inexpensive outfielder via trade who produces Bradley.
I suppose this could be an option as a plan G or H.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-1:38pm at 1:38 pm (UTC -4)
As much as I don’t consider shedding Castillo to be a high priority, I am not closed minded to the possibility, provided it improves the club (or is at least a step in such).
In your plan it is certainly a possible step. I don’t like the idea of Bradley specifically. I realize that Castillo is in the “bad contract” category and that a bad contract has to come back in any likely transaction, and that there is always some unpalatable aspect to any such transaction.
But I fear the loose cannon aspect of Bradley too much to endorse his coming here to stay. If as in yesterday’s hot rumor it’s part of a 3-way in which Bradley quickly moves along, I’m much more in favor.
As you said, “if it just wasn’t Bradley.”
As 2010 unfolds and the true essence of the team is revealed, Castillo strikes me as more easily traded/released with salary eaten than Bradley, and less likely to take any hostages on the way out.
stickguy
11/10/2009-1:59pm at 1:59 pm (UTC -4)
Hopefully I am not contradicting myself, but right now, Castillo is really not a “bad contract” as much as (imo) a “bad player”, or at least, wrong for the Mets.
2 years is not overly long, and while he may be a couple million overpaid, that is easily lost in the wash 9veritable pocket change!)
Wells, Soriano, Helton, now those are bad contracts!
Honestly, I don’t really know what the heck to expect out of Bradley, so what we really need is someone les unhinged to trade for instead!
I just really liked the idea of getting another legit OF bat, and also upgrading at 2B.
Hmm. Maybe we really need a guy getting paid like 2/36 (ordonez?) Trade Luis and Ollie for that, and be well on the road to perdition!
But, this is not a bad line up (although LF D could get rocky):
Reyes
Lopez
Bradley
Beltran
Wright
Frenchy
Murphy
Olivo
Feel free to flip them around a little, but at least you have some real hitters down in the 7/8 hole (with pop), and I actually expect Murphy to up the HRs (targeting 20 in FT duty) and to get his OBP back up to 340/350ish.
Now, if they could trade Castillo for a pitcher (pen maybe), you could easily see
reyes
lopez
wright
beltran
dye
frenchy
murphy
olivo
Again, lousy LF D, but a line up that can score some runs. Also a lot of speed 1-4, and fantastic (.400+) OBP 2-3. Think Bletran and Dye might pick up a few RBIs with that lineup? Plus the bottom order guys have enough power (2B and HR) to clean up the scraps.
Kingman 26
11/10/2009-2:14pm at 2:14 pm (UTC -4)
Why has Felipe Lopez been on 6 teams in 4 years?
I honestly am asking; what is the deal with him?
Nice stats last year though….
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-2:25pm at 2:25 pm (UTC -4)
I can’t claim to know why but he is wildly inconsistent from year to year, even within specific years but from team to team.
What causes the fluctuation in his performance I could only make wild guesses about.
Why did he bat .234 for the Nats then .385 for the Cards in ’08 for example?
I was going to guess it had to do with the team’s W-L record, but he has had good years on losing teams to so it can’t just be that.
For whatever reason, it seems that sometimes he is much more focused than other times.
CaseStreet
11/10/2009-2:37pm at 2:37 pm (UTC -4)
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/felipe-lopezs-outstanding-season
From what I gather, Lopez was lucky last year.
trs86
11/10/2009-2:59pm at 2:59 pm (UTC -4)
I am not a very big fan of stats that try to prove luck.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-1:52pm at 1:52 pm (UTC -4)
Guys I apologize if this is old news, but I just can’t recall seeing it spelled out quite so plainly before.
According to Mack’s Mets, Adam Rubin interviewed a “Mets insider” who intimated this:
“Adding a power bat in left field is a priority for the Mets this offseason, as they plan to keep Daniel Murphy as the primary first baseman in 2010.”
