First Look At 2010 PECOTA Depth Charts

by Eric Simon on Jan 28, 2010 8:22 PM EST Comment 45 comments

These are extremely preliminary, and you can take projections for what they are, but this is pretty depressing.

(click to embiggen)

You can see the rest of the PECOTA standings here. The standings are available for everyone, but only subscribers can see the underlying playing time allocations.

And yes, Gary Matthews Jr. is already included in these projections. And they're still this low? Amazing.

0 recs | Comment 45 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I don’t believe it for a second. Players would have to completely bomb for the Mets to finish lower than second.

-Ceetar, the Optimistic Mets Fan

by Ceetar on Jan 28, 2010 8:28 PM EST reply actions

I think 77 wins is ridiculously low

but I don’t see how you think our most likely scenario is finishing higher than the Phillies & Braves… other than just being optimistic.

"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'

it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.

by Gina on Jan 28, 2010 8:30 PM EST up reply actions

I’ll buy the Braves, maybe, even though they decimated their bullpen and traded their best starter..

However the Mets offense has consistently been near the top of the league, even last year the OBP was up there. Add Bay, Beltran back by May (how are they calculating him?) Reyes, etc.. they’ll score a lot of runs. Johan is awesome, and Pelfrey and Perez and Maine should be at least average anyway. Granted their 5th guy is basically a rookie that has little history to predict with, which could be what the descrepency is, but still. They’re a .500 team at absolute worst.

-Ceetar, the Optimistic Mets Fan

by Ceetar on Jan 28, 2010 8:36 PM EST up reply actions

They have us as a pretty good offense as far as I can tell

but that being said Bay is essentially replacing Delgado so we’re not really gaining anything over the 2007/2008 teams in offense, and Frenchy and Santos are probably well worse offensively then their 2006-2008 counterparts, along with that Wright’s offense went wacky last season so we might be worst there but who knows.

But anyway the problem doesn’t seem to be offense it seems to be pitching defense, now I doubt Maine and Perez will be average, I don’t think Maine will be healthy long enough to be average, but regardless, pretty much every metric says our defense is going to be somewhere between meh and God awful.

"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'

it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.

by Gina on Jan 28, 2010 8:39 PM EST up reply actions

Also Santana being awesome isn't a guarentee

Considering he’s coming off an injury, on the wrong side of the aging curve and was so-so last year. He could be awesome, or he could just be really good.

"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'

it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.

by Gina on Jan 28, 2010 8:42 PM EST up reply actions

He was anything but so-so

I would say he was dominant until June, and even after that he was still our best pitcher, even it that isn’t saying much. Santana is still a top ten pitcher in the Majors.

"F***ing shocker." -Billy Wagner

by nymgb44 on Jan 28, 2010 9:14 PM EST up reply actions

Being our best pitcher isn't anything to brag about

but I meant he was so-so for Santana, and I’d disagree that he’s definitely a top ten pitcher. He’s in the argument but he’s not a lock anymore and he’s coming off an injury.

"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'

it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.

by Gina on Jan 28, 2010 9:24 PM EST up reply actions

I still think his "so-so" performance was because of injury

He was flat out dominant, almost as good as Greinke, in his first 10 starts and then he fell off a cliff. He couldn’t strike anyone out. His K/9 went from something like 11 in his first 10 starts to around 5 or 6 immediately after that. I think Johan, if he’s completely healthy, could easily be worth 5 to 6 wins next year.

"Three home teams advance, and the fuckin' Jets" - Rex Ryan

by Evan_S on Jan 28, 2010 11:07 PM EST up reply actions

Yes and no

I think the Mets will be competitive — they should certainly be better than the Nationals — but I think they could very easily finish behind the Braves (as well as the Phillies).

by Eric Simon on Jan 28, 2010 8:30 PM EST up reply actions

Also, if these were over/unders..

Mets Over, Nats Under, Angels over, Giants Over, Rays under.

-Ceetar, the Optimistic Mets Fan

by Ceetar on Jan 28, 2010 8:30 PM EST reply actions

I think the Nats will be much, much better than last year

FWIW

by deadspy3 on Jan 29, 2010 4:01 AM EST up reply actions

Also since it seems like they're projecting our defense

to be REALLY bad, does anyone know anything about how the defensive metrics they use? I’ve always heard they were really good at projecting team defense, but meh at projecting individual players.

