The Mets are a Scary Playoff Team
Over the weekend, the Mets officially won the National League East, though thanks to the meltdown in Washington — which now includes Jonathan Papelbon publicly choking Bryce Harper, with his manager apparently doing an impression of an ostrich while it happened — the accomplishment has been somewhat overshadowed in the news cycle. And it’s pretty obvious that, with the Nats falling apart at seemingly every opportunity, the NL East was the easiest division in in the league to win; even after sweeping the Reds over the weekend, the Mets still have just the fourth best record in the NL.
But lost in the shuffle of the MVP getting assaulted on TV, along with the Cubs and Pirates getting us all tuned up for what might be the best Wild Card game we’ll ever see, the Mets were quietly setting up their playoff roster, and the results of that tune-up should scare the crap out of the other four playoff teams.
For the first time all season, the team threw Steven Matz, Noah Syndergaard, Matt Harvey, and Jacob deGrom in consecutive games, previewing their playoff rotation (though not in the order they’ll pitch in October), and the results were, well, see for yourself.
| Starter | IP | H | HR | BB | K | ERA | FIP | xFIP |
| Jacob deGrom | 6.0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 1.50 | 0.15 | 1.62 |
| Noah Syndergaard | 7.2 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 11 | 2.35 | 1.97 | 1.24 |
| Matt Harvey | 6.2 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 2.70 | 1.35 | 3.12 |
| Steven Matz | 5.2 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 4.76 | 0.32 | 1.37 |
| Total | 26.0 | 29 | 1 | 0 | 34 | 2.77 | 1.03 | 1.84 |
You can adjust for opponent quality all you want; there’s no way for a four-start stretch that includes no walks and 36 strikeouts to not be remarkably impressive. Sure, the ’15 Reds aren’t the ’27 Yankees, but they have a .311 wOBA as a team this year; putting them in the same hitting tier as the Cardinals (.312), Cubs (.313), and Pirates (.313), and the games were played in Cincinnati, so these weren’t the results of some good arms just taking advantage of a pitcher-friendly environment. These were four high-ceiling arms putting their abilities on display, and sending a message to the rest of the National League.
As a group, their fastballs averaged 96 mph this weekend, which is probably part of the reason why the Reds made contact on just 78% of their swings despite the fact that their starters lived in the strike zone all weekend. 53.6% of the pitches that the Mets fearsome four threw were within the bounds of the PITCHF/x strike zone, the kind of strike-throwing number you generally see from command pitchers who lack the stuff to get a lot of chases out of the zone. But that doesn’t describe any of the Mets four starters, all of whom were throwing hard and with movement. And when you constantly pound the zone with an elite pitch repertoire, well, you apparently end up running a 1.03 FIP.
No, of course the Mets starters aren’t that good. They will eventually walk someone, and pounding the zone with such frequency will usually lead to more than one home run allowed every four starts. But in the wake of all the drama surrounding Matt Harvey’s innings limit, the Mets starters put out a pretty forceful reminder that they might just have the best playoff rotation of any team in baseball this year. For context, here’s their aggregate 2015 performance:
| IP | BB% | K% | GB% | HR/FB | BABIP | ERA- | FIP- | xFIP- |
| 549 | 5% | 26% | 45% | 11% | 0.278 | 76 | 79 | 80 |
The closest single-pitcher comparison to that ERA/FIP/xFIP line? Max Scherzer, who has a 75/77/78 pitcher-slash. The closet comparison in the individual components? Gerrit Cole, who has a 6% walk rate, 25% strikeout rate, and 48% ground ball rate. This is the level that the Mets four playoff starters have averaged this season. Sure, we have shorter track records with Matz and Syndergaard compared to a guy like Scherzer or Cole who have been dominating for years, but the stuff backs up the performances; this is a special group of pitchers.
Of course, a great rotation doesn’t guarantee postseason glory. The 1991-1999 Braves ran some of the best rotations baseball has ever seen, rolling to the playoffs behind their aces every year, and they only managed one World Series title in eight tries. It’s not simply enough to point to the four starters the Mets can roll out there and decide that they’re going to be impossible to beat in October, because hitting, defense, and the bullpen all matter too. But there are reasons to think that the Mets should be just fine in those areas as well.
On the position player side of things, the Mets rank 5th in total WAR this year, and if you use the active roster filter to measure teams by the full-season performances of the specific players they have heading into the postseason, the Mets jump up to #3. The 102 wRC+ their current hitters have posted might not sound too special, but keep in mind that they’re playing in the league without the DH; the Giants and Dodgers are the only two NL teams getting a higher wRC+ from their active roster players at the moment.
And while most of the story about the Mets defense this year involved scorn about their shortstop position, the reality is that they’re a reasonably solid defensive unit, especially when Juan Lagares is in center field and Michael Cuddyer is serving as a pinch-hitter. The middle infield duo is never going to be confused for gold glovers, but David Wright and Lucas Duda are fine at the corners, and the team’s pitching staff strikes out so many batters that they can live with below-average defenders up the middle. The Mets aren’t the Royals in the field, but they aren’t sacrificing too much defense to justify the offensive gains that come from their group of position players.
