Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > It's Mets...Just Mets > Discussion
It's Mets...Just Mets
— 

Sunday, May 28, 2006

One More Year?

Tom Glavine posted his eighth win yesterday.  He’s made eleven starts.  He’s thrown seventy-three innings.  Very impressive.

The Mets re-structured Glavine’s contract for options on the 2007 season (From Newsday):
“Enter Glavine, whose initial contract was set to expire after 2006, prompting the two sides to work out another deal with deferred money that added a team option for 2007.

The Mets can bring Glavine back for $12 million, or if they choose not to, he can activate a player option for $5.5 million that could grow to $8.5 million if he pitches 200 innings. The team option climbs to $14 million if Glavine reaches 180 innings, and the reworked contract includes a $3-million buyout to cover the deferred money.”

One more year.  Okay, there is a rumor that Ken Rosenthal likes to push that the Mets would “let” Glavine return to the Braves to win his 300th next season, but that doesn’t sound like something that would go through.

Tom Glavine won his eighth game yesterday in his eleventh start.  He’s averaged 33 starts for the Mets, but averaged 35 starts the three years before coming to the Mets.  The Mets have played 48 games.  They have 114 more.  Glavine starts every 4.4 games.  That makes him “on pace” for 37 starts.  Is that interesting?  Kind of. 

CURRENT SEASON STATS 
Year W L G GS CG SHO IP H R ER HR BB SO ERA 
2006 8 2 11 11 0 0 73.0 58 23 21 5 22 60 2.59 
Proj 27 7 37 37 0 0 246 196 78 71 17 74 203 2.59

He’s got 283 wins.  He needs seventeen more this season to reach 300.  He can do it this season, and with relative ease.  Once you get eight wins under your belt, the next seventeen are a snap.  Even knocking off three starts, he’s got an excellent shot at twenty-five wins.  Is it gong to be easy?  Of course not.  Th Mets have a good offense, a good defense and Glavine is pitching as well as he has in his career.  The Mets look like they’ll win 90+ games, and someone has to get credit for them.

One more year to reach 300?  Who needs it? 

Chris Dial Posted: May 28, 2006 at 11:53 AM | 31 comment(s)
  Related News: NY Mets

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 1 pages
   1. good_ol_gil Posted: May 28, 2006 at 06:28 PM (#2041657)
I'd say the odds are much higher that he doesn't get to 17 period than him winning 17 more games. Maybe I'm missing something, but this post seemed to be completely serious, which I just can't believe.
   2. Шĥy Posted: May 28, 2006 at 06:45 PM (#2041668)
Even knocking off three starts, he’s got an excellent shot at twenty-five wins.

Excellent? I don't think anyone ever has an excellent shot at twenty wins.
   3. You can't lose with Randy Winn, says Flynn Posted: May 28, 2006 at 06:50 PM (#2041671)

Excellent? I don't think anyone ever has an excellent shot at twenty wins.


For the rest of his career.

Considering Glavine has posted a 119 ERA+ his last two years and is now, at the age of 40, striking out almost a guy per inning, odds are very good.
   4. Sam M. Posted: May 28, 2006 at 09:42 PM (#2041796)
Glavine ain't gonna win 25 games. No Met has since 1969, and this Tom isn't that Tom. If you want to know why, just look at Pedro's last 5 starts. The Mets have lost four of the five, and Pedro has a loss and 4 no decisions in those games, even though he's pitched very well. Why? Really bad luck. A starter has one stretch even close to that, he can't win 25 games in this era. Glavine will have a stretch like that at some point.

But he could certainly win 20, with enough good luck. And that will set him up for us ALL to find out if Rosenthal is right that there is a tacit agreement to let him return to Atlanta if he wants.
   5. Walt Davis Posted: May 29, 2006 at 07:10 AM (#2042095)
And that will set him up for us ALL to find out if Rosenthal is right that there is a tacit agreement to let him return to Atlanta if he wants.

Well, I dunno about that. From what Chris cites above, Glavine's gonna cost the Mets $14 M next year. Will his 300th win be worth it?

Granted, it's not clear whether what Chris wrote means "if Glavine pitches 180 innings this year, then the option price goes up to $14 M" or it means "if the Mets exercise the $12 M option and Glavine pitches 180 innings next year, he makes an extra $2M."
   6. Sam M. Posted: May 29, 2006 at 08:44 AM (#2042139)
From what Chris cites above, Glavine's gonna cost the Mets $14 M next year. Will his 300th win be worth it?

