First 2005 Post Mortem

[Guest ABG]

Have at it. God I'm disgusted.

[metirish]

Well the Mets did play games that mattered late in the season, that was a plus, the starting pitching was better than decent, the bench this year is super.David Wright is a star, Reyes is a star.

I could go negative but I hope this year will be a good learning experience for next saeson.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Reyes has been still more potential than realization, I think.

[Zvon]

="metirish"]Well the Mets did play games that mattered late in the season, that was a plus, the starting pitching was better than decent, the bench this year is super.David Wright is a star, Reyes is a star. I could go negative but I hope this year will be a good learning experience for next saeson.

Im glad Im not the only optimistical noodle head around here.

[Valadius]

David Wright, Superstar.

Opened in Queens in 2004, now better than ever!

[Guest Rotblatt]

Postitives

Reyes stayed healthy and improved as the season went on. Wright took another step towards being a superstar. Hernandez shocked the relief circuit by dominating all season long. Jae Seo established himself as a solid MLB pitcher. Petey proved he could stay healthy and had a Cy Young candidate season (albeit a long shot one). Heilman established himself as a top-notch relief pitcher with the potential to start. Floyd stayed healthy and put up solid OF offensive numbers. Castro showed he could arguably be a regular starting catcher. Diaz established himself as a potential OF regular. Glavine reinvented himself as a legitimate starting pitcher. Cameron adjusted to RF and played well.

Negatives

Looper. Beltran. Looper. Matsui. Cairo. Zambrano (IMO, anyway). WWSB. Looper. Mientkiewicz. Looper. Ishii.

All in all, a fine rebuilding season. None of us expected much better than .500, but I think all of us had questions about Reyes, Floyd & Petey staying healthy, about Cam adjusting to RF, about the future of our starting rotation . . .

If the rest of the east hadn't been so goddamn weak, we wouldn't have been in pain at all.

[Zvon]

Valadius wrote: David Wright, Superstar. Opened in Queens in 2004, now better than ever!

yes, we have liftoff of a career to be reckoned with.

[Zvon]

Rotblatt wrote: If the rest of the east hadn't been so goddamn weak, we wouldn't have been in pain at all.

truDat

[Guest Edgy DC]

I don't understand why a division that's tight top to bottom always leads to the conclusion that the division is weak.

[Willets Point]

The NL West is weak. The NL East are battlers.

[Guest Spacemans Bong]

Good:

Pedro had a good season, although he's fading. One of those silver linings to the black cloud of staying home in October is he could probably really use the month off - he's pitched to November the last two years.

Wright is a stud.

Reyes is a stud, and if he learns to lay off the breaking stuff out of the zone (easier said than done, but he's shown genuine strikezone improvement), will be the best leadoff man in the NL in 2006. He needs to keep his shoulders level too - he should be a groundball/line drive hitter, and never upper cut. Ever.

The Mets have a pretty good pitching staff this year, Looper's monumental suck aside, and with some additions (Burnett, Ryan?) could be really good next year.

The Mets are currently 7th in the majors in attendance. Barring a really, really, really big and long hot streak (like 10 in a row ), they may fall down the order - they have 17 home games left, and it looks like most of 'em won't mean much - but the Mets at this point are drawing better than any Met team since 1989, the year after they fielded arguably the best Met team ever.

Bad:

Beltran sucks this year.

Good:

Beltran is far too good of a player to suck throughout the entire contract, and he has been legitimately hurt almost the entire season.

Bad:

The Mets don't have a closer.

Good:

The Mets have money, and can do cool things with money, like sign BJ Ryan.

Bad: The Mets do not have a first baseman.

Good:

See above, with Paul Konerko. It is a testament that the rest of the offense is actually pretty good that the Mets have been decent without ANY PRODUCTION AT ALL FROM first or second base.

Shopping list:

Relief ace
Second starter
Power bat (this basically means Konerko, with Plan B being Manny)
Second base
Probably a catcher - I don't think Ramon Castro is a starter.