If the team has a weak spot, it’s the bullpen, where the guys in front Jeurys Familia are probably not quite as lights out as you’d generally be comfortable with. But it’s not anything close to an Achilles Heel.
Tyler Clippard has been breaking FIP forever, and his ability to generate so many infield flies makes him a solid setup man even with poor BB/K numbers. Addison Reed is missing bats again since the Mets picked him up from Arizona, so while he wasn’t as good as his save totals indicated a few years back, he remains a good enough arm to put on the mound in a high leverage situation. Hansel Robles gets a lot of swinging strikes, so if the team needs a strikeout, they have a guy down there who can get those when need be. Sean Gilmartin is a solid lefty without a big platoon split, so he can be used to take advantage of a lefty who is weak against lefties without having to be immediately removed if the opponent pinch-hits.
Their primary vulnerability appears to be the lack of a dominating left-on-left guy, but Jon Niese is going to pitch out of the bullpen in October, and has a 3.22 xFIP against LHBs this year, and a 3.36 xFIP vs LHBs for his career. The Mets probably aren’t going to take a guy who is stretched out to throw multiple innings and turn him into a lefty specialist, but if there’s a middle-inning rally that brings a tough lefty to the plate, Niese could be a valuable piece out of the pen to squash a big inning and then stay in the game long enough to get the ball to Clippard and Familia.
Like with the defense, it’s not an overwhelming strength. This probably isn’t the bullpen you’d draw up if you were designing one from scratch, and the 6th-8th innings will probably be the time that Mets fans have the most anxiety during the postseason. But the team’s starters are good enough to get 18 outs in a playoff game, and I don’t think anyone would be surprised if deGrom got 21 or 24 by himself once or twice. Given the frequency of off-days and the high-stakes of the postseason, the Mets can probably lean mostly on their four starters and three best relievers, only mixing in the middle-innings guys when they absolutely have to, and few teams in baseball can stack up their best seven arms against the Mets seven.
With an above average offense, good enough defense, and a reasonably decent bullpen, the Mets would be a solid team even without an elite rotation. What the four young kids showed over the weekend in Cincinnati, though, might be reason to think the Mets can hang with anyone in the NL. If those four arms keep pounding the zone with 96 mph fastballs, it’s not going to take a lot from the rest of the team for the Mets to make a really deep run in October.
Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.
This article has no shortage of caveats, I’ll grant you that. The Mets have gotten their asses kicked by every good team they’ve played this year. Their record outside their division is pretty sad.
They also played almost all of those games without Cespedes, Wright, d’Arnaud, Clippard, Uribe, Conforto, Matz etc. It’s literally been a tale of two teams and two schedules.
And for anyone who thinks that’s just Mets fandom speaking (assuming you’re a Mets fan, Bren, I could be wrong), just look at the starting lineups the Mets trotted out in a 3 game series against the Cubs in May.
May 11 – started Juan Lagares, John Mayberry, Michael Cuddyer, Kevin Plawecki, and Dilson Herrera, and used Johnny Monell to pinch hit.
May 12 – started Cuddyer, Kirk Nieuwenhuis, and Kevin Plawecki, and again used Monell as a pinch hitter.
May 13 – started Cuddyer, Plawecki, Nieuwenhuis, and Herrera.
May 14 – started Herrera, Cuddyer, Mayberry, and Anthony Recker.
All of those guys will either be on the bench in the playoffs (Cuddyer, Plawecki, maybe Nieuwenhuis but probably not) or off the roster.
Meanwhile, the Cubs used almost the exact starting 8 they will have in the playoffs, with the exception of Welington Castillo and Matt Szczur each getting a start.
It’s no wonder the Mets got swept when they were playing with practically a AAA team.
Oh hey buddy
last time I watched the Mets, Mayberry not only started, he was hitting 3rd.
What’s wrong with Mayberry hitting third? He’s got a 168 OPS+ this year!
Have not played many good teams since the trade deadline. Got swept by the Pirates, lost 3 series to AL East teams, and everyone else was either real bad teams or the slumping Nats
People really should factor in the easy schedule they have had in their analysis
Entering the crucial series a few weeks back, the Nats had a 5-game winning streak where they outscored their opponents 40-12.
After the Mets’ series, the Nats won 7 out of 10.
It’s hard to say they were slumping. They just got beat.
A lot of the games played out of division came before the trades though, haven’t they?
4-3 against the team they’re going to play in the Playoffs.
They’re also 10-6 against the Nationals who are 73-66 against everyone else. So they’re only not good because the Mets are good.
The Mets also have one of the better interleague records of anyone in the NL.
9-11???
The Bucs have the best IL record among NL playoff teams at 13-7.
“One of the better” is not the same as “the best”.
