Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Saturday, March 01, 2014

NY Post: Mets’ camp has that ‘Groundhog Day’ feeling

This week Bovada.lv revealed its over/under win total for the Mets at 73.5 and — lo and behold — not long after that it was leaked publicly that general manager Sandy Alderson had gathered the team’s movers and shakers and insisted the Mets possessed 90-win potential. The team’s patriarch, Fred Wilpon, weighed in with (a threat? an inspiration? a prod?) — “we better win 90.”

Now is a good time for a recent history lesson: In 2010, Bovada pegged the Mets at 81.5, the Mets said they were better and finished with 79 wins. In 2011, Bovada weighed in at 77, the Mets said they were better and the Mets won 77. In 2012, Bovada’s number was 73.5, the Mets said they were better and the Mets won 74. Last year, Bovada set the line at 74.5, the Mets said they were better and won 74.

Short of having Needle Nose Ned in center — if you don’t get the reference, really, do yourself a favor, watch the movie — how was this not Groundhog Day?

bobm Posted: March 01, 2014 at 05:39 PM | 19 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: 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.

   1. The District Attorney Posted: March 01, 2014 at 10:01 PM (#4664724)
Hey, the over/under on another site started at 71.5, which prompted Grant Brisbee to pen the improbable sentence "You should probably gamble a lot of money on the Mets."

73.5 is a lot closer. They won 74 last year, so you're basically asking, can they match that again? Last year's OPS splits by position, and most used regular:

C (Buck) 654, 1B (Ike) 721, 2B (Murphy) 736, 3B (Wright) 824, SS (Quintanilla) 561, LF (E. Young) 701, CF (Lagares) 615, RF (Byrd) 736

I don't see any way they'll settle for another 561 at SS -- either Tejada will improve on that, or they'll make a move. Granderson should give you better than 701. RF remains to be seen, but at least that number isn't all that tough to beat -- despite Byrd's good performance for most of the year, the scrubs successfully dragged it down to a reasonable goal. (Which still could very easily not be reached.) I wouldn't bet much on C and CF being hugely improved, but they shouldn't be worse either. 2B and SS should be similar. 1B, who knows. The good news is that I don't see a position that can be reliably expected to decline.

SP were: Gee 199 IP/98 ERA+, Harvey 178/157, Niese 143/96, Hefner 131/82, Wheeler 100/104. You're replacing Harvey with Colon -- that's a downgrade, even though Colon may throw more innings, but it's not awful, Colon's a very good pitcher also. Wheeler will throw more innings. Hefner and Shawn Marcum were both terrible; they're replaced by Mejia and Dice-K as the #5/#6, with maybe Carlos Torres behind them, or Syndegaard/Montero get called up. Who knows -- everyone, every year, predicts their #5/#6 starter situation will improve -- but that does sound like it's probably better. (As bad as Dice-K will probably be, it still can't be much worse than Marcum.)

Bullpen was nondescript. Defense hasn't changed much... Lagares probably doesn't save as many runs even if he plays more games, but at least you've got Duda out of the OF, and in fact your OF may well consist of three plausible CF. Overall, I think you give up a similar number of runs.

So, I think a couple more wins? 77? But, not 90. (Almost) definitely not 90.
   2. odds are meatwad is drunk Posted: March 01, 2014 at 11:48 PM (#4664744)
I would bet a 20 dollar bref sponsership that the mets dont win more than 75 but no one on this site would take that bet.
   3. shoewizard Posted: March 02, 2014 at 12:57 AM (#4664752)
I would bet a 20 dollar bref sponsership that the mets dont win more than 75 but no one on this site would take that bet.


I'll take it, just for the hell of it.

75 or less you win, 76 or more I win.



   4. odds are meatwad is drunk Posted: March 02, 2014 at 02:41 AM (#4664765)
sounds good to me! now I have an interest in how the mets are this year. this thread is now bookmarked!
   5. Downtown Bookie Posted: March 02, 2014 at 09:18 AM (#4664774)
I just want to politely suggest that now would be a good time for you both to agree upon exactly what the sponsorship message should say once purchased. It may seem silly to do so now, but I've seen on this site where ill feelings have been created due to the failure of the participants to come to an agreement after the outcome of the wager was determined.

DB
   6. Joey B. has reignited his October #Natitude Posted: March 02, 2014 at 11:20 AM (#4664796)
...general manager Sandy Alderson had gathered the team’s movers and shakers and insisted the Mets possessed 90-win potential. The team’s patriarch, Fred Wilpon, weighed in with (a threat? an inspiration? a prod?) — “we better win 90.”

Whoa. Whatever you're the heck you're smoking there Sandy baby, you should stop immediately for your own good.
   7. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: March 02, 2014 at 12:19 PM (#4664819)
$20, for that kind of scratch you could sponsor Grant Roberts, Mike Kinkade AND Timo Perez!
   8. cardsfanboy Posted: March 02, 2014 at 12:25 PM (#4664822)
Whoa. Whatever you're the heck you're smoking there Sandy baby, you should stop immediately for your own good.