I may have been asleep for 100 years but I did not think any Met insider had suggested that Murphy is THE guy at 1B for 2010.
stickguy
11/10/2009-2:00pm at 2:00 pm (UTC -4)
I think Rubin talks to himself over his corn flakes. He is his own insider (deep throat? Is that possible?)
DNDJohan aka kistics
11/10/2009-2:17pm at 2:17 pm (UTC -4)
He also said that “big ticket” FAs are too expensive for the Mets to pursue according to a “Mets insider”. Mets will most likely pursue 2nd-tier OF FAs like Mike Cameron.
But on the other hand, Omar has said that Mets are going to be very aggressive going after FAs this winter.
So…… who’s right?? Is Omar saying that Mets will be going aggressive on 2nd-tier guys?
stickguy
11/10/2009-2:11pm at 2:11 pm (UTC -4)
I am on a roll here with this Bradley stuff. Hopefully tomorrow I will get stuck on some other player/rumor that has no chance of happening. So, feel free to rip to shreeds, insult my sanity, or (even better) submit tweaks or alternatives.
Say my mythical bradleye + 2mill/year deal for Castillo deal actually happened (humo me. there are no “real” moves to discuss). That only adds 2mill to the payroll. If lopez sings for 5, you are +7, but LF and 2B are covered.
Add olivo (lets be generous and say 3 for him or barajas). We are +10, leaving ~20-22 to spend.
You can then get say lackey (16) penny (5?) and 1 mill a pen arm.
And of course, these #s shift around a bit as guys are +/- a million, or hopefully, Omar can squeeze an extra 5 for the last moves! Hey, if they do pony up 5 mill more, add gonzolez or lyons say for the pen arm.
Is this team OK? I thin kit fits the budget, and has no Castillo, so 2 for 2 there!
reyes/lopez/bradley/beltran/wright/francouer/murphy/olivo
Santana/lackey/penny/pelfrey/maine/ollie/neise (likely Maine to pen)
K Rod/new set up guy/parnell/stokes/feliciano/Neive/Maine
DNDJohan aka kistics
11/10/2009-2:22pm at 2:22 pm (UTC -4)
I just don’t think bringing in a headcase like Bradley is a good idea. Plus, from what I’ve gathered, Mets are an organization that cares about their image a lot more than other teams. I just don’t see Wilpons agreeing to the idea in bringing in Bradley and take more money.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-2:33pm at 2:33 pm (UTC -4)
Agreed. It’s not that they don’t bring in guys with troubles, it’s that they don’t bring in guys whose troubles are so well known and well documented.
Bradley as a Met under the Wilpons seems virtually impossible.
I certainly don’t want to insult your sanity Stick you are one of the greatest (take that word however you want to define it) contributors to this blog. You always make me think and that’s a wonderful thing. I just don’t see a Bradley/Met mix and therefore I have trouble even going to the next level of trying to construct permutations of the roster that involve him. But I enjoy reading them.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-2:19pm at 2:19 pm (UTC -4)
Guys all of this is stuck in the middle of the comments above but I thought it deserved to be pulled out of there.
TRS challenged me that a better way to look at it than I did in my initial post would be to look instead at “what teams had ‘two aces’” so I did and here are the results:
Cardinals (Wainwright 11, Carpenter 13, Pineiro 16)
Marlins (Nolasco 14, Johnson 19)
I somehow overlooked them in my initial research so make it 14 of 16 teams with winning records
Red Sox (Lester 8, Beckett 15)
Angels (Lackey 22, Weaver 23)
Braves (Vazquez 7, Jurrjens 24)
Rockies (Jimenez 12, Marquis 26, Hammel 28, De La Rosa 30)
and if I’m allowed to count Cliff Lee for the Phillies (but I understand that may not be fair as some of his work was done for the Indians)
Phillies (Lee 6, Hamels 27)
So while we may like to compare the relative undewhelming performances of Hamels and Pelfrey, Hamels at 27 far outperformed Pelfrey at 66 in the context of WAR).
