One Down, Five to Go

What, the Mets have clinched already and there are only five divisions left to decide? :)

snicker

Of the worries mentioned above, Floyd bouncing back is the least of my concerns. I think the front end of the rotation will continue to be productive and the bullpen will be a strength. My main worry is what moves they will make to address the lack of quality SP after Pedro and Glavine. Tomo Ohka's name was thrown around on another thread and that doesn't seem to be a real answer. But I don't want to see either of the top two prospects traded for a Jason Schmidt-type. Not that there's anyting wrong with Schmidt but I want to see Milledge and Pelfrey in Shea. Hopefully a quality SP will emerge on the trade market that can be acquired for basically taking on his salary. I'm sure Levski will offer Russ Ortiz, but someone who can be a better option for the playoffs than Trax. Would Livan Hernandez fit this bill? Any other ideas?

How about Heilman?

I don't think the Mets want to move Heilman into the rotation unless they absolutely have to. Perhaps if Julio becomes reliable (Ha!) they would be more inclined to consider that option.

Since Sam H. is here - how about Greg Maddux. What would he think if both Glavine and Maddux were on the Mets?

I agree, Elvis. I don't want the Mets to trade Pelfrey for Kevin Millwood.

Since Sam H. is here - how about Greg Maddux.

The performances of Maddux and Glavine defy age and scoff at clearly understood and defined career paths of major league baseball players. It's clear they're not playing within the established and accepted rules of age-related decline. I'm pretty sure they're on 'roids.

Pelfrey and Milledge for Millwood might get the conversation going.

All of these years of big spending by the Mets look they're finally going to pay some dividends.

It sure took long enough.

Yeah it's been a whole six years since they were last in a World Series.

I don't want the Mets to trade Pelfrey for Kevin Millwood.

That's good because they can't.

And that's why they invented the phrase - in a NY minute.

Would Jeff Weaver be an upgrade? Not doing too well in the AL but pitched pretty good with the Dodgers.

Maybe this is too obvious to warrant saying, but I'd take Weaver over Zambrano in a heartbeat.

Apparently Milledge is nto getting the call anytime soon -- so I will beat the drum for my other idea. Heilman to the rotation, Pelfrey to pen ala Santana. Of course, that's not going to happen -- but it would be awesome. I bet Pelfrey could dominate major league hitters right now if he only had to going for an inning or so at a time.

Yeah it's been a whole six years since they were last in a World Series.

Oh. When did just being in the World Series constitute success for Mets fans? I seem to recall some conversations on this topic, back in the mid-to-late 90s and early 00s to the effect that just getting there but not actually winning the thing was a "failure" and consituted "choking." Is that no longer the case?

I'm just trying to keep up with the logic, ya know?

s/

Sam, you know none of those people are here now.

If the Mets win 10 division titles in a row and don't win but one WS, it'll constitute choking.

He didn't really wave around "made the playoffs".

Before we get too carried away, remember that the Mets are tied for the 3rd best record in the league, the other three teams as good or better being in the NL Central.

Listen, I was at the last game of the 1969 World Series as a 10 year-old. I have been to the Mets Fantasy camp. I'm a huge Mets fan. All that this great April means is that the over the next 138 games, the Braves have 6 games to catch up on if they want to win the division again this year. The Mets have helped the Braves dig quite a hole.

And, of course, it's a terrific start. Terrific starts are great, and are much better than bad starts like last year's. Remember that if they keep up this pace (.667), they will match what the 1986 Mets did ALL YEAR!

David

If I can't come out of the woodwork to troll your diary, what's become of the world Chris?

We should do a game again.

s/

Oh, you most certainly can! We should - give my best to the missus.

Before we get too carried away, remember that the Mets are tied for the 3rd best record in the league, the other three teams as good or better being in the NL Central.

Absolutely. The real story in the NL East, IMHO, is NOT the Mets, who are playing somewhat over their heads, and will regress to their real level (around .600 or so, if we're relatively lucky with injuries). Their overachieving is about two games of their lead, which is the sidebar, not the story.

