2010 Postmortem and 2011 Napkin Projection

by psiogen on Oct 28, 2010 2:12 AM EDT

The idea here's pretty simple. This isn't an offseason plan, but an attempt to look at where the Mets are in terms of on-field talent, and where we can reasonably expect to go from here.

2010 METS fWAR

2.1 C Thole + Barajas

3.4 1B Eisenhower

0.6 2B Castillo

2.8 SS Joe Kings

4.0 3B Wrongz

1.4 LF Bay

1.0 RF Voltron + Frenchman

4.9 CF Oxymoron

-1.1 All other position players

19.1 HITTERS TOTAL

3.5 Santana

2.9 Large Pelf

2.9 DICKEY

1.9 Niese

0.5 Misch

0.3 Gee

-1.0 All other starters

4.7 Good bullpen guys (K-Rod, Tak, Pedro, Parnell, Acosta)

-2.8 Bad bullpen guys (Nieve, Ollie, Dessens, Iggy, Green, Mejia)

12.9 PITCHERS TOTAL

32.0 TOTAL, plus 48.0 REPLACEMENT

EXPECTED RECORD: 80-82

ACTUAL RECORD: 79-83

Now on to the "projections". These aren't scientific at all, just my gut feeling for a most likely outcome for each player. I encourage quibbling.

2011 METS NAPKIN PROJECTIONS

2.0 C Thole

3.0 1B Eisenhower

1.0 2B Castillo

4.0 SS Joe Kings

4.0 3B Wrongz

2.0 LF Bay

2.0 RF Voltron

4.0 CF Oxymoron

-1.0 Bench (Arias, Nickeas, Carter, Duda, Nick Who, Murphy, Tejada)

21.0 HITTERS TOTAL

2.0 Santana

2.5 Large Pelf

2.0 DICKEY

2.0 Niese

0.5 Gee

0.5 Misch

2.5 Bullpen (Parnell, Valdes, Acosta, Ollie, Iggy, Domestic-Violence-Rod)

12.0 PITCHERS TOTAL

33.0 TOTAL, plus 48.0 REPLACEMENT

EXPECTED RECORD: 81-81

Now with some hopefully plausible (not too expensive) improvements on this baseline:

1.0 A couple decent bullpen guys

1.0 Cutting Ollie

1.5 A couple quality bench bats

0.5 Backup catcher

1.5 Genuine second baseman

1.5 Serviceable fifth starter

1.0 Successful prospect call-up

1.0 A teeny bit of good luck!

EXPECTED RECORD: 90-72

This FanPost was contributed by a member of the community and was not subject to any vetting or approval process. It does not necessarily reflect the opinions, reasoning skills, or attention to grammar and usage rules held by the editors of this site.

Tweet Comment 14 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

In the AL West or NL West or NL Central 90-72 might be good enough to make the playoffs

but not in the NL East with the Phillies and Braves.

Gas prices today are a lot like a pitcher's ERA. Anything under 3 is amazing, under 4 is pretty good and anything 5 and up is something you want to avoid.

by Bobby Baseball on Oct 28, 2010 4:19 PM EDT reply actions

Yeah

But it’d certainly be an improvement on the last four years, and could probably be achieved without handing out any big long-term contracts or trading top prospects, just by having a GM who was really serious about plugging roster holes. Then, when you DO pick up an expensive free agent, you’re not just ordering fancy new deck chairs for the Titanic.

by psiogen on Oct 28, 2010 5:54 PM EDT reply actions

You know...

I figured that it was time for us and Fernando Tatis to part ways. Upon remembering his uncanny ability to grab the junk of other guys, and the laughs that gives me, I’ll all for offering him another one-year deal here.

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

AA Gamethread Embiggening Record Holder- 453 posts (10/03/10)

by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Oct 28, 2010 9:19 PM EDT reply actions

That's a tablecloth-sized napkin you were working on!

Nice job. I did a similar calculation a month ago, to try to guess out whether the team had any shot at all in 2011, and arrived at pretty much the same conclusion, that with respectable production all around, but nothing at all exceptional—as in Wright doesn’t return to his HOF form, Pelfrey doesn’t turn into a 1A starter, and so on—the team as is can easily get to a win total between 80 and 85. Adding wins from there, given the team’s obvious weaknesses, shouldn’t be overly difficult or overly expensive, and it made sense to at least plan to get to 90 wins with nothing more than moderate good luck and the right players here and there. There’s nothing the Mets have to do in order to have a shot next year that buries them in years following. You don’t want to give Orlando Hudson 4/32 to fill the hole at 2B, but then you NEVER want to give a player like him that kind of contract. Prudent, inexpensive pickups will go a long way towards giving the team a shot next year even while Alderson builds towards 2012 and beyond. There’s nothing inherently contradictory between those two aims that should give a competent GM any trouble whatsoever.

by Jack Str on Oct 28, 2010 10:17 PM EDT reply actions

Yeah, I definitely feel that this team is within striking distance of at least being competitive again next year

It shouldn’t be that hard to improve a team that sunk itself in large part by giving way too much playing time to a handful of tremendously awful players.

by psiogen on Oct 28, 2010 10:30 PM EDT up reply actions

Exactly--I added it up a month ago in a fit of something or other,

and it turns out we gave around 2000 plate appearances to replacement level players. Two thousand. That astounded me. Add to that the whole April-May Perez-Maine experiment/fiasco and it was hard to think of another team that had ever gone to such lengths to sabotage its own season.

by Jack Str on Oct 28, 2010 10:58 PM EDT up reply actions

There is another (potential) improvment:

Absense of decisions made by Jerry Manuel

I can’t help but think that the aggregate of bad managerial decisions made that even a merely adequate manager would have refrained from caused the 2010 team to lose at least a couple more games than they would have otherwise.

We don’t know who the 2011 manager will be, but I’m sure whoever Alderson chooses would have to qualify at “adequate” at worst, and most likely better than that.

by DaveNJ on Oct 29, 2010 2:21 PM EDT reply actions