Bases Loaded

[Frayed Knot]

I brought up the team's total ineptness with the bags full briefly in last night's IGT.

Taking a closer look at it, they're up to 114 plate appearances with the sacks drunk this year (99 ABs) with a totally pitiful slash line of .202/.219/.273
That's 15 singles, 3 doubles, 2 triples, and (famously by this point) 0 grand slams. Also 10 Sac Flies plus 4 BBs and 1 HBP

Even if they were merely matching the usual level of sub-par NYM-2010 noffense - which is down to a paltry .248/.312./381 at this point - the totals would be more like 17 singles (2 higher than now), 5 doubles (+2), 1 triple (we lose one there), plus 2 actual GS and 5 extra walks. That gain alone might be worth 15-20 runs and maybe 2 games in the standings even if the extra hits weren't selectively applied to games where they were most needed.
The fact that teams normally hit better in bases-loaded situations because the pitcher is at a disadvantage there (NL as a whole bats 19 points higher) would jack those numbers up even more.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

I'd like to blame dumb luck but to me this team is just plagued with anxiety, and I want to blame Jerry.

[MFS62]

This team would have a tough time scoring at the Chicken Ranch.

And it doesn't matter how many runners are on base.

Later

[Guest Edgy DC]

Baserunners are elements of scoring. Of course it matters.

[MFS62]

There are baserunners at a brothel?
Man, you really know how to party.

Later

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

My brain says SmaSamSz-- I mean, after 114 PAs or so, Murphy looked like our starting LFer, no?-- but my gut says that it's got to be an approach thing. (Well, either that, or that I shouldn't have had tuna for breakfast.)

[Guest Edgy DC]

The thing is that it's a sample size of advantageous at-bats.

[smg58]

Well presumably the Mets know if they approach bases-loaded situations differently than other situations, and if they do, they should probably stop.

[MFS62]

My brain says SmaSamSz-- I mean, after 114 PAs or so, Murphy looked like our starting LFer, no?-- but my gut says that it's got to be an approach thing. (Well, either that, or that I shouldn't have had tuna for breakfast.)

Funny you should mention Murphy.
I thought about him earlier in the week and looked up some numbers in baseball-reference.
They show that Ike really hasn't given the team more than a healthy Dan Murphy would have.
Davis: .320/.423/.744
Murphy (career): .331/ .437/ .768
In fact, less.

Later

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Edgy DC wrote: The thing is that it's a sample size of advantageous at-bats.

Well, yeah, but that just means the norm these numbers are likely straying from should be higher than their overall triple-slash*.

*It feels like there should be a Wolverine-ish sound effect here, doesn't it?

[Ceetar]

My brain says SmaSamSz-- I mean, after 114 PAs or so, Murphy looked like our starting LFer, no?-- but my gut says that it's got to be an approach thing. (Well, either that, or that I shouldn't have had tuna for breakfast.) Funny you should mention Murphy. I thought about him earlier in the week and looked up some numbers in baseball-reference. They show that Ike really hasn't given the team more than a healthy Dan Murphy would have. Davis: .320/.423/.744 Murphy (career): .331/ .437/ .768 In fact, less. Later

I would've bet on Murphy having a better year than Davis. Davis has the advantage defensively though. And all the 'intangible' "He looks like a ballplayer" stats point to him being better right? He hit more home runs too. farther.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Well, yeah, but the ISO and defense (presumably, according to the eyetest and the nowhere-near-statistically-reliable-for-predictive-purposes UZR/plus-minus samples) are better, right?

[metsmarathon]

what's surprising is that the mets aren't striking out excessively much (21 SO / 114 PA) , which pretty much matches the season rate.

the babip, however, is a paltry 0.227, lowest in teh league. colorado has a 0.228; the next worst babip is milwaukee's 0.263.

that's some shit contact we're making.

[Frayed Knot]

Yeah, I suppose the next step would be to see what the NYM bases-loaded LD% / FO% / PO% / GB% stats look like compared to the overall.

Claiming bad luck because your BABiP stats suck would be one thing - but if you're killing most of your ABs hitting infield pops during that time that argument loses ground.

[Frayed Knot]

On the flip side of the equation ...

Our pitching line with bases loaded is .291/.327/.528 -- as compared to their overall of .260/.328/.392
Or, in 150 PAs (127 ABs) they've coughed up 25 singles, 3 2Bs & 9 GS. Also 12 BBs, 2 HBPs, and 9 Sac Flies
If NYM pitchers pitched to their "normal" rate, the results would be more like 24 singles (-1), 7 2Bs (+4), 1 3B (+1), 3 GS (-6), 13 BBs (+1), 27 Ks (-5), 1 HBP (-1)

Obviously the high level of Grand Slams are the biggest problem as basically the expected 2Bs & 3Bs are becoming HRs - something that alone is probably worth 10 runs or more.

So just by getting 'expected' results out of our bases-loaded situations alone (both ways) we'd maybe be 3 to 5 games higher in the standings.

[Theoldmole]

You don't explode for seven runs. Seven is a good game, not an explosion. I'd say explosions start at about 13.

[G-Fafif]

TheOldMole wrote: You don't explode for seven runs. Seven is a good game, not an explosion. I'd say explosions start at about 13.

The Mets leaked seven runs in Pittsburgh last night.

[Zvon]

Is it possible more cowbell will help this situation.
Cause I am ready with the cowbell.
I'm just sitting here and the cowbell is right up on the bookcase.
I can go...
hold on a sec.....

[Zvon]

Oh yea baby