Sandy lives in an alternate universe where the NL east is the Mess, Astros, Cubs, White Sox and Marlins.
   9. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: March 02, 2014 at 12:25 PM (#4664823)
Depending on context, "90 win potential" isn't necessarily saying all that much. With unbalanced scheduling, lots of teams could plausibly be considered to have an outside shot at 90 wins if absolutely everything goes right for them and a whole lot of things go wrong for all of their division rivals. So I'd say it's Freddy, not Sandy, who needs to put down the crack pipe.
   10. Robert in Manhattan Beach Posted: March 02, 2014 at 12:52 PM (#4664838)
And that reminds me, I've only got three more months left on my Otis Nixon sponsorship I won from Treder! Gotta make them count!
   11. formerly dp Posted: March 02, 2014 at 05:09 PM (#4664973)
I tend more on the optimistic side this time of year (the Mets still haven't beaten it out of me), and I'm still having a hard time seeing any sort of path to 90 wins-- the team just doesn't have enough hitting, at least not without some huge leaps forward at several positions. Davis could slug .500; Tejada could post a .370 OB%; Chris Young could approach 30/30 again; d'Arnaud could hit 20 homers-- one or two of those things might happen, but they'd need all of them to sniff 90 wins. The pitching I feel very good about, but there's some cause for concern on that front too.
   12. Arbitol Dijaler Posted: March 02, 2014 at 05:59 PM (#4664983)
And of course they've dropped each of the first three spring training games. Just saying.
   13. billyshears Posted: March 02, 2014 at 10:32 PM (#4665141)
Aren't the Mets due for one of those random good seasons that bad teams have? Or do we not get those?
   14. JE (Jason) Posted: March 02, 2014 at 11:03 PM (#4665155)
My advice is to save "one of those random good seasons" for when the over/under is 77.5, not 73.5. It may be the difference between nabbing the second wild card and being merely a .500 team.
   15. PreservedFish Posted: March 02, 2014 at 11:23 PM (#4665162)
Aren't the Mets due for one of those random good seasons that bad teams have? Or do we not get those?


Great question. Has this ever happened? I mean, since 1969.
   16. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: March 02, 2014 at 11:37 PM (#4665166)
Maybe Wilpon thinks the Mets is including Spring Training wins in that total. It would be an incredibly surprising season to me if the Mets came close to that total with Harvey out for the year.

One guy there has been little to no talk about around here is Puello. It'd be a very big thing for this organization if Puello and Lagares are guys that can be starters for 2015. I think that's when a 90 win total might be a reasonable expectation.
   17. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: March 02, 2014 at 11:42 PM (#4665168)
The 1997 Mets winning 88 games behind fantastic performances from Todd Hundley, Bernard Gilkey, Butch Huskey, Dave Mlicki and Brian Bohanon was pretty random.
   18. JE (Jason) Posted: March 02, 2014 at 11:54 PM (#4665173)
The 1997 Mets winning 88 games behind fantastic performances from Todd Hundley, Bernard Gilkey, Butch Huskey, Dave Mlicki and Brian Bohanon was pretty random.

Gilkey had a fantastic 1996 (.317/.393/.562), except for the time that fly ball from an Expo player hit him on the head. (In fairness, there was a bug spaceship carrying Vincent D'Onofrio's body overhead.) In contrast, his 1997 (.249/.338/.417) was meh.
   19. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: March 03, 2014 at 01:38 PM (#4665400)
The best players on the 1997 Mets were Alfonzo, Olerud, Bobby Jones and Rick Reed -- and the aforementioned Hundley. That was a really fun team. There were a few weeks where it seemed like every game was won on a Matt Franco or Jason Hardkte pinch-hit RBI. Dave Mlicki shutting out the Yankees in the first interleague game was also awesome.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
A triple short of the cycle
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogJohn McGrath: The Giants have become the Yankees — obnoxious | The News Tribune
(14 - 2:27pm, Oct 25)
Last: Fancy Pants Handles lap changes with class

NewsblogBuster Olney on Twitter: "Sources: Manager Joe Maddon has exercised an opt-out clause in his contract and is leaving the Tampa Bay Rays immediately."
(85 - 2:23pm, Oct 25)
Last: puck

NewsblogDave Dombrowski: Injury worse than expected, Miguel Cabrera 'is as tough as you can possibly be' | MLive.com
(15 - 2:20pm, Oct 25)
Last: Cooper Nielson

Newsblog2014 WORLD SERIES GAME 4 OMNICHATTER
(1 - 2:15pm, Oct 25)
Last: Batman

Newsblog9 reasons Hunter Pence is the most interesting man in the World (Series) | For The Win
(21 - 2:14pm, Oct 25)
Last: boteman

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - October 2014
(392 - 2:08pm, Oct 25)
Last: madvillain

NewsblogOT: Politics, October 2014: Sunshine, Baseball, and Etch A Sketch: How Politicians Use Analogies
(3777 - 2:07pm, Oct 25)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogYost's managerial decisions make for extra-entertaining World Series | FOX Sports
(4 - 1:59pm, Oct 25)
Last: boteman

NewsblogBoston Red Sox prospect Deven Marrero enjoying turnaround in Arizona Fall League | MiLB.com News | The Official Site of Minor League Baseball
(6 - 1:45pm, Oct 25)
Last: Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread, September 2014
(933 - 1:35pm, Oct 25)
Last: Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site

NewsblogGambling Bochy creature of habit when it comes to pitchers | CSN Bay Area
(3 - 1:14pm, Oct 25)
Last: esseff

NewsblogMLB - Royals' Ned Yost keeps managing to win - ESPN
(9 - 12:55pm, Oct 25)
Last: The elusive Robert Denby

NewsblogPhils' philospophy beginning to evolve | phillies.com
(8 - 12:43pm, Oct 25)
Last: Cargo Cultist

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 1959 Ballot
(7 - 11:46am, Oct 25)
Last: lieiam

NewsblogRoyals get four AL Gold Glove finalists, but not Lorenzo Cain | The Kansas City Star
(17 - 11:46am, Oct 25)
Last: BDC

Page rendered in 0.3016 seconds
52 querie(s) executed