[nymr83]

]Probably a catcher - I don't think Ramon Castro is a starter

i think he is as good, and cheaper, than anyone who is available. might as well keep him and spend the money at 1B, in the bullpen,etc.

[Valadius]

We need a catching tandem if we keep Castro - he can't play every day.

[smg58]

I'm not sure that Castro and Jacobs couldn't work as a platoon, but there are a few rookie catchers who could possibly be had (Shoppach, Dioner Navarro, Ryan Garko in the Indians system), plus you'd have to consider Pudge if the Tigers just give him away, the bizarrely bad walk ratio notwithstanding. Let's see who's available for what price.

Good: Wright is a star. Reyes showed what he can do when he's healthy enough to run. Pedro. Most of the pitching in general. Jae Seo. Cliff Floyd. Roberto Hernandez.

Bad: Reyes still doesn't get on enough to make his speed the devastating weapon it could be. The lack of timely hits, again. Looper. Shingo Takatsu. Willie's fondness for Shingo Takatsu. Cairo and Matsui. Too little from first base. Beltran was practically irrelevant. Danny Graves and Mike De Jean.

[Diamond Dad]

Glass half full:

Reyes and Wright are only 22 and while Wright can't do much better than he has done this year, he's likely to actually improve in some areas of the game, while Reyes has shown signs of having better plate discipline, can still learn to bunt for hits, and will be leading off for the Mets for the next 10 years.

Willie won't be a rookie manager next year, and the players do seem to play hard for him.

Beltran will be better next year.
Pedro will be as good -- he's still only 35
We'll have a closer next year (note to Omar -- )
We'll have a better first baseman next year (Note #2 to Omar -- )

Glass Half empty:

Trachsel will be a year older
Glavine will still be here
Kaz Mat will be making $8 million next year
We still need to find a closer and a first baseman
Cameron probably can't be traded now until next spring training after he proves that he can still play after his horrific injury
Floyd just finished his first full year without a major injury in 5 years -- how likely is that to repeat itself? Plus, he slumped at the end, which may indicate that playing a full season isn't necessarily something he's able to do while keeping up an offensive pace

Still -- happy to have had interest through Labor Day. Nice of the Mets to drop out of the race just in time for football season.

[Vic Sage]

analysis of 2005?
the pitching was good and the hitting sucked.

plan for 2006?
get better hitters.

thank you for your time..

[Guest Iubitul]

Diamond Dad wrote: Still -- happy to have had interest through Labor Day. Nice of the Mets to drop out of the race just in time for football season.

Oh man... No post-mortems until no more Met baseball is being played...

The winters are always long - any day with a Met game is better than any day in the winter...

[Guest Rotblatt]

Vic Sage wrote: analysis of 2005? . . . the hitting sucked.

Man, that's just so wrong, Vic . . . I wish people would stop saying our hitting sucks, cause it just ain't true, much like the whole "the Mets bullpen sucks" theme isn't true (although Looper does, in fact, suck. Looper.).

Our .736 OPS is the best we've posted as a team since 2000 (.776), which places us at a respectable tie for 10th in the NL, 19th in the majors, tied or ahead of such playoff contenders as Oakland, San Diego & Houston. Is it good? No, but I wouldn't call being at the top of the bottom third sucking, and OPS doesn't tell the whole story. I give us a below average in the OPS department.

We're on pace for 728 RS, our best, again, since 2000 (807), and good for a tie for 6th in the NL, 16th in the majors. That's indisputably good.

We're 14th in the majors in XBH, 7th in the NL. On a related note, we're 15th in IsoP, 7th in the NL. Average.

We're 10th in the majors in SecA, 6th in the NL. Good.

We're 11th in the majors in P/PA, 7th in the NL. Average.

We're 17th in the majors in BB/K, 11th in the NL. Below average.

Our hitting didn't suck. At worst, it was average. If you want to heavily weight OPS, it was maybe a bit below average.

But there's no way our hitting "sucked" this season.

