Mets Current 2010 Projected WAR
by Eric Simon on Feb 4, 2010 5:00 AM EST
Email
PrintWe're still a couple of weeks from Spring Training but we haven't checked out the projected WAR picture in a while, so here it is. Spoiler alert: it's not much to look at.
The projections are from FanGraphs. When a player had both a CHONE and a FAN WAR projection I took the approximate average of the two. Most batters had both; some only had CHONE. Pitchers only had FAN projections, so I used those for starters and went with .5 for all of the relievers.
The NL replacement win total came from this post by Tom Tango. I'm happy to adjust this if someone has a newer/better value for NL replacement, but for now this should suffice.
I spent a lot of time looking at these numbers and I'm still not sure how the Mets are going to squeeze another fifteen wins out of this group. None of the projections seem unrealistically low. If you want to identify an area that should have been improved but was not, look no further than the Bermuda Triangle of 1B-2B-RF, where Murphy, Castillo, and Francoeur project to be worth around 3.5 wins total. For the sake of comparison, the Phillies' analogous triumvirate -- Howard, Utley, and Werth -- project to be worth 15.4 wins in aggregate.
If the Mets are truly done spending this offseason -- as they have professed to be -- bleah. This looks like a tough row to hoe, my friends. A lot will have to go right, along with a lot gone wrong for the Phillies (and possibly the Braves and Marlins), for the Mets to win the 90-95 games necessary for October baseball. Again, these are just projections, but I'm having a hard time finding extra wins in this group right now.
Comment starter: Which two or three players are most likely to exceed their WAR projections?
3:13pm: I realize there's a problem with the 30 replacement win benchmark. In particular, the fact that it's wrong and that in my haste and sleepiness I misread Tango's original post. I'll have another go at this later on, possibly this evening.
57 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
What form of WAR are you using?
A roster composed entirely of replacement level players is commonly considered to be capable of winning 30% of its games; that’s 48.6 wins out of a 162 game schedule, not the 30 wins you note.
yeah,
the NL replacement win total of 30 is definitely wrong. The Tango piece actually says that the avg NL team is 30 wins above replacement, while the NL replacement level rate is 29.2%, i.e. 47.3 wins.
That number actually seems about right.
Tango is saying that the average NL team would finish with 77.3 wins, which is fairly close to what the actual average has been over the last several seasons.
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Stephen Schmidt on Feb 4, 2010 8:54 AM EST up reply actions
30 Wins is the NL team average WAR, not the replacement level
That’s a 92 win team.
In other words you have a 44.5 WAR team, so 44.5-30.0=14.5 wins above average.
The NL average is less than the AL, about 77 wins, so 77+14.5 = 91.5 wins.
I think that’s a bit high, mostly because I don’t think Beltran is healthy. But clearly if all of these guys were healthy, you would have an expected win total over 90 with this group.
by acerimusdux on Feb 4, 2010 12:55 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Also, it looks like you're projecting the bullpen at a minimum of 3.8 to 4.3 WAR
depending on what role you’re predicting for Fogg. That’s very high, as is the projection for Escobar. He’d probably have to be at least a part time starter to reach that projection. Given that’s he’s pitched all of five innings in the last two years the Mets should only try him in that role if the rotation has completely collapsed.
The NL replacement number. That's why the numbers look weird.
Also, the SP WAR look optimistic to me (Pelf, Maine and Ollie). Escobar and Figgy too.
I added up the Phillies projected WAR
using just CHONE for hitters and Fans for pitchers and got 32 for their hitters and 18.1 for their pitching staff totaling 50.1. Obviously that NL Replacement number can’t be correct because no one thinks the Phillies are an 80 win team. At the same time, no way are the Phillies a 98 win team.
"Three home teams advance, and the fuckin' Jets" - Rex Ryan
In that case, replacement WAR doesn't matter much
The Phillies are 50.1-44.5 (or 5.6) wins better than the Mets. If the Phillies are a 92 win team, we’re an 86.
I think that’s way off, for what it’s worth, but the relative numbers matter more than the absolute.
Also, I read that the batted ball profile from statcorner is more accurate than fangraph's.
So, statcorner tRA and WAR numbers would be better.
Their WAR numbers for hitters
Are only offensive as they don’t keep track of defense. That’s why Franklin Gutierrez is a 5+ WAR player on FanGraphs and only a 2.1 WAR player at StatCorner.
"Three home teams advance, and the fuckin' Jets" - Rex Ryan
by Evan_S on Feb 4, 2010 9:18 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
optimistic projections
but the replacement level is way off
I would subtract around 5 wins from the projection bringing the total WAR to 39.5. That, when added to the true replacement level of 48 gets us to 87.5. Not a playoff team, but not that much needs to go right for it to become a playoff team.
by supermets on Feb 4, 2010 8:05 AM EST via mobile reply actions
yes, replacement level is higher.
I’d use 47 wins for replacement level, which would put them as an 82-win team. Still not sure how they’re squeezing another 8 wins out of these guys, though.