Nor is the story the play of the Nats and the Fish, who are exactly as advertised, which is to say fugly.

No, the real story is the Braves and the Phillies, and their sub-par play. The Mets have their lead because those teams are, after play tonight -- assuming the Phillies hang on to win -- three games south of .500 (and they were five games below deck just two days ago). Instead of asking whether the Mets are for real, when we know they aren't (at least not for real .700 caliber), the question is whether we've seen the real Braves and/or the real Phillies. Even though this is the Mets' blog, for Mets' fans we need to be focusing at least a good bit of our attention on whether the teams we expected to be struggling with all year are really empty unis, or if they have some fight in them.

The jury remains out on the Phillies, but not on Bobby Cox. There is zero chance in my mind that he won't have that team significantly over .500 by the ASB, and I seriously doubt the Mets' starting pitching will be consistent enough, long enough to really put enough distance to bury such a team.

But what COULD happen is that we could be good enough to give the Phillies no realistic chance at catching us, if the Phillies don't get their rotation turned around. And I just don't see how they accomplish that -- where do they get the quality arm they need???

So I don't think it's Met' fan arrogance to look at the state of play and feel somewhat confident that some truths have been revealed, and the best one of all is that one of the apparent pre-season threats may well have been exposed as less than it appeared.

I see a two-team race unfolding.

Just think, for the month of april the Mets were able to keep up with the tigers....That was unimaginable only a month ago....

I don't know whether 21 was meant to be sarcastic or not, but the Tigers are for real. They have a very good lineup, 5 solid starting pitchers, and some power arms in the bullpen.

The quality arm the Phillies need might be Cole Hamels but I agree the Braves are the more serious threat.

You think we're a .600 team (with some luck)? 97 wins! If we can do that we don't need to worry about what the other teams are doing.

So far, even the Mets prospects (Milledge, Pelfrey and Fernando Martinez) are doing remarkably well.

The Phillies will still make a run of it. Utley hasn't quite gotten going yet. Their pitching isn't this bad, Madson and Lieber will improve. I think they'll fall short at the end, but will make some noise during mid-season (kind of like what we did last year).

The Braves will be there, but this squad has definite holes that the old Braves squads never had. There's no way that Renteria keeps up with this voodoo he has going. If Francoeur insists on stubbornly swinging at everything, he'll limit his own talents - fortunately for the Mets. I think that their bullpen is nothing special. And Thomson is a decent pitcher, he's pitching over his head right now. Schuerholz has always been great at mid-season acquisitions to bolster the club, but I don't see any easy solutions for the Braves.

a couple of points:

1. it's ludicrous (post #3) for even the most arrogant(?)/ardent Mets fan to start talking playoffs. even in their height of dominance, I can hardly recall anyone in Atlanta talking about the playoffs in April/May. That said, I applaud Elvis's optimism (after all, I'm still picking the Braves to win in spite of their holes.

2. I'll continue to make this point, but as long as Terry Pendelton is the Braves hacking, er, hitting coach, Francoeur will continue to struggle. And the effecst might become permanent if he's allowed to "coach" Frenchy too long.

3. Back to the Mets. 1/2 run better than league average is impressive, given that Trachsel if overachieving, Pedro can barely top 90, and Glavine throws as hard as his slap shot was when he was drafted. then again, their all cagey veterans, so they'll milk it. I'd be more concerned, were I a Mets fan, about the "ability" of Bannister and Zambrano/[insert 5th starter here] not giving back 2 games each turn through the rotation. Especially given that neither Pedro nor Glavine is likely to finish with sub-3.00 ERAs.

I think I put this somewhere on this site, that I see the Braves overtaking the Mets in the last week, mounting the most exciting division race since they steamrolled the Dodgers. Don't forget that the Braves are just now getting their legs, given the lengthy road trips to start the season.

1. How exactly is Trachsel overachieving? He has a 4.73 ERA.

2. Why is Pedro not likely to finish the season with a sub 3.00 ERA?

3. If you point out to Glavine's flukey success, and that's debatable since he has been excellent since the All Star break last year, you have to also mention Zambrano's horrible start. Regression to the mean goes both ways.

