Open Thread on Strength of Schedule

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

I hear you Namor. I wouldn't go so far to say it would be a "miracle" if Maine pitches "well" though. But I agree that the likelihood is that Maine won't give us enough over the long term (at least not this season) for us to be happy with him as a 4th starter.

I'll allow Zambrano three more starts. If he's still awful, he's gotta go. He doesn't have to be released but I'd either make him a mop up guy (although we already have Julio for that) or send him to Norfolk.

[Gwreck]

Yancy Street Gang wrote: I'll allow Zambrano three more starts. If he's still awful, he's gotta go. He doesn't have to be released but I'd either make him a mop up guy (although we already have Julio for that) or send him to Norfolk.

3 starts from now, Julio may well not be needed as a mop-up guy anymore. His outings recently have been encouraging -- even Sunday's, with the 5 Ks. I could see Zambrano in the 'pen, but that may mean Maine and Bannister starting until a midseason deal can be made for another starter.

[Elster88]

One more west coast trip in early June and that's it for CA/AZ this year. Can't beat that.

[Gwreck]

Elster88 wrote: I think this has been touched on but not adequately explained: Why the HELL is there a four day All-Star Break?

Just a scheduling quirk, to have an off-day on a Thursday following the break. Schedule doesn't allow having a 4-game series for every team that weekend.

[Centerfield]

Yancy Street Gang wrote: The thing most likely to undermine this season is the dropoff in the rotation after Trachsel.

While this is true, I'm not even that confident in Trachsel. He has posted a winning record only once during his years here in NY. And though he has a decent ERA, he doesn't exactly inspire confidence taking the ball in Game 3 of a post-season series.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

I agree, CF. I could just as easily have pointed to the dropoff after Glavine.

[Guest Rotblatt]

I agree that we'll need to move Heilman to the pen if Bannister's out for a while &/or Zambrano continues to be ineffective.

Julio's the guy that could make Heilman expendeble in the pen. Sanchez has been spectacular and Wagner's rounding nicely into form, but adding Heilman in there upgrades our pen from "Solid" to "Superb." If Julio continues to improve, he could probably keep us hovering somewhere inbetween those two--call it "Good."

Personally, I think Maine might be adequate, but not much better than that. Aside from Heilman, the only guys who are likely to be significant upgrades over Bannister & Zambrano are Pelfry & Soler, and I just don't see us rushing those two.

Which is why I think moving Heilman (legit #3 starter upside, IMO) to the rotation if Bannister & Zambrano struggle is the right move.

Next year will be interesting, what with Humber, Pelfry, Soler, Heilman, Bannister & Zambrano all presumably in the mix for the final four rotation spots.

Of course, we'll likely sign a free agent SP next off-season, and at this rate, I wouldn't be suprised if we re-signed Glavine, but that just make the competition more interesting . . .

[Elster88]

I've been wanting to say it since it happened, but have been afraid of getting bashed for jumping the gun. But I'll go ahead and say it. The Julio/Benson trade could be what keeps this from being a WS winning team. (Note: "could be").

'Course, I'd much rather have Wiggy than either of them (SC = 8 billion)

[Guest rpackrat]

]While this is true, I'm not even that confident in Trachsel. He has posted a winning record only once during his years here in NY. And though he has a decent ERA, he doesn't exactly inspire confidence taking the ball in Game 3 of a post-season series.

I just don't get this. He doesn't inspire you because he has "only" gone 39-35 for teams that went a combined 212-274 from 2002-2004 (I did not count 2005 because he was injured for most of the year). If we take it back to July 2001 (after his return from Norfolk), his record over 3 1/2 years is 48-38 with a park adjusted ERA around 15% better than league average. People seem to form an initial impression of players and never budge from that impression, no matter what the player subsequently does. It seems like people decided after Trax's awful start in 2001 that he was a bad pitcher, have been forced by his performance since then to at least acknowledge that he's not bad, but can't quite bring themselves to admit that he has, in fact, been extremely effective since his return from Norfolk in mid-2001. A world-series caliber rotation does not have to consist of Walter Johnson, Lefty Grove, Tom Seaver, Warren Spahn, and Steve Carlton all in their prime. The Mets right now have two proven excellent pitchers at the top of their rotation in Pedro and Glavine, and a well above-average number 3 in Trax. Bannister is still a question mark, though I will stick by what I said at the beginning of the season based both on his minor league numbers and my own limited observation seeing him pitch in the minors: He will be a very pleasant surprise for most Mets fans. That basically leaves the 5th spot as a question mark. Zambrano has been about a league-average pitcher throughout his career; he's been awful so far this year. If he can revert to his career mean, he will be an adequate 5th starter (though I'd still like to improve the spot). People need to look at Zambrano for what he is and stop hating him for not being Scott Kazmir.