"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'

it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.

by Gina on Jan 28, 2010 8:32 PM EST reply actions

they still use FRAA

which thinks Franklin Gutierrez is -10

by Sam Page on Jan 28, 2010 8:48 PM EST up reply actions

Lol yeah last time I had a BP subscription

which was a little less than a year ago, they had Dunn rated as a + fielder. So I imagine if our defensive ratings are pulling the projection down they should be taken with a grain of salt.

"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'

it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.

by Gina on Jan 28, 2010 9:02 PM EST up reply actions

We can't possibly be worse than the Nationals.

…can we?

by wrightttxgirlllx3 on Jan 28, 2010 8:38 PM EST reply actions

dare to dream

by Sam Page on Jan 28, 2010 8:48 PM EST up reply actions

made me chuckle

by ol Pete on Jan 29, 2010 12:28 AM EST up reply actions

I don't think so

I can’t see the Mets giving up 100 more runs than the Nationals. Strasberg and Marquis upgrade their rotation, but not that much.

by englishgrey on Jan 28, 2010 8:55 PM EST via mobile up reply actions

Yeah

The runs allowed indicate that the Nationals’ pitching + defense will be equivalent to the Braves’ pitching + defense.

The Nationals gave up 874 runs last year. A 100 run improvement? I just don’t see it.

by mnbv on Jan 28, 2010 10:19 PM EST up reply actions

Probably not, but...

I actually kind of like every move the Nats made this offseason, with the possible exception of Marquis, although some of this is because I’m unreasonably bullish on Chris Duncan. That said, a 100-run improvement — even with a better bullpen — seems like a stretch for them, as does a .500 finish. I don’t know that they’re better than the Mets last year, but it’s certainly easier to see an organizational plan at work in their decision making than it is in our guys’.

by David Roth on Jan 28, 2010 11:27 PM EST up reply actions

Plus they actually have a pitcher who might be worth more than 2 wins for once

They had some real dreck in their rotation last year, whatever Strasburg gives them is pretty much a straight upgrade, he’s replacing replacement-level production.

"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet

What a fool I was to defy him"

-HST

by Mark Himmelstein on Jan 29, 2010 2:44 AM EST up reply actions

Well...

for the past four years they projected us to win the division and look how that turned out…so…

Also worth nothing, the PECOTA projections were the least accurate of all popular projections last season, including the ESPN talking heads random rankings.

by Sam Page on Jan 28, 2010 8:49 PM EST reply actions

i think the reason the wins are so low is

the tradeoff of Stokes and Matthews. Stokes probably added a little, but Matthews himself could probably knock the team down 5-10 wins.

yuck…that’s half sarcasm, but scarily half truth.

by mistermet on Jan 28, 2010 8:56 PM EST reply actions

Do these rankings take into account Omar invevitably dealing the farm for Bronson Arroyo?

by True Blue4 on Jan 28, 2010 9:05 PM EST reply actions

these predictions are crap

they have oakland winning the AL west and the nationals with a better record than the mets, rockies, and brewers

A "Zeile" for avoiding outs

by metsguy234 on Jan 28, 2010 9:44 PM EST reply actions

The PECOTA projects seem about right to me

Anyone who expects more than 80 wins out of this team is deluding themselves. Lets see Reyes, Castillo, Wright, Beltran, Bay afterwards are 4 almost automatic outs. Johan, maybe Pelfrey then who else after that…that isnt a question mark.

by aparkermarshall on Jan 28, 2010 10:10 PM EST reply actions

That's a wee pessimistic, isn't it?

by Syler on Jan 28, 2010 10:56 PM EST up reply actions

The Nats are gonna be 100 runs better than us in runs allowed?

Just don’t see it. And about 80 wins seems right to me, I think 77 is on the low end.

by Jsz on Jan 28, 2010 10:36 PM EST reply actions

I don't get the Nationals pitching.

Zimmerman, Lannan, Marquis, and how ever much Strasburg plays. That’s decent but I don’t buy that they’re as good as the Braves. Plus Adam Dunn gives up and extra 20 runs wherever he plays.

by dtro on Jan 28, 2010 10:49 PM EST reply actions

A few things that don't make sense in the PECOTAs...

