This will be the first in a series of post in which the authors at TRDM make an argument for a statement and allow you the readers to agree or disagree with the statement.
To start the series I am looking at Jerry and meaningful games in September.
The Mets would be playing meaningful games in September this year if they had fired Jerry after the terrible road trip in July.
No this is not another, Jerry is an idiot post. Nor is this a post about how Wally could have done better. This is a post on the likely increase in winning percentage due to a manager change.
As my fellow author pointed out here: Grave Notions: Mid-Season Managerial Changes
there is usually an uptick in performance following a managerial change. The median for that change was .045. Based on my not so incredible math skills that would have given the Mets 68 wins and would have placed them only 5 games back of the wild card about the same position the Rockies were in to start September. If they had won the same 8 games they have already in September they would be 5.5 games back of Atlanta in the WC race with a weekend series against them coming up. Perhaps my math is off in a couple of areas, however, my point is that the Mets starting on September 1st woudl have still been playing meaningful games. While I know it would have been incredibly unlikely for the Mets to come up big instead of fold who is to say that the manager change could not have sparked a chain of events?
By default the Mets winning more games equals the teams they played winning less. During those 32 games 19 of those have been against teams that would have been ahead of us in the division or WC race.
Also you have to factor in that if the Mets were in the race it would have increased the chances of a deadline deal in July or August may have been increased.
The final point I will make is that could that winning have been negative in the scheme of what is important to the Mets for 2011 and beyond?
18 comments
stickguy
9/16/2010-10:53am at 10:53 am (UTC -4)
well, winning should never be negative. and a smart GM should be able to look through the record to identify fundmental issues tht are going to rise up and bite them (so, assuming we got a decent GM…). ANd if the worst that happened was the mets made the playoffs and Omar kept his job, well, maybe he deserved to!
I also think that winning, and losing, can breed unto itself (snowball). Once they get in a slump, and the manager does some things to exacerbate the problem, and the FO does nothing to fix the mix, th elosing mindset can set in (people get down, give up, expect to lose).
Or, soem fresh blood gets them pumped up and they get a little bounce (the manager change), and that perks players up, makes them more positive. So they snag a couple of extra wins. FO adds a player or 2, and they gain confidence. ANd bingo, there are your 6-7 wins since mid-July, putting them right in the WC hunt.
Isn’t this confidence what everyone seems to attribute to the Phils, so back in June when they sucked, no one was worried about it (except their bandwagon fans having a panic attack?)
rustyjr
9/16/2010-11:50am at 11:50 am (UTC -4)
thankgoodness the site is back up !!
metsfan4decades
9/16/2010-12:11pm at 12:11 pm (UTC -4)
Ha! Glad to know it wasn’t just me…
stickguy
9/16/2010-11:51am at 11:51 am (UTC -4)
also, I made this comment yesterday which I think is relative to this arguement:
“and with all the things that went wrong this year (including guys way below career or recent norms), and knowing we are getting new manager (and probably FO), isn’t it at least somewhat plausible that they can win 10% more games next season? Hell, just play .500 vs the nats, marlins and Astros, and they got more than that!
well, that puts them right at about 90 wins. playoff quantity.”
While a manager change may not have helped with the guys having terrible seasons (although it could have, it if led to a fresh player and/or not playing the dead wood, and hitting them in the middle of the order!), it could have addressed the real problem.
Todya, the Mets sit at .500. THis is with a dismal record against the dregs of the league (many of them). If they had just been able to beat up on the nats, astros, etc, like good teams do, then thye again would still be in th ehunt.
TRS86
9/16/2010-11:53am at 11:53 am (UTC -4)
What a damn time for the site to go down. LOL
metsfan4decades
9/16/2010-12:02pm at 12:02 pm (UTC -4)
Well, now that you put it that way…..
It appears the FO raised the white flag way before the players did. I think that contributed to the ‘no heart, not tough’ theory some bandy about….even though I hate that argument. There were some thinly veiled comments about ‘no help’ made by some players that indicated there was dissention among the troops.
Since they raised that flag so early, it’s possible they didn’t either want to eat any of Jerry’s contract, hire an interim, think Jerry is a good guy and even though they’ll make him the scapegoat didn’t want to fire him – or some combination of all three.