[Guest rpackrat]

]The Julio/Benson trade could be what keeps this from being a WS winning team. (Note: "could be").

Kris Benson: Career Winning % .483, career ERA+ 103
Victor Zambrano: Career winning % .530, career ERA+ 101.
(stats through 2005).

Benson is also a year older. I don't think substituting Zambrano for Benson in the rotation is going to make much of a difference at all.

[Elster88]

]Kris Benson: Career Winning % .483, career ERA+ 103 Victor Zambrano: Career winning % .530, career ERA+ 101.

For starters, winning percentage is just about the worst way to judge effectiveness. So career winning percentage can be ignored.

For seconds, well, Benson is a better pitcher. This argument is weaker, but I'd be willing to bet that Benson has a better year. You can pick pretty much any category you want to judge the word "better".

[Guest rpackrat]

I agree that winning percentage is not generally a good way to judge pitchers. A mediocre pitcher on a great team can have a great winning percentage. Of course, Zambrano pitched on a really bad team before coming to the Mets, so his winning percentage is clearly not the result of great play by his teammates. I mentioned winning % only because a previous poster cited Trachsel's w-l record to support his opinion of Trax's mediocrity.

]For seconds, well, Benson is a better pitcher.

And, you base that on . . . what, exactly? His incrementally better park-adjusted ERA? His substantially worse H/IP and HR/9IP ratios? In fairness, Benson has some peripherals that are better than Z's (WHIP and K:BB ratio are both somewhat better). Point is, statistically, the 2 are virtually interchangeable except, as I noted above, Benson is older. Zambrano's biggest drawback is that we traded Scott Kazmir for him.

[nymr83]

]3 starts from now, Julio may well not be needed as a mop-up guy anymore. His outings recently have been encouraging -- even Sunday's, with the 5 Ks. I could see Zambrano in the 'pen, but that may mean Maine and Bannister starting until a midseason deal can be made for another starter.

Well, if you get to the point where you have faith in handing Julio the ball in a 1-run 7th inning then I think Heilman to the rotation is a must.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Depending on whether or not faith also blossoms in Victor Zambrano.

Can't have enough pitching.

But maybe we should talk about the possiblity of developing enough faith in Julio to give him a one-run seventh inning lead when we get to the point where he can get a four- and then a three-run lead.

[nymr83]

3 runs is a "save" (not that i think it should be), i think any major league pitcher who can't get 3 outs before allowing FOUR runs 95% of the time (at least, probably more) doesnt deserve a spot on a major league roster until he can do that.

[Elster88]

Victor Zambrano: "Would you care to snack on some more of your words there, Elster88?"

Looks like all the motivation Zamby needed was some trash-talking from myself. Give me ten minutes with the guy, PLEASE.

[Guest Rotblatt]

BP's updated their hit list. Here are the updated rankings for our May competitors

as of 5/2/06

TEAM: Times Will Face / HL Rank / Hit List Factor

Mets: 4th, .639

MFY: 3 / 2 /.688
STL: 3 / 5 / .616
MIL: 3 / 6 /.609
ARI: 3 / 12 / .528
ATL: 3 / 19 / .467
=blue]WAS: 2 / 22 / .426
FLA: 3 / 24 / .409
PHI: 6 / 25 / .404
PIT: 2 / 29 / .320

The top 3 look even better than before, and Arizona is on the rise, helped along by Juan Cruz, who replaces Russ Ortiz in the rotation. However, the rest of our opponents continue to struggle, with Washington joining Florida, Philadelphia & Pittsburgh in the bottom third of all MLB teams. Atlanta's on the cusp of joining them.

As in April, we have an opportunity to kick a few teams while they're down. We've gotta take the bull by the horns, wrestle it to the ground, and make it eat dirt til it's cried Uncle and wet itself.

[Frayed Knot]

And speaking of soft parts of the schedule (and I think we were) I noticed that Pittsburgh is the odd NL-Cent team against whom we get an extra series this year. 10 games vs the Pirates - 6 at home.

Also (from the 'getting ahead of ourselves dept) September somewhat rivals April on the Charmin scale.
17 of our final 20 games are against:
- Pittsburgh 3 (on the road)
- Florida: 7 (4H - 3R)
- Washington 7 (4H - 3R)

Only 3 in Atlanta break up that (supposed) cake-walk.

Of course by then the young Pitt pitchers may have all gotten their acts together and the Nats & Fish could be entirely different teams so who knows.



I liked the "old" days when there was no discussion of easy or hard skeds because you always played the same one as all your division rivals.