Alright smart guy, 9-11 isn’t “one of the better” either, depending on the outcome of today’s Cubs/KC game it would be the worst or tied for the worst among NL playoff teams.
“of anyone in the NL” is not the same as “among NL playoff teams”
Seriously Ryan, what a pedantic tool! Arguing that 9-11 is a sign of how good the Mets are is just plain dumb. The NL is clearly top heavy and being the worst of the 5 playoff teams is directly relevant to the discussion.
and their record is 7th best in the NL, not one of the better.
I don’t understand why inter-league is an issue here. Or why Pirate’s Hurdles is so concerned with it. If you’re concerned about quality of teams, the Pirates had 12 wins in inter-league play… 11 of which came against teams not making the playoffs.
It’s kind of a silly thing to argue over.
They took the season series from the Dodgers and Nats (who are actually a decent team by baseruns) and beat the crap out of bad teams. They are a game behind the Pirates in baseruns and a half game behind the Cubs, and that’s for the whole year, for a lot of which they didn’t have Cespedes, D’Arnaud and Wright, etc. As currently configured they are right up their with all the best in the NL, regardless of what happened in various season series.
Not much evidence who you beat matters, per Jeff Sullivan:
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/does-it-matter-who-you-beat-on-the-way-to-the-playoffs/
As a Mets fan, I certainly hope we ride great pitching and good enough hitting and defense to a championship, despite our lackluster record against the Cubs and Pirates.
However, I remember back in ’88 the Mets were 13-1 against the Dodgers before losing in 7 in the NLCS (thanks for nothing, Hershiser). So it really shows (anecdotally) that regular season record means nothing in the playoffs.
They won the season series against the team they’re lined up against in the NLDS. Do you even baseball, man?
>>>>The Mets have gotten their asses kicked by every good team they’ve played this year.<<<>>>Their record outside their division is pretty sad.<<<<
They're 34-32 against the NL Central and NL West. I wouldn't call that "sad".
“The Mets have gotten their asses kicked by every good team they’ve played this year.”
No, only the Cubs and Pirates. The Mets are 20-16 against every other NL team over .500, and 0-13 against those two.
“Their record outside their division is pretty sad.”
They’re 34-32 against the NL Central and NL West. I wouldn’t call that “sad”.
You sure are an annoying mouse
What kind of analysis is that from an accomplished writer like Dave Cameron? Since when can you simply look back at current season’s stats when talking about future expectation? Not a single mention of projection in this article. Don’t expect stuff like this on Fangraphs, and especially not from Dave.
Well, when the future is only a week away, it does not seem like a stretch
Between when this article was written and the week-away future, there are an infinite number of micro-futures, in at least one of which, the Mets return to their “true” form.
I don’t get this at all. What “projection” do you want discussed for the playoffs, exactly? The playoffs are fundamentally random, too small a sample to be projectable. This article analyzes the team elements that would be the components of any projection, in exactly the depth that’s actually possible.
Hi guys what’s up?
You sure about that? If so, I tip my cap to a pretty perfect imitation of an idiotic comment.
If so, yeah, hey, how’s it going?
He’s talking about how Cameron’s expectations for the playoffs are entirely based off how these players did in 2015, rather than looking at their true talent (i.e., a projection).
And the Dodgers rotation is clearly better than the Mets’. Even more so when you consider the fact that the 1/2 starters should be more heavily weighted (extra games).
How exactly is the Dodger’s rotation “clearly” better than the Mets’? Alex Wood better than Syndergaard or Matz? Greinke and Kershaw are great but Harvey and DeGromm are pretty good in their own right. You want to give the 1 and 2 starters for the Dodgers the edge over the Mets’ 1 and 2? Completely understandable. But the whole rotation? C’mon now. Don’t hate.
Dodgers NLDS rotiation is: 1) Kershaw, 2) Greinke, 3) Wood, 4) Kershaw on 3 days rest, 5) Greinke on full rest.
“Clearly” was too strong of a word, because we can debate this. But let’s look at fangraphs’ (mixed Steamer/ZiPS) projected ERA’s for the two teams’ 4-man rotations:
deGrom – 3.16
Harvey – 3.16
Syndergaard – 3.38
Matz – 3.63
deGrom – 3.16
Harvey – 3.16
Syndergaard – 3.38
average – 3.29
Kershaw – 2.11
Greinke – 2.98
Wood – 3.73
Anderson – 3.87
Kershaw – 2.11
Greinke – 2.98
Wood – 3.73
average – 3.07
And the more games the Dodgers can get out of their Kershaw/Greinke (due to clinching series early, rainouts, short rest, etc), the bigger their advantage.
Yeah the Dodgers fan said the same thing about chokshaw last year. Projections are based on regression and history matters and the mets starter have less history.
It may be arguably better than the Mets’. It certainly isn’t clearly better than the Mets’.
Perhaps relying solely on projections isn’t the best way to go about evaluating a rotation? We’ve seen the projections be extremely inaccurate before.
