metsmarathon

if you think my 6.0 is too much for pelfrey in the june 13th game, take solace in the fact that he scored a 6.2 on my spreadsheet. granted, it's about as weak a sixer as i've ever given out, but he did just enough, barely and with the help of his unproductive teammates, to earn it. the extra 0.2 was shared evenly between carrasco and tejada.

Pelfrey 6.0 Carrasco 2.1 Duda 0.4 Tejada 1.5

Capuano 5.0 Reyes 1.6 Hairston 1.3 Beltran 0.8 Murphy 0.7 Pagan 0.6

Dickey 5.8 Tejada 2.3 Murphy 1.0 Reyes 0.6 Beltran 0.2 Pagan 0.1

Gee 4.8 Pagan 1.5 Reyes 1.4 Turner 1.0 Beltran 0.7 Duda 0.6

Niese 4.6 Rodriguez 2.0 Pagan 1.4 Tejada 1.2 Beltran 0.5 Turner 0.3

if they wanted to move the fences, i would do almost exactly this. i'd actually prefer a shea-like arc in left field, but it's exactly my thoughts on the right field spot. maybe i should just email the hittracker guy my query on jason bay and david wright, and the effect the citi field walls would have had on their 2009 and 2008 home runs, respectively, in an attempt to finally nail down just how much they should have expected teh walls to affect their home run totals, and the extend to which tehy should have attempted to modify their respective approaches. as we can see, neither changed for the better, though wright seems to have undone much of what he screwed up.

wright by the smidgiest smidge ahead of reyes. i love his do-goodeyness. beltran is up there too, but lags on the home-grown metric. i have a high affinity towards danny murphy.

metirish wrote: Joba with torn ligaments in his elbow, Tommy john says Girardi, a real doc has yet to confirm that. hmm. i happen to know of a good, proven reliever they could probably use...

you seem to miss my point. my point in looking at the home run tracks is to look at what would happen if the hitter did not adjust his approach. of the 36 homers jason bay hit in 2009, how many would still be homers if he struck them all in citi field. my argument is that jason bay and david wright should not have tinkered with their swing in some foolish attempt to eke out more power, as the negative impact on their numbers due to the farther fences would not merit the inevitable tradeoffs. that if they kept on doing what they were doing, they'd be fine. particularly in relation to shea stadium, which already had a depressive effect on home runs. i'm not arguing that citi field did not cause david wright to change his approach / swing. i'm not arguing that citi field caused jason bay to change his approach / swing. i'm arguing that they were foolish to have. that players have indeed changed their approach due to the dimensions of citi field neither proves nor disproves my point. players do stupid things. players wear plastic necklaces with holographic stickers on them. i don't expect them to have done any sort of scientific analysis on the matter.

relative to a neutral field, citi field is a 50% more difficult place to hit homers in than shea stadium. so for every 1217 road homers, shea costs you 111 home homers, whereas citi costs you 155. yes. yes. i know. so if you have a hitter who hits 12 homers on the road, with a home-run-distance distribution equivalent to the sum total of all hitters to play for or against the mets over the prior ten seasons , he will hit one fewer home run at shea, and 1.5 fewer home runs at citi. so that 24 home run hitting guy who plays all his games on a neutral field will become a 23 home run hitting guy at shea, and a 22.5 home run hitting guy at citi field. yes, i see how this should cause home run hitters to cry and carry on and drastically change their approach. obviously, a guy who routinely hits the ball farther will be affected less by citi than a guy who does not. that's why i wanna see the specific data for a specific hitter.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: if we're dropping data because it conflicts with our preconceived notions, then i suggest we also toss out shea's 2008 park effect of 1.081, which was likely inflated by citi's affect on the natural wind patterns. doing that, shea's average home run park effect is 0.884. I don't know what you mean when you write that I was "dropping data". i merely offered the opportunity. According to these numbers, Shea reduced HR's by 9%; Citi reduces HR's by 14% --- a difference of more than 50% (0.91-0.86)/0.91 = 0.054 = 5% i would expect 5% fewer homers at citi field than shea based on the available historic data. if you scale the home homers to the same number of road homers, you get, for every 1,217 homers hit in road mets games, there will be 1062 homers hit in home mets games, presuming the current ratio stands up. 1106 -1062 = 44 44 / 1106 = 0.040, or 4% fewer homers hit at citi than shea, given an equivalent road-homer environment. fuck jason bay and david wright even more. oe: those espn park factors sure are wonky, aren't they?