I’ve said it before and I still believe it: We’re stuck with the Wilpons but Omar must go. Perception needs to be changed from the GM on down. It’s past time for a change – and not just for change sake either. We’re not getting it done, in fact I think this year we took a few steps back.
Give us something for next year and going forward – please.
GravediggerHebner
9/16/2010-12:27pm at 12:27 pm (UTC -4)
As I have always admitted and as my response to Prismo’s recent post surely demonstrated math is not my strong suit so what I’m about to put forth could be completely useless and wrong.
The road trip you submit should have resulted in Jerry’s firing ended with game 99 of this season and the Mets had a record of 50-49 after game 99. Since game 99 the Mets record has been 23-24 for a percentage of .489 in those 47 games.
Had the Mets fired Jerry and received the alleged .045 percentage uptick in their performance their winning percentage would then have bee .534 which applied to 47 games suggests a record of 25-22 or 2 games better than what they’ve actually done.
So if I’m applying the concept correctly the team would be 75-71 right now and since I can’t pick and choose which 2 games they would have won I can only extrapolate this to say they would be in 3rd place 10.5 games out of 1st place in the division and in 4th place in the wild card race 7.5 games out.
So maybe I’m not using the theory properly and I’ve just wasted my time writing it and yours reading it but it doesn’t seem like it would have accomplished much other than making Ken Davidoff receive lots of ribbing for his constant suggestion that the Mets will finish 80-82.
Mr North Jersey
9/16/2010-12:48pm at 12:48 pm (UTC -4)
I can only imagine how frustrating it must be to be known more for constantly repeating a prediction as Davidoff has done than the stories your paid to write.
TRS86
9/16/2010-12:49pm at 12:49 pm (UTC -4)
You are right the Mets would have been ahead of the Cardinals but still behind the Rockies. I gave them the extra 3 wins twice.
I think my point still stands that the managerial change could have lead to meaningful games in September starting Sept. 1st.
GravediggerHebner
9/16/2010-12:42pm at 12:42 pm (UTC -4)
Additionally even if I apply the percentage uptick to what the teams percentage was at the time of the firing the team would have been 26-21 since then or 77-70 now.
So yes “you could make a case” that this hypothetical managerial change would have resulted in the Mets having a more realistic shot at a post season berth but I could make a case that the additional 3 or 4 wins would have come at the expense of the Chicagos, Houstons, Arizonas and Pittsburghs of the world thus resulting in no extra gain against the teams above them.
TRS86
9/16/2010-12:55pm at 12:55 pm (UTC -4)
Thus the title you could make a case. LOL.
My point is that there would have been meaningful games in September having about the same record as the Rockies going into September.
CaseStreet
9/16/2010-12:53pm at 12:53 pm (UTC -4)
Had the pleasure of catching Jerry’s interview with the Fatso. Kind of felt sorry for Jerry. I mean if Bay and Beltran weren’t out for a good portion of the year, the team might have scored some runs and who knows how many games they would’ve won. Have to give Jerry credit for improving the team’s defense (I blamed him for their poor defense last year).
When asked whether the team should be blown up, Jerry said the team needs to add a top of the rotation pitcher and two good relievers, adding that the lineup should be very good with Bay and Beltran back. I kind of agree.
Mr North Jersey
9/16/2010-12:56pm at 12:56 pm (UTC -4)
thx for reminding me to listen to interview I had wanted to listen to it but forgot until now when u referenced it.
TRS86
9/16/2010-12:57pm at 12:57 pm (UTC -4)
Yeah I said yesterday that Jerry finally got something right.
GravediggerHebner
9/16/2010-1:03pm at 1:03 pm (UTC -4)
Now I get it. This “you could make a Case” stuff was just to get Case Street out of hibernation.
TRS86
9/16/2010-1:10pm at 1:10 pm (UTC -4)
You got it. Plan accomplished. Now what the hell do we do?
How about “You Could Make a Fongy….”?
wannybackstra
9/16/2010-1:13pm at 1:13 pm (UTC -4)
you could keep an ALEX in hiding?
TRS86
9/16/2010-1:28pm at 1:28 pm (UTC -4)
LOL, I saw him mid season somewhere. Offered him to come here, never did.