47 with the above numbers would actually make them a 92 win team.
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Stephen Schmidt on Feb 4, 2010 8:56 AM EST up reply actions
lol, that's 8:30am math for you!
That was silly on my part – and a 92-win projection seems pretty high for this club. I’m not sold on the idea that every guy in the pen will be worth half a win, but that’s what it will take for this team to contend. If Pelf, Maine and Perez can pitch well enough to keep the games close and the Green/Escobar/Feliciano combo can hold it down in the 7th and 8th, then perhaps they win enough one-run games to push that win total up towards 90 or so.
by xnumberoneson on Feb 4, 2010 4:50 PM EST up reply actions
I would think there are a few places to gain...
but just as many places to lose. The general projections seem optimistic, but you can also add the possibility of production from Nieve, Thole – who knows? Maybe this is the season that Fernando Martinez contributes his first win. In terms of significantly outproducing these numbers, I think Ollie is the most likely to exceed his projection by 1+ wins. On the other hand, I think he’s also the most likely to underproduce by 1+ win…
That Maine, Ollie, Pelf triumvirate projection of 7 WAR seems highly optimistic.
I think Niese could really outproduce his projection if given the innings, but I don’t think he’ll get those innings.
It probably is
They’re fan projections, which are optimistic per a recent FanGraphs post. I think you can knock it down 25% to ~5.5
To call it "highly optimistic" is highly optimistic.
I’m figuring the mean at 3.5 WAR, with 6 WAR happening around 2% of the time, 5 WAR around 12% of the time, and 2 WAR happening around 20% of the time.
How to calculate replacement-level WAR for the NL
Back it out.
The Mets, per your math, are 44.5 WAR. The Phillies, per Evan_S, are 50.1 WAR. Do the same for the other 14 NL teams, and you’ll get a total NL WAR number. Take the average and subtract from 81 — maybe 80 if you want to discount due to the NL’s disadvantage in interleague plays.
There’s your replacement number. It’s foolproof, too, because even if the CHONE/FAN is inflated, that inflation will be built into your replacement value.
by Dan Lewis on Feb 4, 2010 9:44 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
This year will be interesting because it's so difficult to predict this roster's performance
The year to year production of certain players on the team, like Francoeur and Perez, is so volatile that it’s hard to predict their future performances. On top of that, you have numerous players with health uncertainties, which could severely limit their playing time and quality of performance.
I imagine the range of possibilities is much greater for our team than most other teams. There is still hope.
My predictions.
I’m going over on Murph, under on Beltran and Castillo, over on Perez, and Niese under on Escobar and BB-rod. The rest look pretty accurate.
Given that Nieve is currently pencilled in as our #5 shouldn’t he be in our projections as well?
As you can see I expect more to underperform their WAR than overperform it.
by KeithsMoustache on Feb 4, 2010 10:53 AM EST reply actions
I think that Castillo and BB-rod are fairly good predictions.
I think as far as Nieve goes, Figgy could be interchangeable.
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Stephen Schmidt on Feb 4, 2010 10:57 AM EST up reply actions
fair enough on Figgy/Nieve
and I’m not saying the castillo and BB-rod projections are bad, just have a feeling they will both fall below them this year. Call it the eternal pessimist in me, but BB-rod has totally abandoned his out pitch as of last year, and Castillo’s WAR last year was greatly buoyed by his OBP and even then he only managed a 1.6 WAR. Even if he can keep his OBP up, his defense will likely decline further since he seems to lose more mobility every year. It will be tough for him to maintain a constant level of production from last year.
by KeithsMoustache on Feb 4, 2010 11:08 AM EST up reply actions
I'd take Wright & Reyes to both go over
these guys are in their prime, and if (big if for Jose, of course) healthy, what’s to stop them from putting up career type years? I guess Reyes could run a little less, not sure how much that would end up influencing his WAR. Pagan would go over if he was allowed to start over Frenchy, but that won’t happen.
pelfrey at 3.6 war seems high
but he is entering his prime. it would be great if we didnt have to rely on santana for all our quality starts.
i like a line up with reyes wright bay and beltran though. a lot depends on being healthy but i’d like to see the rest of the NL easts’ projected WAR, especially their top 4 or 5 guys. all those guys between 0.5 and 1.5 could go either way, so a lot is going to be how each teams bench and minor guys do.
HELLO HELLO MR WILPON... BUY THAT MANSION. WE DONT NEED A CONDO.
It is high.
Insane, actually.
That’s better than his stellar 2008, with a defense behind him that’s not likely to be better than that year.
Defense is 100% meaningless
in determining pitcher WAR.
That's not totally true
if a pitcher is constantly being pulled because of long innings it will affect his innings total. And I actually think for starters the number of innings you pitch can have a pretty big affect.
"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 Feb 4, 2010 5:10 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I think you could also make the argument that pitchers who are scared to have the ball in play behind them would be more likely to be BB-prone.
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Stephen Schmidt on Feb 4, 2010 5:30 PM EST up reply actions
You're confused.