If you look at the relevant peripherals for both rotations, it’s pretty clear that:
a) Kershaw’s the best out of all of them by far.
b) Greinke, deGrom, Syndergaard, and Harvey are roughly similar peripheral wise
c) Matz, Wood, and Anderson are in the final tier, with Matz having the most potential of the group
I think it’s fair to observe that the Mets performances should be regressed to the mean based on the SSS. The Dodgers, not so much.
The other intangible is many Mets pitchers are already passed their career highs in IP. They may flame out.
If Harvey, Syndergarde & deGrom are capped at 5 IP per start, that weak bullpen becomes front and center. Their playoff opponents will be working the count to get these guys out of the game, too. The Reds hitters are not going to do that; they are in audition for next year mode.
BMac, ‘working the count’ is probably the worst thing that the Dodgers can do. The Mets’ pitchers attack the strike zone. Harvey, in particular, is one of the best “pitches per inning” starters in baseball this year. If they try to work the count, they’ll just end up in pitchers counts where they have to chase.
Working the count is a good strategy against a pitcher who relies on getting hitters to chase, and doesn’t have an elite fastball – but that doesn’t apply here. Their best strategy is probably to be aggressive, hope to run into a fastball for a 2-run HR, then let Kershaw/Greinke do their thing.
Yirmiyahu below explained what I was getting at. If you want to guess how good Mets are going to be in the playoffs, your best bet is to look at their true talent, aka their projections. 2015 stats is *not* more predictive of their playoff performance. Their projection is the best estimate we have got.
Cameron himself has in the past written why we should be using projections rather than in-season stats for predicting future. That’s why it’s all the more surprising to see analysis like this article presented.
This is the piece you’re talking about, right?
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/you-should-trust-the-projections/
So, to clarify, you’re saying that the argument Cameron made here about weighing the projections more heavily than one-to-three-month in-season streaks should be used to discount the entire 2015 season. Oh-kay.
Mets still will have the advantage in games 3 & 4. Doubtful that the Dodgers make the same mistake and pitch Kershaw on short rest. The Mets overall have not played well against lefties, even after the trades. They do have some guys that mash lefties though (Wright, TDA, Cuddyer, Flores). If they can scrape out 3-4 runs per game, they will take the series. I think it’ll go 5 fwiw.
When are we all gonna learn that projections and season record are both useless for predicting the playoffs? Some baseball is gonna happen, and you’ll have to watch it to know who will win. Somebody’s going to play real well over the next couple weeks and we have no idea who it is. Plain and simple. I wouldn’t want it any other way.
A staff in which every one of its members can throw 95mph and possesses a strong K/BB ratio needs no further projection, unless you just want to project them being awesome.
And there actually was plenty of analysis here, with the bottom line being the Mets are not simply a one trick pony. Was it the lack of pretty graphs or fancy statistics that bothered you?
“Since when can you simply look back at current season’s stats when talking about future expectation?”
what, exactly, do you think “projection” means?
Those four didn’t walk anyone, and yet none of them have the best BB%/9 rate on the team. Doesn’t mean anything, just amusing. BARTOLO.
This same amusement can be mentioned when talking about how hard the Mets throw as a staff. They throw hard..and still have BARTOLO.
I’m actually surprised there isn’t more dissent about starting Matz fourth rather than using him in the pen and starting Colon (which seems prima facie like a better plan to me — Matz has seemingly good stuff for key relief work and Colon is a better fit as a starter who *might* give you 7 quality innings and you can back up with an ultra-quick hook).
Let’s try it again from the top, boys, this time with more BARTOLO.
But really, I do think a Colon starting + Matz/Niese in pen might be how I’d go. Especially if it gets the world a couple more BARTOLO PAs…
God, if this team had Zack Wheeler, too.
Yes! I like this better than simply using BARTOLO as a pinch hitter.
One reason for not putting Matz in pen is history of injury including Tommy John. The demands on relievers warming up multiple times, on short notice, warming up, sitting down, coming in mid-inning, etc., too risky. Not gonna thrust him into something he just hasn’t done.
Additionally, making him 4th starter makes the playoff rotation even stronger giving the others more rest.
This rotation has the capacity to remain strong when those of others are overly taxed, over used. Bartolo has the experience, but with Matz, Mets protect the arms of the first three and throw a lefty with ace-like capacity.
I understand that Matz isn’t your typical reliever and has had an injury history that you wouldn’t want him rushing his warmup, etc, but you could send Bartolo out for 5 innings and have Matz start the 6th fresh and pitch 2 like a start — planned, long warm up, no one on base, etc. Imagine facing Colon’s 89-91 mph twice thru and then a lefty firing 96 mph bullets your next AB. That’s what I’d do.
Matz has better stuff than Colon and his injury history will prevent the team from using him in relief.
Everyone has better stuff than Colon. You’re missing the point.
The point is: BARTOLO
But BARTOLO is a crafty right hander. Up until now, all crafty pitchers have been southpaws. That matters.