4. Considering the strength of the Met bullpen and offense, I'm not really concerned about Z's or Bannister's ability to keep the Mets in games. The only way those two will be giving a game each through the rotation is if they get completely hammered, and last time I checked neither one is that bad of a pitcher.

Concerning 2) - I haven't heard anything about Pendleton being replaced. And from listening to the Braves broadcasters and reading some of the print media, it seems that Francoeur attributes his poor start more to superstition and poor mechanics rather than at his swinging at bad pitches. I hope that it takes Francoeur a very long time before he figures it out. This could be a season-long problem for the Braves.

3. The Mets offense should be able to carry Bannister/Zambrano. At worst they should be .500 pitchers with this team (not 2 losses each time around the rotation). I also think we'll see Soler and/or Pelfrey if they struggle.
The Mets bullpen is one of the best in the NL, perhaps in both leagues.
I'd be surpised if Pedro doesn't end up with a sub 3.00 ERA. I wouldn't be surprised if Glavine has a sub 3.00 ERA as well.

I agree that the Braves will mount a threat, and that they are just getting things gelling. But 6 games is a big lead and this Braves team is as vulnerable as any in the past decade plus. They have lots of holes to fix and no pitching wizard this time to help.

You think we're a .600 team (with some luck)? 97 wins! If we can do that we don't need to worry about what the other teams are doing.

Sure. You keep Pedro, Delgado, Wright, Glavine, Reyes and Beltran healthy, and I see no reason the Mets can't be a 97-win team, especially playing in a division with the Marlins and Nationals. That means getting lucky on the injury front, of course, with the guys we can least afford to lose, but I think they have that level of talent on the field night after night. Average luck with injuries? Low 90s. Bad luck? Look out below.

The Phillies will still make a run of it.

They might. But what I meant to try to say was that IF the first month of play did have any lasting indicators about changed expectations for any of the NL East teams, to me the biggest one was not the Mets being better, or even the Braves being worse. It was that the Phillies might be the biggest departure from expectations, and not to the good. You might well be right, and they'll defy the first month and make a run. But there are some bad signs, and I don't really see how they retrofit if they need to on the fly.

it's ludicrous (post #3) for even the most arrogant(?)/ardent Mets fan to start talking playoffs.

Ditto.

I'd be more concerned, were I a Mets fan, about the "ability" of Bannister and Zambrano/[insert 5th starter here] not giving back 2 games each turn through the rotation.

Well, now that's an obvious overstatement. Even if they are sub-league average, they're not going to do that badly. Two games back each time through the rotation is like . . . well, it's losing every game. If the Mets offensively are a .550 caliber club, then the Mets should be able to win, what, 45% of the game started by two sub-league average pitchers (even if we assume B & Z are that for the sake of the argument)?

Sure, I'm concerned about what we're going to get from those two on a consistent basis. It sure doesn't resemble the back end of the 1986 rotation (Sid Fernandez and Rick Aguilera, they ain't). But I suspect the team is good enough to win a reasonable share of their starts.

Especially given that neither Pedro nor Glavine is likely to finish with sub-3.00 ERAs.

I'd go out on a limb and guess that one of them will, actually. Pedro did it last year, and he wasn't exactly healthy in the second half.

Don't forget that the Braves are just now getting their legs, given the lengthy road trips to start the season.

The Mets seemed to do very nicely, thank you, with a 10-game trip to the west coast, ending with a stop at Turner Field. Not that I don't agree the Mets got a nice break by having such a home-heavy schedule prior to that trip. But that 6-4 trip to maintain the good start was a most excellent sign for the Mets, no doubt about it.

They might. But what I meant to try to say was that IF the first month of play did have any lasting indicators about changed expectations for any of the NL East teams, to me the biggest one was not the Mets being better, or even the Braves being worse. It was that the Phillies might be the biggest departure from expectations, and not to the good. You might well be right, and they'll defy the first month and make a run. But there are some bad signs, and I don't really see how they retrofit if they need to on the fly.