Walt, if Tom Glavine wins 20 games for the Mets this year, and they then let him go to the Braves, even though they had an option they could have exercised to keep him, it will be because there had been an understanding in place beforehand. There is no way the Mets let a one-year salary (even one like that) stand in the way of keeping a 20-game winner away from their key division rival, unless it was agreed in advance as the price of Glavine deferring money this year when he restructured his deal a month or so ago.
   7. Chris Dial Posted: May 29, 2006 at 09:08 AM (#2042149)
Albert Pujols has 22 home runs. Do you think he'll hit 60?

He is in about as good a position as he can be.

Is it likely? No, but he's got a real chance at it.

He's in about the same position as Glavine.
   8. Cold Prosimian Posted: May 29, 2006 at 01:04 PM (#2042289)
Pujols has a real chance at 60 because he's hit at least 40 in each of the last three years, is in the prime of his career, and there has been a recent precedent of players hitting 60 homers in a season. Also, hitting homers doesn't have much, if anything, to do with how good your teammates are at scoring or preventing runs.

Glavine is old, wins are a team stat, and no pitcher has won 25 games since 1990. Only three have done it since 1978. I would say, just guessing, that Pujols has about a 50% chance to hit 60 homers this year, whereas Glavine has about a 1% chance of winning 25 games. That's hardly in the same position.
   9. chris p Posted: May 29, 2006 at 01:26 PM (#2042318)
so is this whole thread going to be a discussion about the definiton of an 'excellent' chance?
   10. Rob Base Posted: May 29, 2006 at 01:37 PM (#2042334)
I can't believe they closed the "Hot Dogs & Apple Pie" thread. I was en fuego!!!!
   11. WilhelmDilthey Posted: May 30, 2006 at 03:03 AM (#2043651)
I can't believe there is a somewhat straight-faced discourse here about Tom Glavine's probability of winning 25 games this year. This isn't some sort of confusedly presented joke?
   12. dahlian Kirby, children's author extraordinaire. Posted: May 30, 2006 at 03:22 AM (#2043654)
I'd give Brandon Webb at least double the odds Glavine has to win 25, and even I'm not willing to say it's a good chance that Webby will win 25. 8-0 is the statistical anomaly, to use it as a trend line is just asinine. at the beginning of the season if you had me choose an over-under for wins for each pitcher I think 17 would be about right. If you ask me now for an over-under on the wins the rest of the season I'll stand by my original prediction and say 12. 25 wins for Glavine and I'll eat my hat.
   13. Rob Base Posted: May 30, 2006 at 08:01 AM (#2043683)
I'll stand by my original prediction and say 12

I'm sorry, is that 12 total or 12 more (total of 20, not 17)?
   14. Andere HUSSEIN Richtingen, Socialist Posted: May 30, 2006 at 10:52 AM (#2043767)
I would say, just guessing, that Pujols has about a 50% chance to hit 60 homers this year, whereas Glavine has about a 1% chance of winning 25 games. That's hardly in the same position.

I think Pujols hitting 60 is far more likely, but I think you vastly overestimate his chance of hitting 60 HR. He needs 36 to do it in four months, and I believe only once in his career has he done that. Sure, he could be establishing a new level for himself, and he's at an age where that could easily be happening, but I think it's far short of a 50/50 proposition.
   15. chris p Posted: May 30, 2006 at 10:54 AM (#2043769)
mike lowell has an excellent shot at breaking the all time doubles record. that's a fact.
   16. RB in NYC (Now with Christmas Spirit!) Posted: May 30, 2006 at 11:01 AM (#2043776)
But Pujols hitting the HRs is an entirely different cup of tea than Glavine getting the wins, as Sam points out. Pedro has a 2.65 ERA in May and a W-L record of 0-1 (whereas for sake of example, the crosstown "ace" Randy Johnson has a 6.12 in May, but 3 wins). He has no control--well, extreamly limited control--over how good the offense is.

