Schaefer business

[metirish]

Maybe Beltran will have a monster year and beat Wright out, that of course would be great for the team.(assuming Wright has a great year)

[Guest themetfairy]

We should have such things to worry about

[Guest AG/DC]

metirish wrote: Maybe Beltran will have a monster year and beat Wright out, that of course would be great for the team.(assuming Wright has a great year)

If 2006 is any indication, having a monster year will not Wright-proof your Schaefer.

[Benjamin Grimm]

In 2006, it was Beltran's idleness for the last two weeks or so that let David get by him.

Schaefer is a mix of quality and quantity, and Wright won it that year on quantity.

[Guest AG/DC]

Balderdash.

[Willets Point]

AG/DC wrote: Balderdash.

Agreed. Quantity is due to consistency.

[Benjamin Grimm]

On September 23 Beltran was ahead of Wright.

Beltran sat out a whole week in September. Wright didn't. Wright pulled ahead. He won by fewer than two points.

So how is that balderdash?

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

I don't remember specifically but I would think that Beltran's lead on Wright may have been too slim going into the last week, based on my suspicion that Wright for whatever reason tends to mop up credit with a bigger sponge than his teammates.

[metirish]

2006 was a great year , hopefully this September Beltran won't have to sit out a week and can fight Wright all the way....

[Guest AG/DC]

Sorry, I'm really trying to save time in my life by making one-word arguments.

Beltran had the clearly superior year. even as he played in 14 fewer games.

Going by my favorite quick-'n'-dirty measure, Plate Apperances x (OPS+ - 60) we get

Wright: 661 x (133 - 60) = 661 x 73 = 48,253

Beltran: 617 x (150 - 60) = 617 x 90 = 55,530

They played positions in similar spots on the defensive spectrum and Beltran won a gilded gauntlet at his, and may have even deserved it.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Oh, I know Beltran had the superior year, and deserved the Schaefer award that year. I'm not disputing that.

My point was that he would have won had he not skipped an entire week. It's that extra playing time that put Wright over the top. Hence my point that he won on quantity, which you termed "balderdash."

I do agree with Johnny's point that Wright was probably closer to Beltran than he should have been, and that Beltran's lead should have been large enough that he could have held it even with a week off.

[Guest AG/DC]

Well, if I was Jim Backus, a one-word argument would have been sufficient.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Are you referring to Thurston Howell, or Mister Magoo?

[Guest AG/DC]

Mostly Howell, but even moreso Tyler Fitzgerald.

[Fman99]

Is there a specific number of total points that should be given out in Mets losses? I notice that people are giving out anywhere between four and six points depending on what I am not sure.

[metirish]

No there is not, it's at your discretion.

[Guest Triple Dee]

Fman99 wrote: Is there a specific number of total points that should be given out in Mets losses? I notice that people are giving out anywhere between four and six points depending on what I am not sure.

No, I think that just reflects the general antipathy directed at the team.

[Fman99]

Thanks.

[metirish]

Fman99 wrote: Thanks.

I always thought you were Willets.

[metsmarathon]

ok, i need help with yesterday's game...

did church have a realistic chance at snagging teixeira's home run, that he looked to me to have misplayed, or was that going to go out no matter what approach church took to the ball?

currently, i've got church as one of three beer-sipping mets, yet my feelings on that play may leave him a bit thirsty. is it unfair to hold that home run against him, or is it a realistic expectation that he make a successful play on that ball - a ball i thought for sure was catchable until it wasn't?

OE: i'm also holding the double over pagan's head against him. i think that's a bit more fair, as he should have gotten that ball easily.

[Fman99]

metirish wrote: ="Fman99"]Thanks. I always thought you were Willets.

No actually I am Fman99.

[Guest themetfairy]

Every time this thread pops up I get anxious that I've made a mistake in my voting.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I have to say, the voting so far has been just about perfect. My spreadsheet is sucking up the votes and spitting out the results with almost no intervention on my part.

There have been no misspellings. Nobody's awarded more than ten points. There's been good participation, even in the losses.

Great work everybody!


In other business, I'll be posting the official reminder, with links, tomorrow, but voting for both Atlanta games will close on Wednesday morning.

[Benjamin Grimm]

And here's the official notice that voting for both of these games will close on Wednesday morning:

Schaefer POTG 04/05/08 Atlanta 11, Mets 5 (9 votes so far)

Schaefer POTG 04/06/08 Atlanta 3, Mets 1 (10 votes so far)

[Benjamin Grimm]

metsmarathon wrote: Santana 6.8 Wright 1.8 Church 0.2

Oops, metsmarathon.

You've gone over the 6-point maximum on Santana. Please edit.

[metsmarathon]

my bad.

last year, i only gave out one 6-point performance, to tom glavine on 27 july (he earned 6.4). five games into this year, i'm already giving out 6 points in a loss!

[metsmarathon]

my schaeffering is upside down from everybody else! i'm giving almost 4 beers to delgado, and only a single beer to perez!

delgado gets credit for the go ahead home run, another single, and turning a dp all by his lonesome, with demerits for two unproductive at bats including one lob, and the error.

perez gets gredit for 5.2 ip, 2ks, and leaving in line for the win, with demerits for 3 hits, 3 walks, 2 hbp, a balk, failing to turn in a quality start, and bequeathing two runners.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I figure Delgado's error did more harm than the benefit provided by his home run, but I didn't think he deserved a zero. So I gave him a half point.

Perez did very well. The only flaw was that he couldn't go deep enough into the game. I gave him 3.5. If he had finished the sixth, I probably would have given him a 4.

[metsmarathon]

yeah, if perez is left in to finish the 6th, and gets a nice, easy, uneventful ground ball out, he leaves the game with a health 4 beers, and knocks delgado down to 3 beers. his thirstiness, then, falls on willie's head, presuming oliver would've gotten that lone uneventful out, of course.

but i've long been holding it against pitchers who cannot start a game without getting a quality start out of the affair, and there's a reason (aside from just managerial incompetence) that willie took him out when he did. failing to get that quality start can really hurt a pitcher when i vote. also, this year, i started tracking bequeathed runners, and having bequeathed runners, perez gets the hit there.

delgado is helped, of course, by the fact that nobody else was doing much schaefer-earning.

OE. does any blame for the error go to reyes? i mean, i just looked at the relay, and honetly, i'm not sure where delgado could've thrown the ball to get around utley, to reyes. should reyes have given more of an inside target, albeit forcing delgado into a more unnatural throw more across the basepath and his body? perhaps delgado should've recognized that and gone to first for the sure force instead?

[Frayed Knot]

Must .. resist .. temptation.. to give Scheffer points to Eric Bruntlett