I think for the Phillies, it's just an issue of a bad beginning stretch. They're still a well-constructed team. I think I might like Abreu/Burrell/Utley/Howard even more than Beltran/Delgado/Wright/Floyd. The rotation and bullpen remains a notch below ours. I don't think Gillick will panic, and the Phillie ship will right itself.

Julio's only striking out 17.7/9 this year. Holy ####.

I think I might like Abreu/Burrell/Utley/Howard even more than Beltran/Delgado/Wright/Floyd

Delgado > Abreu and Howard
Floyd > Burrell
Beltran > Utley
Wright > God

That said, the Phillies group should be strong.

Well, conceivably the Mets coudl be a .600 team but I'd have to have to ifs. IF the key players stay healthy AND if the back end of the rotation is somwehat better than I anticipate. They don't have to be great, just okay. As strange as it may sound I might actually be a little more optimistic about Zambrano than Bannister. I guess with Banniste rwe need to hope that a) his control improves and b) he's able to throw that supposedly nasty curve with more consistency in warmer weather.

Julio's only striking out 17.7/9 this year. Holy ####.

Yes, although if you look at his k-rate as a % of batter's faced it looks less impressive. He's allowed 21 batters to reach base and recorded 35 outs (22 via the K). So, 63% of his outs are K's but only 39% of his batters faced. That's still very high but it's equivalent to a dominant reliever (1.00 WHIP) with a 10.5 K/9... unless I messed up the math.

I guess with Banniste rwe need to hope that a) his control improves and b) he's able to throw that supposedly nasty curve with more consistency in warmer weather.

Bannister's control will improve. He has no track record of wildness in the minors.

1/2 run better than league average is impressive

The Mets team ERA is half a run better than *second place*. It's a run better than league average.

Oh, and my original work in my preview came up with 98 Wins. I toned it down because it seemed to be too much. Now, maybe not.

All things considered, the Mets could improve by 20 games.

Yes, that’s dramatic and surprising, but don’t forget, the Mets Pythags for 2005 were 89-73.

20 wins - that's 101 over 2005. I had to fudge to drive the pitching getting worse up.

Our team rocks.

Let's see how the next 18 games after the Pirates series go before making any predictions. They are all against Philly (twice), Atlanta, Brewers, Yanks and Cards. That's probably the toughest strecth we will see this year.

That's probably the toughest strecth we will see this year.

Except for the games against the Phillies and Braves, who suck.

*ducks*

One of my Imps is a Phillies fan. The Mets better stick it on them, or I'll have to listen to a bunch of crap.

re post #38: no need to *duck*, my friend. Half us Braves fans can't throw worth a lick, or Schuerholz would have already called.

about the comments on my post: sure, I overreacted a little. I would still state that (records notwithstanding, which only reinforces the point) the Mets are THE team to beat in the NL East. My only point was that, contrary to most posters in this thread, they DO have weaknesses.

When I wrote about Trachsel overachieving, that was BEFORE I saw how he was shelled by the Braves; he was sporting a low-3 ERA before that. As for Pedro, all accounts have his stuff as slipping; the numbers don't back this up, so I'm still wary. But it would still surprise me if he finished under 3.00. As for Glavine, he's had great months each of the past two years (first half of '04, last half of '05), yet each year he was still in the mid-3's ERA.

The point on Zambrano is well-taken; I had debated mentioning that he can't be *that* bad forever, but then again, considering I think he'll be replaced in the rotation, I didn't bother. You are absolutely right, regression to the mean applies.

Also, does anyone really think Sanchez will finish with a 0.00 ERA? I am impressed by the Mets bullpen, especially Minaya and Randloph sticking to their guns and keeping Heilman in setup. But I doubt with the heavy usage that Glavine, Trachsel et al will require will keep them performing like this all season (granted, the Braves have FAR greater problems in the 'pen).

As some poster above noted, the key for the Mets this year is avoiding injuries. They ARE the team to beat...and given the players hurt in the past 12 months running to first (Rolen, Lee, Sheffield), they might want to be careful there.