All 7 teams with at least “two aces†had winning records and 5 of the 7 made the playoffs.
trs86
11/10/2009-2:58pm at 2:58 pm (UTC -4)
Thanks Grave, to me this supports your argument much better than to use just pitchers ahead of Pelfrey. It would not be that hard for the Mets to field a rotation with 4 pitchers better than what Pelfrey perfomed last year but that would not really mean anything in some cases.
However, what you just provided shows that you need 2 VERY good pitchers in most cases to be successful.
Great job Grave and way to respond back civily and with even more information. That’s much better than attacks. Nice to be here.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-3:06pm at 3:06 pm (UTC -4)
My pleasure.
I think this sheds light on two things:
1 – I really do need someone to feed me topics or at least steer me in a direction, if left to my own devices I could spend hours or even days proving nothing in particular and making points that are terribly obvious;
2 – FWIW I may disagree with you on some things and argue them rather vehemently, but at the end of the day I still consider this your blog and by extension you my boss so unless/until I truly want to get fired I’ll probably always lean toward civility in discussion with you. Everybody else, screw ‘em, they’re idiots!
(that last sentence is a joke people, I love you all!)
trs86
11/10/2009-11:18pm at 11:18 pm (UTC -4)
On the comment section Grave please treat me as you would anyone else which is from what I can tell always civil. And considering you don’t get paid, lol (or me) I don’t think anyone is a boss.
CaseStreet
11/10/2009-3:03pm at 3:03 pm (UTC -4)
yup, I’m still trying to figure out how the Cards lost. They had all the pieces. Top pitching and good hitting.
stickguy
11/10/2009-3:31pm at 3:31 pm (UTC -4)
and yet, they managed to win in 2006 when they had neither.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-3:37pm at 3:37 pm (UTC -4)
At the end of the day, you just have to get into the post season. Then it’s who gets hot (or doesn’t go cold) in a small sample of 11 to 19 games. But I’d rather take my chances with two aces and good hitting than without.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-3:40pm at 3:40 pm (UTC -4)
Plus, in 2006 Chris Carpenter, Albert Pujols and Scott Rolen were not exactly chopped liver.
Using team WAR the 2006 Cardinals ranked 10th in the majors, 5th in the NL in hitting, but a paltry 28th in the majors and 15th in the NL in pitching.
So you can win 83 games and find yourself world champion with crappy overall pitching, but you still need an ace and it’s not a formula I’d purposely put in place unless maybe I had Tony LaRussa and Dave Duncan on staff.
trs86
11/10/2009-11:18pm at 11:18 pm (UTC -4)
Great point.
DNDJohan aka kistics
11/10/2009-3:33pm at 3:33 pm (UTC -4)
Maybe they were ‘gritty’ enough….
metsfan4decades
11/10/2009-4:11pm at 4:11 pm (UTC -4)
LOL – if that were true, then the Phills would have won the series this year b/c all we heard these past three years, on what the Phils have over the Mets – is ‘heart’, ‘grit’, ‘stones’, etc. etc.
In reality though, when all was said and done this year, Yankees just had the better pitching to get it done. You might be able to compare the 1-3 in each rotation and make a case for either team, but the better BP, with Mo, obviously went to the Yanks.
Omar, are you listening? Pitching, pitching, pitching…
wannybackstra
11/10/2009-4:37pm at 4:37 pm (UTC -4)
Following on yesterday’s discussion of trading Castill to upgrade defense at 2B, free agent Placido Polanco wins the AL Gold Glove at 2B.
CaseStreet
11/10/2009-5:03pm at 5:03 pm (UTC -4)
yeah, IDK much about his hitting, except that he’s been a very consistent high avg hitter. His defense would be great for a few years.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-5:10pm at 5:10 pm (UTC -4)
Weird thing about his defense, I was checking his annual UZR ratings and it seems that in odd years, his rating is much higher.
