Community Projection Results: John Maine
Here are the final community projections for John Maine.
| GS | IP | H | BB | K | HR | W | L | ERA | FIP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AA | 33 | 203 | 175 | 70 | 189 | 24 | 16 | 9 | 3.72 | 3.89 |
| Bill James | 31 | 200 | 190 | 81 | 169 | 26 | 12 | 11 | 4.05 | 4.49 |
| CHONE | -- | 177 | 166 | 68 | 153 | 21 | -- | -- | 3.97 | 4.27 |
| Marcel | -- | 163 | 146 | 63 | 141 | 21 | 12 | 9 | 3.98 | 4.40 |
| ZiPS | 30 | 178 | 168 | 66 | 148 | 23 | 13 | 10 | 4.15 | 4.33 |
I don't know if we're homers, eternal optimists, or something else entirely, but we keep pacing the projection systems by a pretty hefty margin. The AA prediction for Maine's ERA -- 3.72 -- is a full quarter of a run better than even the most optimistic computer projection. Maine will be 27 this year and could reasonably be expected to improve upon his performance from a year ago. I wouldn't be terribly concerned with the non-AA FIP projections. Maine has managed to maintain a consistently low hit rate and, by extension, an abnormally low BABIP (Batting Average on Balls in Play). FIP doesn't look at hits at all. It considers only walks, strikeouts and homeruns. Maine has seemingly showed an ability to limit his BABIP beyond what might normally be expected, and the result is that his ERA will often exceed (read: be lower than) his FIP.
The key for Maine will be maintaining his impressive strikeout rate from 2007 while lowering his walk rate. His walks were a bit high last year, and he definitely has some room for improvement there. His homerun rate is fine, especially considering his extreme flyball tendencies. If he can stay on the field and give the Mets somewhere around 200 innings next year he should be extremely valuable given his indentured servant-like salary.
0 recs |
11
comments
Comments
Maine projections
by sireric on Jan 25, 2008 2:58 PM EST 0 recs
seriously?
by anonymous on Jan 25, 2008 3:00 PM EST 0 recs
Homer
by Lunkwill Fook on Jan 25, 2008 3:03 PM EST 0 recs
I disagree...
And the argument that his arm strength decreased doesn't entirely hold up when you consider that his strikeout rate increased throughout the year, as did his K/BB.
by vonhayes on
Jan 25, 2008 4:32 PM EST
up
0 recs
BABIP
As far as "pitching fairly well early on, but a lot of it was good fortune", there is nothing to suggest, outside of BABIP, that any of his first half was good fortune.
See, here's the problem. The people who don't like Maine can't believe he is an outlier to the standard BABIP range. The people who DO believe in Maine see him as one of those outliers (similar to Sid Fernandez, both of whom had deceptive deliveries plus a hard rising fastball). I happen to be of the second.
by Lunkwill Fook on
Jan 25, 2008 4:48 PM EST
up
0 recs
Maine/BABIP
I'm not sure it's safe to assume yet that he's truly any better than the total .288 mark he posted last season. You could make the argument that he just got tired at the end of the season, but his BABIP skyrocketed at the beginning of August, right around the 130 IP mark. And while it's true he's never thrown 191 IP before, he has thrown 168, 120 of them prior to August. That's not radically different from what he did last season.
I'm not sure what to expect from Maine in the BABIP department. As for the comparison to Fernandez, I think it's an interesting idea. They do/did both feature rising fastballs. But they aren't completely compatible pitchers, either. There's the difference in pitching hand, Maine throws quite a bit harder (average FB velocity of 93 last season -- Sid rarely cracked 90), and Fernandez's secondary pitch was a slow curve compared to Maine's tight slider.
by Blackfish on
Jan 26, 2008 1:28 AM EST
up
0 recs
Oh boy
by vonhayes on
Jan 28, 2008 9:38 AM EST
up
0 recs
I agree with you on the Fernandez thing.
I'm not saying he wasn't any good in the first half and he was just lucky - that's not at all what I meant by "good fortune". What I'm saying is he pitched similarly throughout the year, and, based on BABIP (which was an extremely low and impossible to sustain .230 in the first half), he had a lot more balls fall through in the second half, which resulted in more baserunners and more difficult outings.
by vonhayes on
Jan 28, 2008 9:37 AM EST
up
0 recs
COUNTDOWN AVERTED???!!!????
2 reasons>>
Your list has become irrelevant because newer players have grown more prominent in the history of the team.
You probably came across a Metsite called Fear and Faith in Flushing which not only counted down from 100 to 1 but also did it in a timely manner so as to keep entertaining his readers, something you seem to care nothing about.
So long jerk!
by Funktual on Jan 26, 2008 3:39 PM EST 0 recs
Wow
by Eric Simon on
Jan 26, 2008 5:32 PM EST
up
0 recs
wow @ the last post
by gogomets on Jan 26, 2008 3:47 PM EST 0 recs