It's fun to talk trash and/or baseball with NYers, especially when I might *sigh* have to move there soon.

Nice discussion starter, Dial. Though, isn't this talking out of both sides of your mouth?:

"Only Jorge Julio has struggled, and he may have gotten over that, allowing 2 runs in his last 8 innings."

"Steve Trachsel had nothing on April 30 to see his ERA jump from 3.13 to 4.73. He wasn’t too bad to that point."

Within a sentence or 2, we dismiss earlier performance for a recent small sample of goodness, then flip back the other way!!

Indecisive -

Last year the Mets were "unlucky" and finished six games below their Pythagorean projection. This off-season, they addressed two of their three biggest needs (1B, RP) with decisiveness. Most pre-season predictions had a three-team race heating up with the Mets, Braves and Phillies.

After one month, we've seen that the upgrades at 1B and RP have been every bit as good as hoped for. Delgado has been a massive improvement over Doug M. while Sanchez and Wagner have turned the late innings into a team strength. Meanwhile, Wright shows no signs of a sophomore slump and Reyes has improved defensively while also showing more patience at the plate. They've built a six-game lead on their rivals, helped in part by already doubling their 2005 win total at the house of horrors known as Turner Field.

You can contend that a 17-8 start is meaningless but for the 2006 Mets, it's a huge confidence builder. The talent is on this team. Dial and Sam M. have talked about 97 or more wins for this club. I believe the Mets have a higher ceiling than either the Braves or Phillies. If everything goes right for all three teams, as currently constructed, I think the Mets will win.

Obviously, everything doesn't go right. In the essay, Dial talked about his concerns, what could go wrong. In my view, the biggest weakness is the SP after Pedro and Glavine. I think it's strong enough to win the division. I think if Zambrano-Bannister go .500 (as others above have indicated) with Trax a bit better and Pedro-Glavine considerably better, that's a division-winning rotation. However it needs to be upgraded for the playoffs. Obviously, if the Mets make a trade for a SP that would help in the playoffs, it will help in the regular season. I thought that was implied, I apologize for not stating it in clearer terms.

I'm not printing playoff tickets or placing wagers in online casinos. But every indication has the Mets as a strong contender for the playoffs. Now they can sit on their hands or they can take stock, see where they're going and what they need to get there. You can wait for a longer sample, injuries, regression or whatever, but I'd rather create a plan on what we already know - this is a good team.

But, we'll get to see soon enough. If the Mets fall by the wayside, feel free to make a snarky post or send me an email. I don't ask for anything in return.

FB,
one is a reliever and the other is a starter, so that's one big difference. I also watch all teh games (and score them), so I can se the changes in performance specifically. Julio has cut back on his overthrowing. Whetehr or not he can always remember to do that is a question.

Trax is a 10 year pro, so he knows what he has to do. His is more an issue of health, not suckitude. As discussed in the other thread, every pitcher will have good outings and bad outings - Julio gets fewer chances due to the nature of his job, vs. the nature of Trax'.

I don't think I am talking out both sides of my mouth, but it wouldn't be intentional.

As for Pedro, all accounts have his stuff as slipping; the numbers don't back this up, so I'm still wary. But it would still surprise me if he finished under 3.00. As for Glavine, he's had great months each of the past two years (first half of '04, last half of '05), yet each year he was still in the mid-3's ERA.

Derf. Pedro's ERA last year was 2.82.

"all accounts" don't have his stuff slipping - you are reading here that he's still got it. He has less velocity, but he is nasty.

I doubt Sanchez will finish at 0.00, but after a century of no pitcher posting an ERA under 1, we've seen it about three times in the last decade. So, I wouldn't be surprised if he posted 60 IP with an ERA of 1.

And right there you said "Glavine". Double-derf on me. But Glavine is only being "expected" to finish at 3.5. No big deal there. I think he'll finish better than that now that he's gotten this good start.

But I doubt with the heavy usage that Glavine

Uh, why do you think Glavine will create heavy usage - Pedro is likely to do that first, IMO.

