Frayed Knot

Hot off the press at MLB.com: 'Mariners near deal for Cozart'

I hadn't realized that Jay Caitlin (as CF insisted a while back is the proper form of address in order to stay in good terms with the politically correct crowd) is signed for next season (at the reasonably reasonable number of $13 mil) which changes things slightly, but so do his numbers over the last three seasons combined which aren't nearly as attractive as just this year alone: .233/.295/.446 I'd prefer to spend our limited resources on something we don't have right now [speed, leadoff skillz] and lefty-hitting corner OFs with power potential who K a lot isn't exactly in short supply in Queens these days.

Former Mets in the badlands -- Ike Davis, Beltran Ike is currently plying his trade in AAA Scranton Wilkes-Barre, 14 ABs with the big club apparently gave the Yanx all they needed to see from him. And I think it's better than even money (like WAY better than even) that Beltran is no longer a Yank by game time tonight. But as of today Tyler Clippard qualifies as an ex-Met pitching for the Yanx

I'd stay internal at this point, either Reynolds or Cecchini. If either or both bomb in the short term it's a race as to who's back sooner, Reyes or Cabrera -- almost certainly Reyes based on how Asdrubal looked going off the field.

Edgy MD wrote: What a hot potato that guy has become. Fourth team for Clip-Art since the beginning of 2015. Wasn't having a particularly good season out in the desert: 4.30 ERA / 1.3 WHiP compared to the 3.06 / 1.05 he put up in Queens last year. I guess he's going to be the guy setting up Bettances at this point, either him or Adam Warren who's also a recidivist Yanqui. Whatever it's going to be, it's a far cry from the Bettances - Miller - Chapman trio they were running out there since May

I was just curious if the 'Trade-Reed' brigade was looking for this-season help at another position or was punting entirely on '16 and looking for future goods. One thing about Reed which I had either forgotten or never knew is that he's still only arb-eligible at the end of the year. True that would make him more attractive on the trade market but also makes him more attractive to hang onto. If we dealt away Reed it seems to me we'd be wanting to land a Reed this winter.

MFS62 wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: Deadline is tomorrow (Monday) 4 PM I thought it was today. Lacroy was held out of today's game pending a trade. That made me think they didn't want him on the field while a trade went down (like the Flores internet fiasco last year. Well you NEVER want a guy on the field when a deal is in the works and a deal WAS in the works, it just happened to fall through. Lucroy later pinch hit after the deal was declared dead. The deadline was bumped back a day this year because the traditional day fell on a Sunday and would haven't landed right in the middle of virtually every team's game. Jayson Stark is saying that Lucroy to the Mets is a dead issue.