[Valadius]

Why do we think our hitting sucked?

Because the average Mets scoring opportunity goes like this:

Batter singles, reaches 1st.
Batter sacrifices runner to 2nd, 1 out.
Batter walks, runners on 1st and 2nd.
Batter lines out, 2 outs.
Batter strikes out, 3 outs.

[MFS62]

I'm still hoping this will be like the CSI episode in which, during the autopsy, they discovered that the person was still alive.
There will be plenty of time to determine the cause(s) of death once they're really, oficially dead.

Please keep this thread around. I'll be glad to provide my input at that time.

Later

[Guest Rotblatt]

]Why do we think our hitting sucked? Because the average Mets scoring opportunity goes like this: Batter singles, reaches 1st. Batter sacrifices runner to 2nd, 1 out. Batter walks, runners on 1st and 2nd. Batter lines out, 2 outs. Batter strikes out, 3 outs.

Except it doesn't. Our OPS with runners in scoring position is .751, 15 points better than our average. With runners on, our OPS is .762, 26 points better than our average.

Now, with RISP & 2 outs, our OPS drops to .678, which is pretty bad, but I suspect a drop-off there is normal for most teams. In close & late situations, our OPS is .726--a dropoff, but not a huge one.

We're all prone to fixating on the mistakes we've made, but we really haven't been a bad team offensively or defensively. Willie's made some retarded mistakes, but I think to the independent, stats-oriented observer, we look like a pretty good team that got unlucky.

[Guest rpackrat]

Positives:

Wright!!!!!!!!!!!
Reyes
Floyd
Pedro
Starting pitching in general (notable exception: Ishii, but he'll be gone)
Bench

Negatives:
First Base
Second Base
Closer

IMO, the biggest need is a slugging 1B. We have some trade bait in Diaz or Cameron, or could obtain a slugging leftfielder (Manny?) and move Floyd to 1B.

2B we seem to have some options in the system

Closer. If it can't be addressed through free agency, maybe Heilman has earned a shot.

Oh, and WWSB has to learn that BIFL!

[Elster88]

]respectable tie for 10th in the NL, 19th in the majors

This is not respectable, this is below average. Seeing as how hitting is 50% of the game, I don't see how below average can be acceptable or respectable for any team with playoff aspirations.
_____________________________
This post had the designation 159) Bob Shaw

[Guest Johnny Dickshot]

We've been one-quarter a bad team offensively.

Our first basemen have produced the worst numbers in the NL in just about every category (fewest hits, HRs, XBHs, lowest BA/OBP/SLG). Our second basemen have also badly underperformed league-average figures in every category.

Now, the rest of the team may have helped take this edge off partly and bring us to "average" combined figures, but it hasn't changed the fact that that most nights, we are worse than the opposition in 25% of the batting order. If these spots were only average and not league-worst, we'd have been a much more successful team.

[Elster88]

]We're on pace for 728 RS, our best, again, since 2000 (807), and good for a tie for 6th in the NL, 16th in the majors. That's indisputably good.

Not indisputably good. 6th in the NL is above average, true, but 16th out of 30 teams is not good, it's average.

And we had this argument already, and JD made many salient points about the blowouts which contributed to this.

Rotty, I think you are thinking with your heart too much. Just take a look at what has happened since Arizona, please.

W 1-0, L 2-1, L 4-1, W 6-4, L 8-2, L 3-1, L 4-2, L 5-4, W 7-1, L 4-2, L 3-1, L 4-3, L 5-0

That's 31 runs in 13 games, or 2.38 runs per game, including a 7 spot and a 6 spot. I don't think Piazza and Cameron make a huge difference when inserted back into the lineup either.

And we pulled this off during a stretch which was easily the best chance to make the playoffs since 2001.
_____________________________
This post had the designation 159) Bob Shaw

[MFS62]

I wonder what the 2005 team stats look like if you take out those two blowouts against the Snakes.