1. Albert Pujols’ defense is projected at 21 runs above an average 1B using FRAA. Mex’s best season using FRAA? 10. That strikes me as strange.
2. Does their WARP even adjust for position? Joe Mauer shows up as nearly equal in WARP (5.3, 5.2) to Berkman, despite having a 6 point EqA advantage and 9 more runs in VORP (45-36). Berkman is +9 1B, Mauer +4 C. Still, that should be a bigger difference.
3. Nobody really knows how BP’s stats are calculated, either.

by The nye mets are my favorite team on Jan 28, 2010 10:59 PM EST reply actions

Clarifying a bit...

That last point is taken to mean that BP doesn’t disclose their methods entirely, and thus it is a lot harder to do criticism of the black box.

77 wins might be a bit low, but Chone isn’t optimistic either.

by The nye mets are my favorite team on Jan 28, 2010 11:03 PM EST via mobile up reply actions

what does Chone have us projected at?

"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'

it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.

by Gina on Jan 28, 2010 11:05 PM EST up reply actions

IIRC, low 80s.

by The nye mets are my favorite team on Jan 29, 2010 1:54 AM EST via mobile up reply actions

Us, the Nats, and the Marlins all need to flip-flop.

There’s no way in hell the Nats are winning 82 games. Their record last season was 59 and 103. They’ve upgraded themselves decently, but in order to win 82 games, they need to have upgraded almost twenty-five games worth. I certainly don’t think they have. Their rotation is a hell of a lot more of a question mark than even ours is- Marquis is their “ace”, then they’ve got Lannan, Olsen, Zimmerman and Mock. Their closer is (most likely) Matt Capps, who is probably a hell of a lot more shaky than our K-Rod. They have a (seeming) decent line-up, but their pitching seems to be their undoing.

"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.

by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Jan 28, 2010 11:40 PM EST reply actions

They don't really need to upgrade 25 games worth

They were 5 worse then their pythagorean, so with even luck, it’s a 20 game improvement. Still large, but I’d expect (I’ll try to look into it more later) that many of their players performed worse than their talent level, which for a team so far below .500, could be another 5-10 wins – although I’ll admit that’s completely random speculation. I still think it’s a bit of an absurd projection, but I don’t think it’s completely impossible either.

by yellomellojello on Jan 29, 2010 9:22 AM EST up reply actions

The Nationals will definitley be a much improved team in 2010, that I believe, yes.

I don’t believe that they have the capability to leapfrog the Mets and the Marlins, nor do I think they have what it takes to win THAT many games, 82. I’d expect them to win anywhere from 65-75.

"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.

by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Jan 29, 2010 5:19 PM EST up reply actions

It is a bit frustrating seeing the winner of the NL East at 88 wins

Since we probably could have upgraded ourselves to get somewhere close to that. We could have dumped Castillo in the GMJ trade, signed Felipe Lopez, signed Sheets and given ourselves a shot at the playoffs.

by Brittannia on Jan 29, 2010 12:03 AM EST reply actions

all well and good

but remember the last two years when we were supposed to be awesome? well PECOTA blew that, so maybe they’ll blow this.

or maybe we’ll just straight up blow. either way, this aint a papal bull as far as records go.

HELLO HELLO MR WILPON... BUY THAT MANSION. WE DONT NEED A CONDO.

by kendynamo on Jan 29, 2010 12:24 AM EST reply actions

yeah

suck it, Marlins!!

I.M. Forme
"When you get yourself into trouble is when you feel you have to do something, and then you get yourself in trouble." --Omar Minaya

by itsmetsforme on Jan 29, 2010 2:10 AM EST reply actions 2 recs

There is no way in hell the Nats improve by 23 games

I think 77 wins is on the low side. 80-85 seems right.

"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"

by firejerrynow on Jan 29, 2010 6:49 AM EST reply actions

77 looks about right to me, unfortunately.

by ThnkGoodnessforHowieRose on Jan 29, 2010 7:35 AM EST reply actions

they project Rays to win AL East

and the Yanks to miss playoffs

That would make a 85+ loss season a lot easier to handle…

by hotspur on Jan 29, 2010 9:39 AM EST reply actions

Projections are updated

Defense was originally weighted too heavily. The Mets are now at 78 wins, the Braves and Phils are even and the Nats are 81-81. http://www.baseballprospectus.com/fantasy/dc/

by NJBaseball on Jan 30, 2010 1:06 AM EST reply actions