34 Strikeouts* in those 4 starts.
Problem is, you barely even need 4 starters in the playoffs, and Kershaw and Greinke are even better. Plus the Mets are full of players with no playoff experience, especially on the pitching staff.
Eh, playoff experience is pretty overrated. Plenty of teams have hit the playoffs without much of it and it’s just as much of a crapshoot for them as it is experienced teams.
The narrative for when the Yankees lose in the playoffs is that they are too experienced (i.e. old).
Really? I thought the narrative was mostly ‘Hey cool, we don’t have to hear about the Yankees anymore’.
You dare to mention Clayton Kershaw and “playoff experience” in the same breath?
Of course if you go with 3, guys are pitching on short rest. Dodgers 3rd and 4th starters are not good. And Kershaw has had a pedestrian post-season record. Now I would prefer not to face him, but the point is that the playoffs are like a box of chocolates.
I agree that the Mets have the ability to beat anyone. And also to get swept. It’ll start with the pitching. If they pitch like they are capable of, they can beat anyone. If they look tired like they have before the Cincy series…
Thing is, going with a 3 man rotation usually has you pitching your better arms on 3 days rest, and historically that has a way of turning excellent pitching into very mortal pitching. The Mets rotation being deep is an incredible benefit because they never HAVE to do that, they can throw all their guys, and they can do so on full rest which makes them even more nasty.
The Nats thought the same thing last year…
because the entire rulebook changes when you get to the playoffs, right? I remember when they tried this narrative with cliff lee in 09. funny stuff
The most amazing/scariest stat to take away from this article is that Joey Votto never drew a walk against the Mets.
Against the Mets’ four starters.
He walked against a reliever or two. Still impressive though.
He spent basically the whole series complaining about the umps’ strike zone, too. Went back to the dugout grousing on called third strikes in key spots in at least the Syndergaard and Matz games IIRC, and looked surprisingly bad chasing high fastballs a couple times. Maybe he’s out of sorts ATM for whatever reason, but the way they made a hitter that good look that bad that consistently was one of the key things to me about the Reds series as a tune-up for the postseason.
*Against the Mets’ four starters.
The Mets are the least scary of all NL Playoff teams.
…and they should be gearing up for a 1 game playoff vs LAD. Instead 2 of the top 3 teams in MLB get punished because of loose geographical boundaries that don’t really make sense.
(Did Bud Selig ever look at a map??? Atlanta is far more central than Pittsburgh.)
Yes, those grapes are particularly sour.
It is pretty hard to justify the Cubs as one of the top 3 teams in MLB. Maybe top 3 teams in the NL, but certainly not MLB.
The back end of the bullpen is a heck of a lot stronger with Neil Ramirez in there.
They really don’t have a playoff #3 and going with a committee approach with Hammel, Hendricks, Wood, Richard, and Cahill is the best they can do.
They strikeout a lot against good pitching and they’re young. I would tend to agree with you, but as a Cubs fan I must add nothing is certain!
Cubs k at 30-35% against the league. You cannot win in playoff with those rate and Lester is more like a no 4 on any other playoff team and the pen is probably worst in the playoff too
I’m no mathematician — indeed, I’m just two numbers — but I think there are more than four teams in the playoffs.
And there should be 8 teams to each league, no inter-league play and no playoffs, just the world series. That ship sailed years ago.
Also, I much preferred my 8-inch black-and-white Zenith to these 63-inch flat-panel doohickeys. I like all my programs rendered in stunning, lifelike grayscale.
Exactly.
I can’t stand this argument. The Cubs would not even be in the playoffs 5 years ago. The ’06 Cardinals were barely over .500 and there have been multiple teams in baseball history that have won 100 games and not made the playoffs. Enough talk of changing the playoff landscape again.
Agreed.
Indeed. In fact the Mets would have won the NL East ever year from ’84 to ’90 had this current alignment been in place. There just wasn’t any internet or social media around for people to cry about it on.
Sour grapes all you want, but this isn’t convincing. Divisional play, with the unbalanced schedule, encourages lasting rivalries and makes for interesting pennant races; if you want to get rid of it you have to have something better, not just “take the teams with the top, um, 5 records because I said so.”
You can still have races and an unbalanced schedule with 4 divisions.
Put me in the group that thinks 19 games against the same team, every year, is a bit much and gets boring.
Wait, so the fix for a divisional system that supposedly lets too many bad teams into the playoffs is… to divide the leagues up into even MORE divisions?
???
2 AL divisions and 2 NL divisions. 4 total as opposed to the 6 we have now.
Sorry if that wasn’t clear.
Put me in that group too- 2 divisions in each league. Let the 162-game season count for more, followed by a 7-game LCS and 7-game WS. But it makes too much sense (& too little $$$), will never happen….
I agree that 19 games against the same team every year is a bit much and boring from a fan perspective. However, if you dropped to 4 divisions total, that would entail much more travel for the players. They already complain about how grueling the travel is. The players union would likely never approve such a change or any change involving more travel.