“Remember that WAR relies on counting stats (Ks, RA, BB, etc.) to be translated into rate stats (K/9, FIP, etc.) and then combines these factors into value stats. Calculating the value of a pitcher is much more difficult than doing so for a position player simply because the number of variables involved and how dependent a pitcher is on the environment in which he plies his craft. A fly-ball pitcher in Citizen’s Bank Bandbox will likely do very poorly…and if he has the Nationals’ “defense” behind him, he’d be doomed (DOOMED) to fail."
from http://www.purplerow.com/2009/6/19/914041/war-lords-of-the-diamond-pitchers, “WAR Lords of the Diamond (Pitchers)”
I think the real difference in the season will come down to Perez, Maine, and Francoeur.
If Maine is healthy, he ought to be worth 2.1 WAR at the very least. Perez has been so erratic that he could easily be anywhere from 3 to -3 WAR. Francoeur plays good enough defense that his WAR will be determined by his BABIP and power, so he could be anywhere from below replacement level to a 3 WAR player.
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
Frenchy will probably be about 1 WAR
I think that’s a fair estimate for him.
"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"
if we're not going to be competitive anyway
then I kind of hope Perez does manage to put up -3 WAR, just to be able to say I saw history.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
I have no idea
but I imagine it can’t be that low just because even a stupid team would be able to tell if a player was that bad and stop running him out there right?
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
I'd much rather see Francoeur do it.
At least we could non-tender him, where we still have the pleasure of Ollie for next year. That would be a cool thing to see though, much like Anthony Young.
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Stephen Schmidt on Feb 4, 2010 4:41 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah but maybe if he's that bad
Either the Wilpons will fire Omar for giving him the contract or it will be so bad Omar will decide to completely revamp his scouting/player evaluation process?
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
worse Met is Brian McRae
at -2.7 in 1999 according to Mets Geek, not sure what worst ever is, i’ll look around a bit.
by KeithsMoustache on Feb 4, 2010 4:50 PM EST up reply actions
lowest i can find is Neifi Perez at -3.1 in 2001
as a comparison Yuniesky was -2.1 last year.
by KeithsMoustache on Feb 4, 2010 4:53 PM EST up reply actions
what this tells me
it’s that it’s entirely possible he could register a -3 and the mets would still keep running him out there.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
I don't think we'll see a record just because of the seven billion fifth starters
the Mets have accumulated.
but since ollie costs so much
they’ll give him every opportunity to succeed, no matter how unlikely that may appear as time goes on (I actually think he has his best season as a Met this year… just a gut feeling, no facts whatsoever to back it up.
by KeithsMoustache on Feb 4, 2010 8:07 PM EST up reply actions
Probably, but I could easily see him higher just due to the random nature of statistics his approach will create.
It’s also really hard to picture his approach at the plate getting any worse, so at least there’s that.
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
Reply fail
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Stephen Schmidt on Feb 4, 2010 4:04 PM EST up reply actions
Why don't you use CHONE batting with UZR projections and CHONE pitching
I don’t think including the fans is a good idea.
CHONE pitching WAR
isn’t on Fangraphs (yet?). You would have to calculate it yourself.
If you add 17 wins to the replacement total
which is what it should be about, (47.3 wins) we have a 91 win season.
"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"
2007 and 2008
Mets won 88 in 2007, before Johan, and 89 in 2008 with a laughing-stock bullpen. The projected 2010 roster doesn’t seem profoundly different in talent from those teams (plug Bay in for 07-08 Delgado), assuming Beltran is back healthy in May-June. Projections that vary much from 88 wins or so should show why the Mets are likely worse (or better) than the 2007 and 2008 groups.
by birtelcom on Feb 4, 2010 7:43 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Bay=Delgado for those years
but some combination of Murphy at first and whoever, plus Frenchy else isn’t likely to match the production we got out of the corners between 2006-2009, which despite a bunch of no names was usually around average or better. On top of that the rotation is much worse, the defense is way way worse and the bullpen is kind of a major question mark.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
You're forgetting the pitching staff now projects to be much, much worse,
even though it’s composed of some of the same pitchers. Maine, for instance, has a completely different profile after being hurt in 2008 and 2009.
The fans are going to be too optomistic
I would just stick with CHONE.
Eric, I have a spreadsheet that calculates WAR for all players and the team given Innings pitched, ERA and leverage for pitchers, and wOBA, PA and UZR for hitters. I could send it over to you if you’d like.
pitching not good enough .
this team is a 88 win team at best it is going to take at least 92 for the wild card and 95 for the division thanks omar for screwing this team for a playoff spot you suck ..
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Podcast: Dirk Hayhurst talks about Italy, the reality of the big leagues and his new book
- Dennis ‘Oil Can’ Boyd claims he used cocaine before a majority of his games
- Does Billy Beane’s contract extension signal an optimistic dawn for Oakland fans?
- Ask Alex: Will Alex Avila be an All-Star again?
- Create-a-Caption: Matt Cain’s great pair of golf pants
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