...from listening to the Braves broadcasters and reading some of the print media

This constitutes your first mistake.

it seems that Francoeur attributes his poor start more to superstition and poor mechanics rather than at his swinging at bad pitches.

Let's be perfectly clear about Jeff Francoeur, okay? He is the golden child. He is already a near-godlike celebrity in Atlanta. He just signed his first major endorsement deal with Delta Airlines. He is the face of the franchise and the hook on which the Braves will hang their marketing hat for years to come. All of this is said to preface the following simple fact: what you hear from talking heads and PR outlets about Jeff Francoeur is not exactly based completely in truth. You won't hear Don Sutton say of the new Golden One "you know, if you discount that one hot streak from the first month after his call-up last year, Francoeur has hit a lot like a kid rushed straight out of AA and completely outmatched by veteran major league pitchers."

You want to see Jeff Francouer? Go here and put a big, happy, photogenic smile on him: http://www.baseball-reference.com/g/guilljo01.shtml.

To be fair, Francoeur is a good defensive player.

Captain Freedom Pants is an excellent defensive player, and when Longer Hands is playing LF the Braves have the best defensive outfield in the majors. But The Good Captain hits like..., well he hits a hell of a lot like Raul Mondesi hit last year, right before he was dumped unceremoniously and replaced by The Smile That Gleams Through The Night. Of course, Capt. Fries has a huge upside, and he's not a mentally unbalanced nutjob, so he has that over Mondesi, but the fact of the matter is he has shown one month of "WTF?!" and three months of "Oh look, a 20 year old callup from Mississippi." The Braves can win with him learning at the ML level, but if they're going to do that they have to replace ADHD with a real firstbaseman.

No comment on "Future MVP Marcus Giles", who collisions may have impaired his abilities sufficiently to make him erratic, and not "Future MVP"? Certainly not now that King David has ascended the throne.

The Marcus(tm) seems to have lost The Pop(tm) from The Swing(tm) since The Collision(tm). Sources tell me that it takes 18 months for a broken collarbone to properly heal to the point where true strength of swing will return, so maybe he's due for a return to opposite field homers soon. I'll be satisfied if he just matches Chase Utley. Wright is a bar too high for a second baseman not named Morgan, I think. I'm happy with TM baking his 400 OBPs into the leadoff spot... I am lobbying the nickname police to change TM to The Crash Test Dummy. They tell me that Muppet Monobrow is just too mean.

I also refuse to use "King David." Instead I will refer to him as Larry Junior Junior.

Also, you can pretty much rename the MVP "That Which Albert Owns" for a good 10 years.

Come on, King David is an excellent nickname.

King David will surpass Prince Albert (while he is in the can).

I don't deny the hustle and flow of King David. I simply prefer to maintain my internal fantasy of hearing Braves fans cascade "Laaaaar-eeeee, Laaaarr-eee" down upon his head. It amuses me. And really, that's all that counts.

I also refuse to use "King David." Instead I will refer to him as Larry Junior Junior.

How come when I call Larry Jr. "Larry" instead of Chipper I get chastized, but when Sam H. calls David Wright Larry Junior Junior for the sake of referring to Chipper (thus calling Chipper Larry Junior), it's OK?

God, I'm so confused . . . .

Come on, King David is an excellent nickname.

King David is an excellent nickname only to an insensitive anti-Semite. It would be like giving this guy the nickname "The Savior." Evangelicals would go nuts, Fred Phelps would start virtual picketing of the site. You can't use actual Biblical, religious icons as the basis for sports nicknames. It'll bring all sorts of plagues and armageddon and another PETCO thread and #### like that raining down on BTF at some pre-destined date that Nostradamus nailed like 372 years ago. You want to be responsible for that, Dial Lama?

Wait . . . don't answer that.

Come on, King David is an excellent nickname.

I prefer The Metssiah(tm).

even in their height of dominance, I can hardly recall anyone in Atlanta talking about the playoffs in April/May.
---------------------------------

They didn't really talk about them much in October, either...