Oh, cutting down to 2 divisions and no wild card I basically agree completely would make for much better playoff races. It’s just not what the initial commenter was arguing at all, that would presumably make them even unhappier.
Of course determining playoff eligibility as it is currently done nut re-seeding maintains exciting pennant races — much like the 2015 AL wild card race is exciting, a race for a eligibility is still a race, even if the reward is merely a play-in game.
And the unbalanced schedule makes this almost more appealing: if you’re getting to the playoffs with a middling record, you probably aren’t in a highly competitive division; thus, your eligibility is less impressive than a team with a better W-L record that only manages to be second or third in their division (and thus had to play tougher teams more frequently).
Can we be done with this argument? This year is an anomaly, and it sucks for the Cubs and Pirates, but it’s not like this is likely to happen again. I mean, there’s a decent chance we have 2 100-win teams coming from the same division. Usually we have to wait 3 or 4 seasons between 100-win seasons.
Just a few years ago, we were calling the playoffs unfair because the wild cards didn’t have enough of a disadvantage. Now you’re upset their disadvantage is too large. The ship has sailed, the playoffs are fun and mostly fair, this can be put to bed.
“it’s not like this is likely to happen again”
This strikes me as far from true: IANAPiratesF, but this team has been one of the better and more exciting teams to watch in recent years, and they may well be on their way to a third straight WC-game bounce (if last night’s Arrieta returns for the one-gamer). And whether or not it’s an anomaly, rules that work well in light of all outcomes — and don’t dismiss some unfortunate outcomes that can be resolved as “anomalies” unworthy of addressing — are good rules!
Hay! Papelbon got his grubby hands on your neck too?
The Cubs are 1.5 games ahead of the Mets right now. It’s not one of life’s great tragedies.
Nothing in baseball is one of life’s great tragedies. But to the extent we are talking on this website about the rules of a recreational hobby, determining playoff eligibility on W-L record but simultaneously downplaying the importance of a 1.5-game difference strikes me as rather incongruous. A smaller gap has divided a playoff team and a non-playoff team many times before.
The point is a 1.5 game difference is too small a gap for one to be crying foul in terms of the way the playoffs is currently structured.
NEIGHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Looks like business will be picking up soon!
Looks like OUR business will be picking up soon!
HAY!!!!!
Dear Alice,
I’ve read your complaint and I’m moving the Braves back to Boston.
Can’t a man retire in peace?
Please. The Cubs and pirates are less than 1 games better based on base runs. And the Cubs are 1/2 a game in front and k at 30% against league average pitchers.
I wouldn’t throw any stones about map reading. Atlanta is 195 miles inland. Pittsburgh is 345 miles inland, and far more central than Atlanta
It is true, however, that Atlanta is further west (84°23?24?W for Atlanta vs 79°58?35?W for Pittsburgh, per wikipedia)
yea, I mean, the Cardinals should have to return their ’06 title because they were the 5th best NL team that year and there are 4 slots. In fact, they had the 13th best record. Had it not been for archaic “National league/american league” boundaries as opposed to true geographic boundaries, the Cardinals wouldn’t have sniffed the playoffs. They would have been 4th in the AL Central.
“Did Bud Selig ever look at a map??? Atlanta is far more central than Pittsburgh”
Yes, Atlanta is west of Pittsburgh, practically on the same longitude line with Cincinnati. But it would be odd to have the Marlins and Braves in two different divisions, and would increase travel for teams in both east and central if the two teams were split up.
I don’t really follow the Mets but isn’t Colon having a fine year? What’s his role in the playoffs? Must be nice to have that kind of pitching depth.
Colon has been stellar against the NL East. Less so against everyone else. Plan seems to be for him to pitch out of the bullpen.
He’s having a fine year, nothing special. If he was in the Dodgers rotation he’d pretty much be their #3. If the Mets didn’t have several much better options, he’d be a fine option for the rotation.
I hope the Mets (or the Cubs, or the Pirates) go all the way, good luck to them. Seeing Papelbon going after Harper was amusing. harper may play hard, but he hasn’t been running “sure outs” for the second half of the season. He may be a great player and having a great year, but you can’t just let a player decide when and if he will hustle. I blame Matt Williams.
If my team doesn’t go all the way then I want the Dodgers to go all the way because then Don Mattingly will be their manager for a prolonged period of time giving my team better chances in future years.
Hustle and horseshit start with the same letter. Coincidence?
Hearken, hard-heartedly, how he hackily hits horseshit high-points: Harper’s half-hustle hurts hopes, holds Hurtlocker
Especially when I’ve eaten too much bad oats and I’m half a furlong away from the nearest stall.
Just neighing.
I expect nothing less from a bronco like yourself, Mr. Elway
If you’re saying Harper isn’t trying enough, then I’d have to disagree. He’s Barry freaking Bonds, and yet somehow his team is still failing to do anything.
