Community Projection Results: John Maine

by Eric Simon on Jan 25, 2008 1:26 PM EST

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.

Tweet Comment 11 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Maine projections

When I did mine I gave him higher wins, and more innings pitched, on the premise that with better defense, and more run support those numbers should go up. Conceivably his era could go much higher than the AA projection, but end up with more wins and innings.

If you gonna act like a fool, I'm gonna treat you like a fool....Fool ~Judge Greg T. Mathis~

by sireric @ Amazin' Avenue on Jan 25, 2008 2:58 PM EST reply actions

seriously?

You don't know if we're homers? At this point I'd think the numbers demonstrate it pretty convincingly, though the magnitude of the homer effect (say, 5-10%) is smaller than I'd have anticipated, perhaps to AA's credit.

by anonymous on Jan 25, 2008 3:00 PM EST reply actions

Homer

I'm a total homer. That said, I think statisticians keep thinking the 2nd half John Maine is the REAL John Maine instead of what usually occurs to them which is: "First time ever at that level of innings, probably was tired."

by Lunkwill Fook on Jan 25, 2008 3:03 PM EST reply actions

I disagree...

While what Eric said is true (that Maine typically has a relatively low BABIP-against), his first half BABIP was an unsustainable .240-ish. He was pitching fairly well early on, but a lot of it was good fortune.

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 reply actions

BABIP

But the problem with that theory is that he's been doing that for most of two seasons now. There are outliers to the BABIP norms and it's beginning to look like Maine is one of them.

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 reply actions

Maine/BABIP

I think it's a little too early to say that Maine's definitely a guy who can be consistently below BABIP. He's only pitched 320 innings or so in his career, and only 1 1/2 seasons as a Met. His career BABIP is .261, and his mark for last season was .288, which is below average, but not terribly so.

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 Alex Nelson on Jan 26, 2008 1:28 AM EST up reply actions

Oh boy

Remember that slow curve? That was sickening, at least when it fooled hitters.

by vonhayes on Jan 28, 2008 9:38 AM EST up reply actions

I agree with you on the Fernandez thing.

As in, I do think it's possible that Maine is one of those outlier type guys. But even Sid had BABIP's of .250-.260 for the most part.

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 reply actions

COUNTDOWN AVERTED???!!!????

I used to come around once in a while and check on your countdown of 50 greatest Mets and am always disappointed to see you haven't done a single one. But now I can clearly see why.
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 reply actions