Deadline is tomorrow (Monday) 4 PM

Maybe if I get some time I'll look back through the stats and do an Armando vs Jeurys comparison to see who looks better when viewed through these same conditions. THAT would be interesting. I'd be curious to know that. OK so I semi-promised to get back to this topic at some point - and it only took me a month. A bit of background first: Since the original discussion here kind of centers on how Jeurys the closer compares to Armando the closer, it made the most sense to compare them during those times when each was the team�s main closer. In Benitez�s case that meant I took his data starting in mid-1999 when he took over that job from Franco through the 2002 season - and, yes, that means I skipped his final half season for the Mets in 2003. I did so because without question he sucked during that stretch and everyone knows it. And while that makes it seem like I�m putting my thumb on the scales in his favor (a he�d certainly look worse if that portion was included) a big part of this it to see how Benitez fared even during the time he was saving most of his games and yet still getting tons of abuse from the fans. Those with many years here know specifically what I�m talking about; it was never enough that he saved the game but how did he make you FEEEEEL while doing so. That�s a large part of what reignited the discussion. So this pits Armando when he was at his best for a nearly 3-1/2 year span vs what Familia is doing during his period as the team�s �Final Boss�, the beginning of 2015 through to the present. So what did I look at? Well first their overall stats for those spans with all the usual categories. The other thing I did was to break out just those appearances where they entered the game in what we now know of as standard closer usage: one-inning only, only with a 1, 2, or 3 runs lead, and only to start the inning fresh w/bases empty and none out. The reason I went there, aside from the idea that it tends to �standardize� all closers stats, was that I had a baseline to compare it all to as back in 2013 & 2014 when I wanted to find out the overall success of closers (because I was curious and because I�m a nerd) I tracked how ML closers as a group did in those �standard� save opps. Specifically I was tracking three things: - was it a one, two, or three run lead they were trying to protect? Obviously it�s easier to close out a game with a bigger lead than a smaller so you want to account for each. - did the closer protect the lead or blow the save by allowing the tying and/or go-ahead runs (how the game eventually turned out is irrelevant, only the success or not of the save mattered) - and was the save a �Perfect� 1-2-3 inning, or was there some degree of drama involved? So between the overall stats for each plus the situational saves breakdown we can contrast Familia & Benitez to each other and also to my generated league-wide norms and at least get some idea of how the two compare. OK, so with that overly-long intro out of the way, what did I find out? Mainly I found that both guys are/were pretty darn good � and are/were pretty darn comparable. FAMILIA: All appearances 2015-present 127 Games, 4-5; 2.33 ERA; 126.2 IP; 103 H; 33 ER; 6 HR; 41 BB; 135 K; 1.13 WHIP BENITEZ: mid-1999 thru end of 2002 247 Games; 15-9; 2.81 ERA; 255.2 IP; 167 H; 80 ER; 31 HR; 123 BB; 339 K; 1.13 WHIP The coincidence that JF has made right about half as many appearances as AB did makes comparison a bit easier. Familia has a large edge in HRs allowed and also walks. But this shows that he also misses fewer bats as his strike-out rate is lower (despite pitching in a K-happy era) and his hit rate higher. Their WHiP rates are near identical (the hits on the one side balancing out the walks on the other) but advantage Jeurys in ERA with his nearly 1/2 R/G edge ... or maybe not so much of an advantage since, although it�s only been 15 years between the two careers, the �99-�02 era Armando pitched in was the biggest offensive era since at least the 1930s and maybe ever. As a result, Benitez�s WHiP was about 20% lower than his era while Familia�s more like 15% better than his. A small difference but we�re pretty much talking about small differences here. Same with ERA as Familia is putting up an ERA that is not quite 1/2 run better (0.48) than Benitez but is doing so in an era where overall ERA is better by almost that same amount -- ERA for 2016-16 = ~4.05; ERA for 2000-2002 = 4.48 (0.43 difference) -- which effectively wipes out that gap almost entirely. As for those specific save situations as detailed above, here�s what I found back in 2013-14 for league-wide norms of all standard 1-inning saves: Overall save success = 86.9% Saves with a 1 run lead = 78.8% successful 2 run saves = 89.8% successful 3 run saves = 96.4% successful The Shorthand version of all those numbers: ML closers blow a lead they�ve been given about one time out of every seven chances. Broken down further: slightly more than 1 in 5 one-run leads are blown, about 1 in every 10 two-run leads, and very very few (approx 1 in 28) three-run leads. And, no matter what the size of the lead, the �Perfect� 1-2-3 inning occurs a bit more than 1/3 of the time (36.3%) - a rate which I�ve long suspected is below where most fans think it is (or think it should be). As for how our boys compare to those norms and each other (and, again, these aren't ALL save attempts but are rather just those saves which fit the standard one-inning save definition): FAMILIA: Overall Save % = 93.0% (66 of 71) 1-run games = 85.7% (24 of 28) 2-run games = 100% (27 of 27) 3-run games = 93.8% (15 of 16) ... remember the 'Justin Upton' game? �PERFECT� = 43.7% BENITEZ: Overall Save % = 91.5% (119 of 130) 1-run saves = 87.9% (51 of 58) 2-run saves = 97.4% (36 of 37) 3-run saves = 91.4% (32 of 35) �PERFECT� = 36.2% Slight advantage Familia overall and a somewhat larger edge in spinning those drama-free 1-2-3 saves. But Armando was a shade better in those saves where there was no margin for error and also had a larger percentage of his save opps (44% to 40%) that were of the one-run variety. Both guys topped the league norms in overall save conversion and in each of the individual categories with the exception of Benitez and three-run blown saves where he was high, and in �Perfect� saves where he was right around average. So, final conclusion? This winds up right about how I thought it might, maybe an edge to Familia but a small one and one he�ll have to keep up for another two full seasons in order to �match� what Armando did during his time here. Comments, rebuttals, complaints, corrections, and just about everything else short of overly-ripe fruit is, as always, welcome.

So this is future help we're looking for here rather than present because, make no mistake, losing Reed would hurt the team over the next 60 games (and beyond?).

Loney (at least temporarily) takes over helmet removal duty.

In my view, this replay was no more or no less 'definitive' than the last one, but one got overturned and the other didn't. Personally I wouldn't have flipped either of them but I'd do that for every replay where there's not 'clear and convincing' evidence to do so and then maybe it would stop managers from challenging every call that maybe/might/could go there way if someone would only get the magnifying glass out.

So they're telling us that there was enough "definitive proof" in that replay to overturn that call?

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Did Smoker get into a game -- and has he been send back to Vegas? No, Yes.

Hey, a hit with a runner in scoring position [u:fbc38bcr]AND[/u:fbc38bcr] no one needed to be hospitalized as a result. Most teams would call that standard operating procedure. On this team it's called progress.