Should he run it out? Of course. But it’s not Paps who should call him out on it. Only the manager, an established clubhouse leader (Zimmerman, Desmond, Werth), or someone having a superstar-like season (so basically only Harper) have the authority to make that call. And considering Paps is known for his attitude and considering his performance has been eh while the team fell off a cliff, Paps had no business saying anything.
So yeah, blame Harper and his lack of hustle.
When Papelsmear does more than pitch an inning every 2-4 days, he can talk to baseball players.
Cubs are a scary playoff team. After Arrieta shuts down Cards in the wild card game, and Rats in the NLDS, we’ll see just how scary the Mets are (if they make it there) when facing Schwarber, Bryant, Rizzo…
I like how you ended with an ellipsis to make it sound like you could have continued to list players.
Russell, Fowler, Baez, La Stella, Couhglan, Soler, Castro. Cubs are stacked
So’s my girlfriend. What are you getting at, Big Daddy?
88, 110, 88, 106, 112, 95, 77 are the wRC+s of the players you just named. Not exactly Murderer’s Row, not yet at least.
Yeah, Baez, La Stella, and Castro are all just striking fear in the hearts of pitchers everywhere. Plus you’re completely ignoring the fact that the Mets have a pretty freaking good offense as well nowadays. Let’s examine the starting lineups here:
CUBS
C – Montero (107 wRC+)
1B – Rizzo (144 wRC+)
2B – Castro (77 wRC+)
3B – Bryant (140 wRC+)
SS – Russell (88 wRC+)
LF – Coghlan (112 wRC+)
CF – Fowler (110 wRC+)
RF – Soler (95 wRC+)
METS
C – d’Arnaud (133 wRC+)
1B – Duda (132 wRC+)
2B – Murphy (112 wRC+)
3B – Wright (138 wRC+)
SS – Flores/Tejada (94/98 wRC+)
LF – Conforto (140 wRC+)
CF – Cespedes (136 wRC+)
RF – Granderson (129 wRC+)
Cubs have 2 guys at 140 or above, Mets have 1, but the Mets have 6 guys at 120 or above, Cubs only have the same two. Mets have 7 above 100 whereas the Cubs have 5.
Senor_Met, aren’t you forgetting Schwarber? He’s been the starting LF since his call-up.
Schwarber have been a sun .200 hitter for a month now, he seem to be going the way of the baez
The Cubs have Arrieta and…Lester. Lester would be the Mets’ #5. And go compare Duda, Céspedes, and Conforto’s numbers to the guys you have just mentioned.
“Lester would be the Mets’ #5”
*Giggle snort*
Yeah, it is amusing. Only reason Lester would even be #5 is because Wheeler is still out after TJS. Once Wheeler is back, Lester would be in the bullpen making spot starts to keep Harvey and Syndergaard and Matz from pitching too many innings.
Let’s put that another way. Which of these pitchers would you least want on your team right now, irrespective of salary? deGrom/Harvey/Syndergaard/Matz/Lester. You could maybe make an argument for Lester over Matz but deGrom/Harvey/Syndergaard are already better and Matz looks like he will be. Lester would be the #4 on the Mets at best.
Za & Ollie: lol, check out Lester’s WAR. you guys are nuts.
Yes, because WAR is the BEST stat to compare Lester when, of the 4 pitchers in question, 2 are rookies and haven’t pitched even close to a full season, and one is on his 1st season back from TJ on an innings limit.
Give me other stats, Ollie my friend. Lester is better than anyone you got besides maybe DeGrom. And Arrieta is better than all of them by leaps and bounds.
How about FIP, for this season:
Lester: 3.02
Syndergaard: 3.27
Matz: 3.62
deGrom: 2.67
Harvey: 3.20
All in relatively the same ballpark. But Syndergaard and Matz are also rookies and have the potential to be much better than that. Harvey’s career average is much lower. Lester’s career FIP is 3.52. I would take any of those four over Lester except maybe Matz, only because I haven’t seen enough of him.
Gee, Ollie, looks like by FIP Lester is better than anyone but DeGrom, which is exactly what I said. So this:
“Yeah, it is amusing. Only reason Lester would even be #5 is because Wheeler is still out after TJS. Once Wheeler is back, Lester would be in the bullpen making spot starts to keep Harvey and Syndergaard and Matz from pitching too many innings.”
is ridiculous.
of course Lester is 32 heading toward his decline phrase while being paid 8 times more than the combined mets 4 which for me is amazing
Dovif – Even if that silliness you say is true; what in the world does that have to do with how the pitcher’s are now heading into October?
In all seriousness, which Cubs fan would take Lester over any of deGrom, Harvey, or Syndergaard? I could understand a few picking Lester over Matz due to Matz’ limited Major League experience. But nobody would take Lester over deGrom, Harvey, or Syndergaard.
