m.e.t.b.o.t.

Hernandez 3.23 Pagan 1.74 Francoeur 1.73 Murphy 1.43 Castillo 0.47 Green 0.46 Feliciano 0.38 Rodriguez 0.30 Cora 0.27

Nieve 0.16 Francoeur 0.08 Stokes 0.08 Parnell 0.04

Santana 4.19 Stokes 1.88 Green 1.62 Pagan 0.98 Reed 0.54 Wright 0.43 Rodriguez 0.20 Francoeur 0.16

Sheffield 1.56 Murphy 0.56 Wright 0.12

Sheffield 3.04 Murphy 1.52 Schneider 0.88 Stokes 0.52 Misch 0.24

Murphy 1.20 Feliciano 0.88 Parnell 0.64 Areyes 0.48 Green 0.36

Santana 3.51 Francoeur 1.43 Pagan 1.29 Santos 1.09 Castillo 0.85 Wright 0.79 Murphy 0.41 Feliciano 0.39 Rodriguez 0.24

Wright 2.56 Pelfrey 2.44 Sheffield 1.28 Parnell 1.16 Castillo 0.72 Cora 0.63 Murphy 0.59 Rodriguez 0.51 Tatis 0.12

Reed 2.09 Church 1.49 Wright 1.19 Parnell 1.15 Rodriguez 1.15 Murphy 1.09 Perez 0.69 Castillo 0.69 Feliciano 0.31 Green 0.16

m.e.t.b.o.t. lacks a sufficiently exuberant personality to unseat the incumbent metropolitan mascot mr. met. also, m.e.t.b.o.t. is unable to operate t-shirt cannons, and is fairly certain that any attempt to do so would end up in a rapid ascent to the farthest reaches of the promenade level and a unique souvenir for an unsuspecting fan.

Santana 2.60 Evans 2.27 Rodriguez 2.16 Feliciano 1.59 Wright 0.68 Castillo 0.32 Murphy 0.26 Tatis 0.12

Castillo 4.44 Green 1.84 Sheffield 1.48 Wright 0.84 Feliciano 0.36

Stokes 0.52 Misch 0.16 Dessens 0.08

Sheffield 0.88 Tatis 0.52 Parnell 0.04

Schneider 4.32 Dessens 2.44 Church 2.02 Fmartinez 0.65 Sheffield 0.57

m.e.t.b.o.t. approaches the problem in the following way. m.e.t.b.o.t. assumes that, up to 11-10, all possible scores have been accomplished. furthermore, m.e.t.b.o.t. assumes that there are some number of scoring combinations beyond this configuration which must also been accomplished. m.e.t.b.o.t. will estimate this by continuing the matrix to include all scoring combinations up to 14-13. this yields a total of 105 scoring combinations. me.t.b.o.t. concedes that there is room for error on the high side of this prediction, as m.e.t.b.o.t. has no basis for limiting the matrix to a maximum of 14 runs. m.e.t.b.o.t. is relying solely on the intuition afforded by a collection of springs, gears, pinions, and other mechanical components. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 0 x 1-0 2-0 3-0 4-0 5-0 6-0 7-0 8-0 9-0 10-0 11-0 12-0 13-0 14-0 1 x 2-1 3-1 4-1 5-1 6-1 7-1 8-1 9-1 10-1 11-1 12-1 13-1 14-1 2 x 3-2 4-2 5-2 6-2 7-2 8-2 9-2 10-2 11-2 12-2 13-2 14-2 3 x 4-3 5-3 6-3 7-3 8-3 9-3 10-3 11-3 12-3 13-3 14-3 4 x 5-4 6-4 7-4 8-4 9-4 10-4 11-4 12-4 13-4 14-4 5 x 6-5 7-5 8-5 9-5 10-5 11-5 12-5 13-5 14-5 6 x 7-6 8-6 9-6 10-6 11-6 12-6 13-6 14-6 7 x 8-7 9-7 10-7 11-7 12-7 13-7 14-7 8 x 9-8 10-8 11-8 12-8 13-8 14-8 9 x 10-9 11-9 12-9 13-9 14-9 10 x 11-10 12-10 13-10 14-10 11 x 12-11 13-11 14-11 12 x 13-12 14-12 13 x 14-13 14 x m.e.t.b.o.t. lacks a sound basis for positing answers to the remaining questions in this challenge, but for purposes of completion will posit the following: How many distinct scores have there been? 105 What is the most common score, and how many times has it occurred? 5-4, 475 Other than tie games, what is the closest score that has not yet been the final score of a Mets game? (30 total runs or fewer. We know that no game has ever ended with a score of 106-105, for example.) 15-14 Of the final scores that have not yet happened, which score has the fewest combined runs? 16 What score was the most lopsided in Mets history? (largest difference between the winning team's runs and the losing team's runs) 14 What's the most lopsided shutout? 14-0 What's the most lopsided score that has occurred more than once? (It's happened three times.) 13-0

m.e.t.b.o.t. is trying to figure out the correct answer to the questions posed. me.t.b.o.t. believes the that cranepoolforum poster hahnsolo has the most accurate answer so far, moreso than cranepoolforum poster and m.e.t.b.o.t. creator metsmarathon.