[Elster88]

Philly is a decent team.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

Are the Mets the only team in the NL East that doesn't play Tampa Bay this year? That would be unfortunate.

I agree about the standard scheduling. I liked it when it was always 18 games against each team in your division, and 12 against the opposite division. Having three divisions in each league, plus interleague play, makes that impossible. I do like the 19 games played within the division, but I don't like that, with only a few exceptions, the Mets play only 6 games against all of the other NL teams.

[Centerfield]

I wish we had to play the Cardinals once. Twice maybe.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Three and one it is.

[Guest Rotblatt]

Well, we've done our job in May so far by taking 3 of 4.

We only need to take 1 of 3 versus Atlanta to stay on track for 16 May wins, but with the Phillies starting to phill into phorm, it'd help to have a bit of a cushion. We face them 6 times this month, and it's looking like that will be far from the cake walk their April record suggested. May 9 through May 25 (PHI, MIL, STL, NYY, PHI) could be a brutal stretch for us.

[Guest Edgy DC]

One way to look at it is that we've been through the absence of Beltran and nasty slumps by just about everybody in the lineup --- including one lasting most of the season by Cliff Floyd --- and come out of it above water.

Maybe we'll have most of our cylanders firing for that stretch, I hope, I hope.

[Guest Rotblatt]

On this week's hit list, we check in at #4--first in the NL.

]On the right end of some dramatic victories, and now 9-2 in one-run games. Still, when injuries to the rotation--the latest a torn flexor tendon that will cost Victor Zambrano the season due to a communication breakdown--portend the arrival of the owner of both the American and National League records for highest ERA in a season of 30+ starts, you have to wonder whether the Mets are living on borrowed time now that the clock has struck Lima Time.

Brewer's check in at 9th, Cards sit at 5th, Yanks at 1st.

Phillies at 17th:

]Phantastic: the Phils run the table, stretching their winning streak to eight games and rising above .500. Leading the charge is Chase Utley (.483/.531/.862 with three homers) with Ryan Howard and Aaron Rowand each adding a trio of dingers. The rotation remains a problem, with Brett Myers and Cory Lidle the only starters with ERAs below 6.16.

If we lose today, we'll still be on the pace I set for us prior to our current stretch of games, thanks to taking 2 of 3 against Atlanta. Every win is precious here, though, while we figure out a way to stop the bleeding from our rotation.

Milwaukee's been struggling lately, losing 4 of their last 5, and with Peavy starting against them tonight, their work's cut out for them. They've played very well at home, though (11-6), and I expect a tough series this weekend.

[Elster88]

]I liked the "old" days when there was no discussion of easy or hard skeds because you always played the same one as all your division rivals.

Still do, minus one interleague series, no?

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

No. Each year the Mets (and each other team in the East) plays one extra series against a Central club. One team will get the Pirates while another will get the Cardinals.

[Frayed Knot]

The culprits are Inter-League, the move to 3-divisions, and expansion.
Teh Mets used to have 11 opponents, now they play 20 different teams and there's just no way to divide that evenly.

That odd extra (or missing) series here and there plus the inter-league games comprise about 15% of the sked. You're also fighting for the Wild Card against teams which can have vastly different skedules. Plus, if you want to be really picky, odd numbers of games against teams means someone has an extra home game.


The schedule was great after they first went to the 2-division set-up (6 teams per).
The season was essentially divided into fifths with all play being INTRA-divison in the 1st, 3rd, and final 5th of the season, while the 2nd & 4th sections were cross-division. So while you were playing in-division so were al your division opponents and same w/cross division.
Much easier to track as well as being fairer.

[Guest Edgy DC]

]Teh Mets used to have 11 opponents, now they play 20 different teams and there's just no way to divide that evenly.

Actually there is. If they went to two 15-team leagues they could have

• 18 games each (9 home, 9 away) against 4division opponents (72 games);
  
  
• 6 games each (3 home, 3 away) against 10 non-divison league opponents (60 games, 72 + 60 = 132); and
  
  
• One of
  • 6 games each (3 home, 3 away) against 5 non-league opponents in a designated (rotatiing annually) division, or
  • 2 games each (1 home, 1 away) against 15 non-league teams (ulikely)
  (30 games, 72 + 60 + 30 = 162).

The problem there is the belief that inter-league play has to occur at once, making an odd-number of teams in each league un-doable. Maybe it is.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

I've thought about setups similar to the one Edgy outlined, and I like it. It does mean that at any given time, there will be one and only one interleague series going on, but that's okay. You can arrange it so that the biggies (Mets-Yankees, Cubs-White Sox, etc.) fall on weekends, and the dull ones (Royals-Pirates) fall during the week.