... annnnnd we're rain delayed.

Strangest trade of the year so far is probably San Diego dealing Matt Kemp to the Braves in exchange for Hector Olivera, or at least the contract of Olivera as the Pad's plan is to release Olivera as soon as they get him. Olivera is the Cuban the Dodgers signed seemingly sight unseen - or maybe they just figured that after surprisingly everybody by hitting on Puig that they had the golden touch and any ballplayer who escaped that island was going to turn out just as well. Signed by the Dodgers in May of 2015, the 30 y/o Olivera had 75 ABs in the minors (mostly in rookie ball) before LA dealt him to Atlanta as part of a multi-team, mega-player trade at last year's deadline, agreeing to pay his entire $28 million signing bonus in the process. The Braves put him on the ML club last September and again at the start of 2016. But an assault charge put a damper on those plans (hate when that happens) and he's been on double secret probation ever since. In the meantime this means the Mets will have the still only 31 y/o Matt Kemp to deal with six series per year for the next three seasons (signed thru 2019). As erratic as his career has been it's tough to know whether that's a good thing for the Braves or a bad thing. He's back to hitting for power again but his .285 OBA is a steep drop off his .340 career average or when he was putting up .399 in his near-MVP season five years ago. And then just to bring this full circle, the Dodgers are paying a large chunk of the contract for each of these guys as they were the ones who signed both to their current deal but then quickly decided they wanted out.

De Aza - CF CABRERA - SS LONEY - 1B WALKER - 2B CONFORTO - LF FLORES - 3B NIMMO - RF RIVERA - C SYNDERGAARD - P

Certainly looking that way but not official yet. Cleveland is on Lucroy's N-T list so he still gets the final stamp of approval. I'm kind of relieved to be honest here. Now rumors have the Mets turning their attention to Jay Bruce although I'm not sure how he's a real fit either, especially seeing as how he'd be gone at the end of the year. At least with Lucroy you'd also get his 2017 season in the swap.

On the other hand maybe the demotion to set-up man will send Papelbon off the deep end like it seemed to do to Storen last year.

Well yeah, that he's hitting in the middle of the order says more about the absence of DooDoo & Dabid and the back-sliding of d'Arnaud & Conforto. But his singles & HRs dichotomy is sort of a separate problem. Walker is actually one of the few regulars whose RiSP numbers more or less resemble his overall 2016 stats [717 OPS vs 740] It's the rest of the team whose 717 overall OPS plunges to [u:3eyknf4r]597[/u:3eyknf4r] w/RiSP.

I vaguely remember Ruggiano with the Marlins a few years back ... (looking it up) he had one good partial year and got rewarded with increased playing time the following season and couldn't match the stats. Since then he's been a part-timer with the Cubs, Mariners, Dodgers, and then got 4 ABs with Texas this season before getting released. Didn't hit that well at AAA Round Rock either. BR/TR, 34 y/o.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Guys On The Internet think its a multiple players deal where wed also get LHRP Will Smith. Apparently Darnaud,Zimmo and a prospect going away. I don't like the direction this seems to be heading.

13 in a row down with nothing even resembling something that coulda, maybe, might be a hit during that stretch.

A few quick calculations here as I dive even further down this rabbit hole of an obsession concerning this team's pitiful hitting with runners on. If the 2016 Mets were to hit with RiSP just like the 2016 Mets hit otherwise -- not exactly a high bar to clear seeing as how they're DFL in the NL in BA at .238 -- their 148 hits w/RiSP would turn into 174. Taking that figure and using their present production of 1.486 Runs per RiSP-AB (220 runs produced by those 148 hits) the new figure would result in an extra 39 runs scored over the course of the season to this point. That alone creates about four extra wins on average, turning the current 53-49 record into more like 57-45; the 7.5 games back into 3.5; and the current 84-win pace for the full season into 90 And that's not even the worst of it, because not only do they hit less often with RiSP but they hit a larger pct of singles in those ABs than their usual (almost 70% instead of 63.1%) with far fewer 2Bs (16.2% instead of 19%) & HRs (12.8% instead of 16.4%). So if those extra hits were in the same proportion as what they produce normally then the runs scored increase would logically get even larger. Taking just their bases loaded situations as an example. Currently they're 15-for-73 (a .205 BA, actually a notch above other RiSP ABs) in bases-loaded w/RiSP situations, but 12 of those 15 are singles. So again, simply by applying their 2016 'normal' rates to those 73 bases-loaded ABs not only would they have an extra 2.4 hits but those hits would be distributed with 1 fewer single mixed in with between 2 & 3 more doubles and between 1 & 2 more HRs. That change alone could produce an extra 10 runs.