Now Pujols doesn't have full control over how many HRs he hits (he has to get the pitches) but it's probably somewhere in the range of 80%. Glavine probably has, at most, 50% control over whether or not he wins. I don't see how a reasonable person could say their chances of reaching a milestone are the same.
   17. Rob Base Posted: May 30, 2006 at 11:04 AM (#2043778)
I don't see how a reasonable person could say their chances of reaching a milestone are the same.

The fact that Glavine doesn't control all the variables does not necessarily impact the probability of his wins occurring (or at least does not impact it in a predictable way). I'm not saying Dial is right (though I think his post is tongue in cheek), but your conclusion doesn't follow from your premises.
   18. RB in NYC (Now with Christmas Spirit!) Posted: May 30, 2006 at 11:27 AM (#2043791)
The fact that Glavine doesn't control all the variables does not necessarily impact the probability of his wins occurring (or at least does not impact it in a predictable way).
I'm not saying it does it in a predictable way, Glavine could just as easily have a Randy Johnson May-type month (suckass pitching, wins) as a Pedro Martinez May-type month (great pitching, no wins). Or the more logical combinations of great pitching, win/suckass pitching, no wins.

But the Pujols HR chase is pretty much all up to Pujols. If he has the talent (or whatever you want to call it) to hit 60, 70, 80 HR this season, he's pretty much going to do it. The correlation between his capacity for hitting those HRs and them being hit is very strong. Glavine might have the talent to win 25 games this season on merit, but the correlation between pitching well enough to deserve a win and actually winning is far weaker.
   19. bunyon Posted: May 30, 2006 at 11:27 AM (#2043792)
I'm not sure I buy the tacit agreement for Glavine to return to Atlanta for 300. If he had been so keen to win 300 in Atlanta, signing with them the last time around would have made much more sense. The Braves were consistent winners and the Mets weren't. Clearly, money and contract length was the primary motivation in the last contract negotiation. My guess is the same will be true this time.

I do agree that if Glavine wins 20 games (or, hell, has a 20 win caliber season, regardless of his support) and the Mets look like contenders next year (which I assume they will), they would be nuts to let him go to the Braves.
   20. bunyon Posted: May 30, 2006 at 11:35 AM (#2043799)
Wow. It hadn't occured to me that we've seen half a dozen 60 HR seasons since the last 25 game winner. Weird.
   21. Bob "Jugement" Dernier Posted: May 30, 2006 at 11:48 AM (#2043805)
I don't feel like paging through the game logs to find out, but isn't it the case that with off-days and rainouts in April, good #1 and #2 starters end up starting proportionally more games early in the season than they will by the end? At the moment a whole bunch of NL pitchers have 11 starts, like Glavine. So they all project to ~37 starts. Two (Doug Davis and Roy Oswalt) have 12 starts and presumably project to ~40. But the league leader, every year since the last strike, has started 35 or 36 games, no exceptions. Either this year figures to be crazy out of line, or this is just what happens every year.

That, or I am overanalyzing a jest post :)
   22. Rob Base Posted: May 30, 2006 at 12:17 PM (#2043824)
The correlation between his capacity for hitting those HRs and them being hit is very strong. Glavine might have the talent to win 25 games this season on merit, but the correlation between pitching well enough to deserve a win and actually winning is far weaker

That's probably an accurate statement, but, as you point out, we don't know which way his win total will deviate from his ERA (or similar/better indicator of personal performance).
   23. Roadblock Jones Posted: May 30, 2006 at 12:47 PM (#2043855)
If Glavine does reach 25 wins, he can thank himself for hitting .353 so far this year, including important hits in his wins over Washington and Milwaukee in April. Both of those were 1-run games and presumably no-decisions without his offensive contribution.

Glavine's 500 OBP vs. Pedro's 095 explains at least some of the difference in their W-L records so far. Continuing to hit like that (no sure thing of course) will make 25 easier.
   24. Sam M. Posted: May 30, 2006 at 01:15 PM (#2043897)
If he had been so keen to win 300 in Atlanta, signing with them the last time around would have made much more sense. The Braves were consistent winners and the Mets weren't. Clearly, money and contract length was the primary motivation in the last contract negotiation. My guess is the same will be true this time.

Completely different time in his career. Glavine was at that point a pivotal figure in the union, which was leaning heavily on players not to leave one thin dime on the table. For Glavine to give the Braves any sort of a home town discount would have been just impossible -- despite which he damn near did it, he wanted to stay so badly.