I could get behind The Metssiah(tm). That's good work. Somewhat stunning coming from a Mouthbreathing Mets Fan, but still, credit where due. Good work Charlie! I've decided to change Larry Junior Junior to Little Larry III (said Little Larry The Third). I'm pretty sure Chipper is The Metssiah's father anyway. Another of my proposals shot down by the "too mean" police was "My Baby Daddy."

King David is an excellent nickname only to an insensitive anti-Semite.

The Elders of Zion have authorized me to ok this nickname.

I could get behind The Metssiah(tm). That's good work.

Must be something wrong with it then. Probably a code for the Holy Grail or something.

Elvis,

please re-read my post #38: I stated that the record only *supports* the supposition that the Mets are the team to beat in the NL East. Thus, I mean that they were already the team to beat, and their April only makes it that much tougher for a team to overtake them.

I agree completely that they addressed (I like your use of "decisively") their glaring flaws in the offseason. As much as I hate to admit it, I had hoped the Braves would do SOMETHING to counter, even though I knew the financial resources weren't there. [note: this is not a complaint about the Braves' payroll]

Finally, while I am relative new to posting here (and happy to be shelled into place when deserving!), would someone provide a definition of "Snark?" It appears to be something to avoid...

(oh, and Dial: you're welcome to have Mr. French himself playing good defense on your team. Perhaps you won't be frustrated when he makes Jose Reyes look like Brian Giles at the plate)

btw, prospectus projects the Mets to end up as a .600 team exactly. To do that they need to have a .578 winning percentage from here on out which is exactly what their current stats regressed to their pecota projections expects.

The teams projected to have even more wins? The Yankees and... the Tigers! Also the Brewers are projected to win 96. This all seems a little screwy.

FWIW -- that BP Playoff Odds projection thingy is useless this early in the season.

Well, the current rates should obvious be heavily regressed to the pecota projections but if you do that it's probably the right way to go about it. Now given that they see the Tigers as a .600 team (and I'm sure pecota didn't project anything close to that) my gut says that they aren't regressing enough.

I think the problem is that this early in the season, the projections are skewed by big blowouts (i.e, the Tigers and Yanks) and the fact that some teams (ie the Mets and the Nats) have played a bunch of games against each other. I think the methodology has some usefulness -- but not until 80 or 100 games have been played.

How come when I call Larry Jr. "Larry" instead of Chipper I get chastized, but when Sam H. calls David Wright Larry Junior Junior for the sake of referring to Chipper (thus calling Chipper Larry Junior), it's OK?

Because I, unlike you, am funny. You are a Mets fan.

Duh.

Because I, unlike you, am funny.

It's rather unkind of you, then, to hide it behind that grumpy facade every fall. Or should we blame Seligula and his post-season blasphemies for robbing us of your comedy stylings, too?

I'm pretty sure Chipper is The Metssiah's father anyway.

Grandpappy, maybe. The old guy's bones are surely creaky enough, and he probably got started young enough down there in the southern hills.

J. Cross beat me to the Tigers comment. But unlike the Tigers, the Mets are at least a high eighties team, and probably low nineties; same with the Braves and Phillies, though I don't understand how the latter are 12-14 when they've given up almost a quarter of a run more than they've allowed per game. Hmmm... now I see exactly how that can be. Oh, well.

I could get behind The Metssiah(tm). That's good work.

High praise, indeed! Thank you Sam H.

Somewhat stunning coming from a Mouthbreathing Mets Fan, but still, credit where due. Good work Charlie!

Oh, wait...

I don't give up. Nor do the Braves.

But right now, the NL East streak lies on life support. Good execution last night by the home team.

Wright is too good a player to be given a nickname that is a ripoff on a Yankee-originated idea.

It isn't remotely close to "a ripoff of a Yankee-originated idea" since I have *NEVER* heard of "Saint Nick". ANd St. Nick is Sannta Claus, nothing like the biblical King David.

King James, King Felix, King David, it's all derivative anyway...

It still doesn't have GodzYouki's catchiness.