I also know this is an incredibly small sample, but in the Tigers last month while they were crashing and burning around him, he hit .338 with a .400 OBP.
He had 7 sac bunts last year so he could handle that if asked. His interleague play line is an eye opening .298/.355/.526.
wannybackstra
11/10/2009-6:44pm at 6:44 pm (UTC -4)
His +7.7 and +3.6 in his last two even years would be mroe than welcome compared to Castillo’s league worst (among regulars) -12+ last season.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-5:03pm at 5:03 pm (UTC -4)
Congratulations Placido!
I have never checked before so I don’t know if this is common or rare, but Polanco’s UZR and UZR/150 ratings were the best in the American League, so the GG seems to have gone to the right guy.
I know he just turned 34 a couple weeks ago, but I would welcome Polanco on a short deal as a Met provided Castillo could be sent packing. From afar watching him, he plays the game “the right way.”
wannybackstra
11/10/2009-6:48pm at 6:48 pm (UTC -4)
Interesting about Felipe Lopez, despite his healthy +7.6 UZR/150 at 2B this season I think his 17 errors is still way too many for 140 games at 2B.
And I concur about Polanco playing the game the right way. He may be Jose Valentin type influence on Jose Reyes and perhaps the 2011 2B crop of Reese Havens and Ruben Tejada (Polanco would also make an outstanding bench player in 2011 or semi-regular given his also stellar defensive ability at 3B and SS, albeit those in smaller samples). Pouting Castillo is not exaclty the type of guy who brings a lot of energy to the field.
whataputz
11/10/2009-6:53pm at 6:53 pm (UTC -4)
I disagree….I find Castillo’s pouting quite motivating.
whataputz
11/10/2009-6:54pm at 6:54 pm (UTC -4)
still, I still find it hard to believe a team i going to take him off our hands and not make us eat alot of the money. I know he had a good season, but still, you could sign Hudson for alot cheaper.
wannybackstra
11/10/2009-7:04pm at 7:04 pm (UTC -4)
Don’t disagree at all.
Just speculating on a way for the team to get better.
CaseStreet
11/10/2009-8:46pm at 8:46 pm (UTC -4)
it’d have to be a team trying to move a bad contract and in need of a 2B, hello Cubs.
Canadians always gotta mess things up
metsfan4decades
11/10/2009-9:03pm at 9:03 pm (UTC -4)
Interesting….per Ken Davidoff:
The Mets are meeting tonight with Boras concerning Matt Holliday and, in surely a shorter conversation, Alex Cora.
Also:
Oliver Perez is in Arizona, at the Athletes Performance Institute, and he’ll receive visitors this winter in Mets pitching coach Dan Warthen and trainer Ray Ramirez. Minaya, not surprisingly, was extremely forgiving of Perez’s gad-awful 2009 season. Said Minaya: “Pitchers will have bad years. Things happen.”
On a very small scale, I’m glad to see Perez is looking back over his career and at least trying to improve. That Athletes Performance Institute hasn’t been around but about 8 years or so. The fact that Ollie is attempting to get a jump start on getting healthy, being in shape, gives us some hope for his 2010 season. A healthy Perez should be able to win at least 12 games – right? I wonder if Boras strongly suggested this move for him….
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-9:11pm at 9:11 pm (UTC -4)
I like Alex Cora, but I hope the conversation is short because it’s “just letting you know we’re going in another direction” type conversation.
On one hand I doubt the Mets acquire Matt Holliday. On the other hand, Omar’s “thing” is the big acquisition. Pedro, Beltran, Johan, KRod. So I won’t pass out if somehow it does happen.
Good news that at least Opie is engaged. We never know where his mind is, but his body will be in good form.