from 2001 to 2008, shea stadium had an average park effect on homers of 0.870, based on the data on espn.com. this includes 2006 where shea had a jaw-droppingly low park factor of 0.575. excluding this from the data, shea had a park factor of 0.912. from 2009 until present, citi field has an aveage park effect on homers of 0.861, based on the same espn data. if you wish to discount the 2009 season wherein the park had a positive effect on homers to the tune of 1.057, this figure drops to 0.763. i don't know why you'd drop 40% of your data just because it doesn't agree with your preconceived notions, but whatever. if we're dropping data because it conflicts with our preconceived notions, then i suggest we also toss out shea's 2008 park effect of 1.081, which was likely inflated by citi's affect on the natural wind patterns. doing that, shea's average home run park effect is 0.884. oddly, (0.884-0.763)/0.884 = 13.68% i still come back to the notion that i want to look at the paths that batted balls took off of jason bay's bat in 2009 and compare them to the fences of citi field, to see just how many balls he should have expected to lose to the park. i'd like to also do the same to david wright's 2008. well, more correctly, i'd like for someone to do it for me. and then i'd like to tell them both to fuck off to hell for letting the goddamned fences un-make their careers over maybe four home runs each, at least half of which would probably still go for doubles.

Capuano 3.8 Reyes 1.7 Rodriguez 1.5 Beato 1.2 Isringhausen 1.2 Thole 0.6

you generally expect healthy 28 year-olds to put up the best seasons of their respective careers.

we're a third of the way into the season right now. fangraphs.com has reyes as the #2 player in the majors with 3.2 WAR. he's tied with joey votto, behind only jose bautista and his silly 4.9 WAR. derek jeter sits way down there at 0.5 WAR thus far. derek jeter is on pace for a 1.5 WAR season. if jose reyes stopped playing after the conclusion of tonights game, he'd still have been [u:22xauot7]twice [/u:22xauot7]as productive as derek jeter will be [u:22xauot7]for the entire season. [/u:22xauot7]baseball reference doesn't really love jose reyes' defense. they have him down as the 8th best player in the NL, 19th in the majors, at 2.1 WAR. granted, they have derek jeter at 0.2 WAR. derek jeter is on pace for a 0.6 WAR season according to baseball reference. if jose reyes stopped playing after the conclusion of tonight's game, baseball reference would show him as being over [u:22xauot7]three times [/u:22xauot7]as productive as derek jeter [u:22xauot7]for the entire season[/u:22xauot7]. if jose reyes regresses to his prior ways, he's still a 5+ win player when he's healthy. the only way derek jeter is a 5 win player next year is if he starts hanging out with arod's cousin. hell, i don't think derek jeter will amass 5 wins [u:22xauot7]total [/u:22xauot7]from now until the end of his career. i don't know who you're asking about these hypothetical jeter/reyes swaps, but it would help if they were remotely well-informed. as a side note, i heard on the radio today that micahel kay still expects derek jeter to hit 0.300 this year, despite hitting only 0.260 at the moment. which means that he expects derek jeter to suddenly hit over 0.320 for the remainder of the year. i'd consider him neither impartial nor knowledgeable.

don't fucking trade reyes. don't fucking trade wright. build a fucking winner and rake in the fucking dough.

Dickey 5.2 Reyes 1.7 Tejada 1.4 Beltran 0.9 Harris 0.4 Murphy 0.4

Gee 5.1 Reyes 1.0 Thole 1.1 Tejada 1.0 Pridie 1.0 Turner 0.8

Niese 5.8 Pagan 1.5 Murphy 1.2 Beltran 0.9 Reyes 0.6

Beltran 3.7 Tejada 1.9 Isringhausen 1.8 Byrdak 1.2 Murphy 0.8 Harris 0.6

per fangraphs, mackey sasser is the most productive metly deuce at 2.9 WAR per his career in the number. next comes roy staiger at 1.9 WAR, then chuck hiller at 1.2 WAR, and finally justin turner at 1.0 WAR. it's certainly his number to take. but he's gotta wrest it from mackey

Tejada 4.3 Turner 2.0 Thayer 1.5 Beltran 1.2 Paulino 0.6 Murphy 0.4

Scouts liked Jeter over the Mets' Jose Reyes because of Jeter's durability. yeah, i can kinda go along with this logic. if reyes gets hurt, you're gonna take a big hit with your replacement player. if jeter gets hurt, your team might improve.

Vic Sage wrote: Ceetar wrote: except you make inferences that he didn't just had a bad year, he was purposely stat-padding because despite spending his whole career suggesting that he grasps that home runs aren't everything he purposely took an approach that would make him a weaker player that just hit home runs. Maybe it was the influence of Jerry Manuel and his liking that style of player. i'm not inferring it; you're inferring it. I didn't even imply it. I just think DW is trying to do what he thinks he has to, after the debacle of `09, to stay even moderately productive in the unfriendly confines of ShitiField. and i contend that he is foolish to do so. citi field never seemed to keep chase utley from hitting homers here.