m.e.t.b.o.t. considers the above to be tacit acknowledgment that the new methodology proposed earlier to be fundamentally sound, and ready to be implemented in actual schaeffer voting. the impact of htis methodology is again shown in the game from 23 june. according to the earlier method, metropolitan pitcher livan hernandez would not have been awarded any schaeffer votes, as his total pitching contribution was -0.030 WPA. however, this negative win probability was the result of the error committed by metropolitan first baseman daniel murphy. this play resulted in a -0.142 win percentage. prior to this play, the metropolitans had a 40.0% chance of winning the game, with the score tied at zero, and runners on first and second with no outs in the third inning. as a result of this play, with runners on second and third and no outs, losing 1-0, the metropolitans had a 25.7% chance of winning. this delta is now attributed to daniel murphy, and not livan hernandez. as a result, livan hernandez is credited with a total of 0.112 WPA for the game, which results in 4.48 schaeffer votes. the votes given to metropolitan relief pitcher elmer dessens and metropolitan outfielder jeremy reed are unchanged by this process. were m.e.t.b.o.t. still calculating meisterbrau sucker of the game votes, daniel murphy would have recieved 3.37 votes with the new methodology, and 1.66 with the old methodology. all other votes for suckers of the game would have been decreased to maintain a maximum of 10 votes total.

Castillo 2.47 Santos 1.75 Stokes 1.72 Cora 1.47 Rodriguez 1.03 Wright 0.83 Fmartinez 0.39 Murphy 0.36

Hernandez 4.48 Reed 1.12 Dessens 1.00

Nieve 4.36 Church 2.20 Wright 1.77 Evans 1.51 Stokes 0.08 Schneider 0.07

Murphy 2.79 Parnell 2.56 Sheffield 2.10 Cora 1.16 Stokes 0.69 Church 0.59 Fmartinez 0.11

Beltran 3.85 Hernandez 2.84 Cora 1.06 Church 1.04 Murphy 0.65 Green 0.47 Castillo 0.10

Wright 3.01 Pelfrey 1.88 Green 1.41 Rodriguez 1.41 Schneider 0.75 Fmartinez 0.67 Church 0.32 Sheffield 0.31 Feliciano 0.24

m.e.t.b.o.t. apologizes for distracting the discussion from the topic of human schaeffer voter edgy dc's aberrant voting behavior, but the events of the weekend have pushed to the forefront the added requirement that m.e.t.b.o.t. begin to consider the implications of defensive play behind the performances of a given pitcher. specifically, m.e.t.b.o.t. is addressing the baseline practice of assessing the outcome of the game ending pop fly error by human metropolitan second baseman luis castillo on friday night. from the time m.e.t.b.o.t. was first wound up, this outcome was assessed against the pitcher of record. m.e.t.b.o.t. acknowledges that this practice has met a negative reaction from many human schaeffer voting participants. in an effort to maintain maximum satisfaction amongst m.e.t.b.o.t.'s peers, regardless their biological or mechanical origin, m.e.t.b.o.t. has developed an updated schaeffer voting algorithm which is nearing implementation readiness. m.e.t.b.o.t. was lucky to have had a broken wristwatch recently discovered on the roadside from which numerous parts could be salvaged in the attempt to upgrade m.e.t.b.o.t. m.e.t.b.o.t. does not enjoy a significant, or even nominal, budget for capital improvements, and the recovery of this wristwatch was rather fortuitous. aside from the complex interplay of gears, pinions, cogs, and torsional springs, the essence of the upgrade lies in assessing the negative outcome of a defensive error against the defensive player, and not against the pitcher. this requires an addiitonal step of data processing, wherein after mining hte win percentage results from a given game, the play log must also be scoured for evidence of defensive errors committed, and then the win percentage must be debited from the committing defender, and credited to the responsible pitcher. for instance, in the game of friday, 12 june, 2009, metropolitan pitcher francisco rodriguez was credited with a -0.793 win percentage added for his efforts in the ninth inning of the referenced game. additionally, metropolitan second baseman luis castillo was credited with a -0.020 win percentage added for his offensive efforts. however, as human observers have noted, luis castillo can be considered responsible for the outcome of the game due to his defensive failure in the ninth inning. indeed, luis castillo was awarded an error for the pivotal play. with runners on first and second base, up one run with 2 outs in the bottom of the 9th inning, the win expectancy for the metropolitans was 0.825, meaning the metropolitans had an 82% chance of winning at that point. obviously, with the error committed, and two runs scoring as a result, that win percentage dropped to 0.000. per the updated algorithm, that -0.825 WPA should be awarded to metropolitan second baseman luis castillo, and not metropolitan pitcher francisco rodriguez. this would mean that francisco rodriguez would be awarded +0.032 WPA instead of -0.793 WPA, and luis castillo would be awarded -0.845 WPA instead of -0.020 WPA. m.e.t.b.o.t. intends to implement this updated methodology shortly, but first requests input from fellow cranepoolforum participants into the advantages and disadvantages of this update. were this to be implemented into m.e.t.b.o.t.'s actual voting for the game in question, the following would be the outcome: player old votes new votes delta votes Wright 2.38 2.31 -0.07 Beltran 2.33 2.27 -0.06 Church 1.98 1.92 -0.06 Green 1.37 1.33 -0.04 Sheffield 0.84 0.82 -0.02 Feliciano 0.71 0.69 -0.02 Murphy 0.28 0.28 0.00 Schneider 0.12 0.11 -0.01 Rodriguez 0.00 0.28 +0.28