Don’t throw raw veggies at me, but what does anyone have to say about another Boras client, Andruw Jones? I checked and his 17 HR were split 9/8 home/road in almost exactly the same # of plate appearances (168/163) so whatever power he has left wasn’t strictly a product of Arlington. I didn’t see him play at all but according to the old sabermetrics he can still pick it, he had a UZR/150 of 25.5 in LF (in 98 innings) and 22.9 in RF (in 50 innings).
whataputz
11/10/2009-9:29pm at 9:29 pm (UTC -4)
I wanted the Mets to sign Jones last offseason, but now I feel its less usefull, as we are supposedly limited in funds, and he probably is going to get a better deal than just a spring training invite like we could have had last offseason.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-9:49pm at 9:49 pm (UTC -4)
I have no idea what sort of money Andruw might want, but the cool thing about him is the Dodgers are paying him $3.2 mil a year from now til 2014. So whatever he wants, the Dodgers are covering that much already.
If it’s true that he can still field his position in a plus way, I might be able to live with some quasi-platoon of Pagan/Andruw in LF if it allowed the Mets more money elsewhere.
metsfan4decades
11/10/2009-11:14pm at 11:14 pm (UTC -4)
You know, I never understood what happened to Jones. Is it everyone’s opinion his earlier success might have something to do with some type of ‘help’ – i.e. performing enhancing drugs and/or steroids? Strange to see someone with that early success seem to completely lose it all at barely over 30….
Kingman 26
11/10/2009-9:37pm at 9:37 pm (UTC -4)
MF4D, thanks for the news.
Now that the horrid WS is over and we are all back on the same team, I am right back with you on the Ollie optimism train. Let’s give him another chance, as we clearly have no choice!
2004 and 2007 were his good years, so maybe he is due again in 2010…
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-9:53pm at 9:53 pm (UTC -4)
I hear you. One of the thoughts that keeps me from going completely insane is that Ollie is only 28, maybe he is one of those late-blooming lefties.
I say that into the mirror 3 times every morning (1 for each contract year).
metsfan4decades
11/10/2009-11:18pm at 11:18 pm (UTC -4)
Hey Kingman – I’m all over that with Ollie. As you say, we’re stuck with him at least through 2010. We all should be rooting for him to have a successful turn around next year. Bare minimum, his trade value would then be higher.
I’d be very surprised though if Ollie morphed into someone other than the Ollie we’ve all come to know and expect. Unhittable one outing, completely awful the next. I’m just hoping his outings and ‘good Ollie’ far outweigh his outings as ‘bad Ollie’…..
wannybackstra
11/10/2009-9:49pm at 9:49 pm (UTC -4)
Talk of the Mets meeting with Boras re: Holliday tonight.
Also talk of the Mets interest in Benjie Molina. If they wind up signing this guy, I may not be able to watch next season.
The rumors are a swirling… buyer beware and believe at your own risk.
GravediggerHebner
11/10/2009-9:57pm at 9:57 pm (UTC -4)
When I read Omar’s quote about not going for 1 big power hitter but rather “sprinkling power around at multiple positions” I thought he’s gonna need a bigger sprinkler for Benjie.
I may be crazy but I’m shooting for Greg Zaun.
So let’s see. I’ve endorsed Greg Zaun for C, Andruw Jones for LF and John Lackey for SP. How much have I spent? How bad is that team?
metsfan4decades
11/10/2009-11:27pm at 11:27 pm (UTC -4)
A. Jones/Pagan in LF for 2010 wouldn’t be all bad, if we could somehow land AGonz in a trade. My wish list would be pay for Lackey, trade for AGonz.
But since I have to live in reality and not my fantasy world, I know that will never happen.
But oh, if it somehow did, we could then revisit LF again mid year or if it’s somehow working, at the end of the season. If FMart hasn’t been dealt, maybe he would be ready. Or…not having even remotely looked far enough ahead at the end of the 2010 season, see what might be available through FA then.
trs86
11/10/2009-11:42pm at 11:42 pm (UTC -4)
I am just worried about how much Agonz is going to cost. There may be a lot of teams involved? IF the Rays could get involved in AGonz they could trade Pena but who knows if they would want to or not. The move would give them a much cheaper 1B for more years.