Now, assuming he ends 2006 within 6-8 wins of 300, it's a matter of not where he gets CLOSE to 300. It's where he actually gets the 300th win itself. And that may have a lot of real weight for Glavine. Plus, this next contract won't be nearly as significant to the MLBPA as Glavine's last "big" deal was.

Like I said, none of us really know whether there is some understanding in place. But it would be totally consistent with the Mets' M.O. if there is. It is just the way Wilpon is wired to have him say, "Tommy, I know how much winning 300 in Atlanta would mean to you. If when the time comes, that's what you want, we won't stand in the way." It's much the same impulse that makes him want to build New Ebbetts Field. If he ends up back with the Braves in 2007, we'll know in hindsight there was a deal in place. Until then, we can only guess. But my guess is yes.
   25. bunyon Posted: May 30, 2006 at 01:22 PM (#2043904)
Sam, you certainly follow the Mets more closely than I and you make good points about time in career. However, IIRC, on the last signing, it didn't turn out to be where he got close to 300 but the thinking was that he would get it during the duration of the contract. That he had a crappy 2003 and 2004 may have changed the calculation a bit, but I'll be stunned if Wilpon behaves as you suggest (of course, I'm used to being stunned by MLB owners).
   26. Bob Koo Posted: May 30, 2006 at 01:29 PM (#2043911)
*BREAKING NEWS*
Mets call up Lastings Milledge. Nady on the DL following an emergency appendectomy last night.
   27. Sam M. Posted: May 30, 2006 at 01:38 PM (#2043919)
Mets call up Lastings Milledge. Nady on the DL following an emergency appendectomy last night.

Let me be the first to say it: That X Nady. A Pipp of a guy.
   28. Mike Emeigh Posted: May 30, 2006 at 01:42 PM (#2043922)
Mets call up Lastings Milledge.


Anyone have a reference?

-- MWE
   29. Bob Koo Posted: May 30, 2006 at 01:47 PM (#2043928)
Mike,
The Mets' TV network, SportsNet New York, was the first to report it on its website.
   30. manchestermets Posted: May 30, 2006 at 01:57 PM (#2043941)
   31. dahlian Kirby, children's author extraordinaire. Posted: May 30, 2006 at 03:49 PM (#2044113)
I'm sorry, is that 12 total or 12 more (total of 20, not 17)?

12 more for a total of 20.
Page 1 of 1 pages

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

<< Back to main

Support BBTF

donate

My Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

Because You Are Bad At It
(55 - 12:09am, Jun 21)

MLB Mandates Vambraces
(33 - 11:38am, Mar 20)

Kong
(95 - 12:34am, Jan 13)

Sector One Cleared
(25 - 12:50pm, Oct 01)

Five Down, One to Go
(24 - 1:27am, Sep 03)

Four Down, Two to go
(15 - 5:35pm, Aug 08)

Mets at the Break
(18 - 10:16am, Jul 13)

Three down, Three to go
(14 - 12:20pm, Jul 10)

Wrighting the Ship
(10 - 8:05am, Jun 27)

Two Down, Four to Go
(34 - 1:19am, Jun 09)

One Down, Five to Go
(74 - 2:46pm, Jun 02)

One More Year?
(31 - 3:49pm, May 30)

Hot Dogs and Apple Pie
(145 - 8:54am, May 25)

Three Weeks Later...
(23 - 10:50am, May 22)

Vivid Seats is a sports ticket broker, concert ticket broker and theater ticket broker offering the best baseball tickets like Yankees tickets, Cubs tickets, and Red Sox tickets, as well as Police reunion tour tickets and Jersey Boys tickets.

We have baseball tickets, the NFL schedule, college football tickets and Cowboys tickets. We have NBA tickets like Celtics tickets and Lakers tickets. Plus, buy Giants tickets, Patriots tickets and Colts tickets. Also check out our MLB baseball schedule

Buy Cheap MLB Tickets

Concerts Theatre NFL Angels Dodgers MLB Celtics Theater NBA Tickets Venues NHL Lakers Tickets NFL Yankees NHL Phillies NBA Wicked Marlins MLB Concerts Cubs Mets Red Sox Wicked WWE Red Sox Mets Yankees Dodgers

Page rendered in 0.8902 seconds
61 querie(s) executed