Later

[Elster88]

This has been done...but I don't remember where. JD do you remember which thread? Someone link it.
_____________________________
This post had the designation 159) Bob Shaw

[Guest Johnny Dickshot]

At some point last week I figured this out -- taking away our 5 highest scoring games our average rpg dropped from 4.5 to 4.1, approximately, and more or less approximated our actual winning percentage by pythagorean.

I think I was trying to say that overall RS/RA was a little decieving in that we'd been involved in more blowout wins (5 double-figure RS advantage games) than blowout losses (only 1 loss by 10, no 9s, 8s) -- and that reflected not great hitting necessarily but good pitching.

[Vic Sage]

Rotty, i'm as stat-oriented as anybody here and i actually do appreciate the fact that LUCK plays a large role in outcomes. And i'm not one whining about how "un-clutch" we are, as i think its a matter of sample size.

BUT, one has to have one's had entirely up one's sphincter, or just be watching an entirely different baseball team, or relying to much on stats that could easily be interpreted differently, to think that this team's hitting un-sucks.

when your 1b and 2b production is the worst in the league, and only your 3b production is significantly above average, one has to look at the aggregate stats and figure out why they DON'T paint an accurate picture of this team's hitting, instead of interpreting them in the most favorable light that contradicts what your eyes can plainly see.

i think Widey's point, about a disproportionate number of offensive explosions skewing the RS numbers, may be one reasonable explanation.

[Guest Rotblatt]

]This is not respectable, this is below average. Seeing as how hitting is 50% of the game, I don't see how below average can be acceptable or respectable for any team with playoff aspirations.

My main point was that it doesn't "suck," even if it's below average. My other point was that it's better than 3 teams that have a very good shot at making the playoffs, so yes, being in the bottom third in OPS can be acceptable.

="Elster88"] ]We're on pace for 728 RS, our best, again, since 2000 (807), and good for a tie for 6th in the NL, 16th in the majors. That's indisputably good. Not indisputably good. 6th in the NL is above average, true, but 16th out of 30 teams is not good, it's average.

Well, the major league results are skewed, since the AL has a DH instead of a pitcher. I probably should have left them out entirely, but I thought it was interesting to look at.

]That's 31 runs in 13 games, or 2.38 runs per game, including a 7 spot and a 6 spot. I don't think Piazza and Cameron make a huge difference when inserted back into the lineup either. And we pulled this off during a stretch which was easily the best chance to make the playoffs since 2001.

Your last paragraph is irrelevent when discussing how our offense has performed. And 13 games is an incredibly small sample size, but even WITH those 13 games, we've still played like an above-average offensive team when viewed over the course of the season.

The entire season, I've been listing runs scored and offensive numbers, saying "Hey! We're not so bad after all!" (you may remember me from such threads as "Offensive Powerhouse?"), and from pretty much month 1, y'all have been telling me that I'm crazy, that our offense sucks, it's an abberation, we'll revert to norm, etc. Well, now we're pretty much done with the season, and the numbers are what they are.

We've been in the top half in the NL in runs scored all season, despite terrible production from 1B & 2B. Why? Because we're getting above average offensive production from 3B, SS, LF, RF, CF & C.

And Vic, just because they're not "well above average" doesn't mean shit. How many teams are getting league average output at every position? Without looking, I'm guessing none. 1B for the Sox has been a sink, 2B from the Yankees hasn't been good. Maybe St. Louis has gotten that, but they're about it. Everyone has holes; ours just happen to be bigger than most, but the net contribution from the rest of our team has outweighed it. And it's resulted in enough runs to put us in the top of the NL.

Look at the data and show me where my conclusion--that our offense has been average--is wrong.

I've been watching and listening to the same games you guys have, and so far, the "Your head's up your ass" argument isn't convincing me. Neither is the cherry-picking argument (if we take out the 5 best games, etc.).

Oh, and one more stat that I forgot to include: our EqA of .261 is good 13th in MLB, 7th in the NL. .260 is set to be league average, IIRC.