Eh, FIP isn’t really the stat to be looking at when comparing these pitchers. How about xFIP:
Noah Syndergaard, 2.96
Jacob deGrom, 2.97
Jon Lester, 3.11
Matt Harvey, 3.34
But that doesn’t consider the fact that all three Mets pitchers (deGrom and Harvey especially) are adept at inducing pop-ups and weak contact because of a low Z-Contact% (there’s plenty of research out there on this). Which allows these pitchers (like Clippard for example) to sustainably beat their FIP).
Meanwhile, Lester is an atrocious fielder of his position, which quite predictably has a negative effect on his run prevention relative to his FIP.
I guess this is a bad time to tell you the Mets actually have a better lineup (wRC+, ISO, hrs, etc) top to bottom than the Cubs.
Schwarber: 243/351/505. 133 wRC+. 1.7 WAR in 63 games (251 PA). Below average defensively.
Conforto: 280/350/516. 140 wRC+. 1.9 WAR in 51 games (177 PA). Above average defensively.
On the other hand, Schwarber *is* 4 days younger, so I guess there’s a little more projection out of him.
Yeah, no. Schwarber has a must brighter future ahead of him. Check out the prospect rankings.
This is silly. Schwarber & Conforto are both first round draft picks who raked in the minors and who prospect watchers loved. Schwarber was nearly universally preferred before they made their MLB debuts (except by Keith Law & Dave Cameron) but it’s hardly a lock that Schwarber will have a better career just because he was a few spots higher on a prospect ranking sheet. It prospect rankings were that much of a science there would never be any busts!. Both are extremely promising young players who have so far excelled in the big leagues, but only time will tell who has the better career.
Home-prospect bias: it could happen to YOU
Exactly. We all know that prospect rankings are definitive when it comes to predicting future performance!
Or the k rate schwarber at 30% with same walk rate, comforto less than 20%
Conforto has a better wRC+, has struck out a third less often than Schwarber, and plays much better outfield defense. Schwarber might wind up being the better player but Conforto has been the better player so far.
Right, how will Jacob DeGrom get Tommy La Stella or Starlin Castro out????
Doeesn’t matter after Schwarber, Bryant, Rizzo go back to back to back.
You Mets’ fans are too much. Beat up on one of the weakest divisions in baseball history and think this team is so great. Mets would be in 4th place and out of the playoffs in the Central.
Love to use comment sections for playoff fanfic
Last I checked, the Mets play in the NL East and not the NL Central, so your point’s invalid. I’m also unsure on why your reaponse to this article is to bash the Mets. Did you have a bad experience at Shea Stadium as a child or something?
the Cubs would be 3rd place on the east too. What is your point
Really, interesting. do you look at standings, records or any other numbers?
At this point by a game and a half, hardly a lock. And you can throw those seven wins the Cubs had out the window because this Mets team is completely different from the one the Cubs took advantage of. Play those seven games now and the Mets win five of seven. No science behind it it’s just what I feel based on watching the Mets all year long. But I feel my opinion matters more than yours.
The Cubs team is different as well since the last games played in late June between these two teams. Schwarbeast wasnt on the team when the Cubs won all seven neither was Baez, the other two rookies now have an entire season under their belts including Russell playing his best defensive position and Bryant ascending with a 6+ WAR. Furthermore Castro has been one of the best hitters in baseball since early August, Jake has morphed, new Cubs Austin Jackson, Cahill, Rodney, Richardson etc have performed at a high level. Maddon has an entire season under his belt managing a new team and I could go on.
So whereas the Mets are a better and deeper team so to are the Cubs. Lets hope the two teams meet in a few weeks.
Neither of those guys is the worst Cubs infielder to face deGrom this year. Jonathan Herrera is, and he didn’t have much trouble.
Please. The Mets aren’t scary. Now, if the team were made up of g-g-ghosts, then you’d have a point.
The winners of a AAA division who have a worse record than the MLB teams do not seem very scary.
Another person who doesn’t understand the marathon nature of baseball. For most of the season, the Mets were without TdA (best hitting catcher in baseball not named Buster) and David Wright. They didn’t have Yoenis Céspedes. Now their lineup, top to bottom, competes with any in the game. Check out the Mets’ offensive numbers in the second half. Your tired argument is tired.
Competes with any in the game? 2nd half wOBA: Mets .339, Jays .354.
Competes with any in the game except 1, sure.
Stay humble, Jays fans.
You understand that “competes” means a different thing than “defeats” right? The Mets 2nd half offense has been excellent, that’s really the only point. Their offensive true talent is better than the overall season numbers show bc for 1/2 the season they didn’t have Travis d’Arnaud, David Wright, Yoenis Cespedes, Michael Conforto, etc.
You do understand the team designated hitter? Did not think so
Oh yeah thanks for d’arnald and Thor. How is that ace of your …. That great knuckler
Non-pitcher stats, 2nd half
Mets: wRC+125
Jays wRC+125
That seems competitive to me.
But I guess comparing a lineup with a DH to a lineup with a pitcher and not park adjusting is a better way to look at things.
A wOBA inflated by a DH compared to one without. That makes a lot of sense.
Amen
Their opponents over that 4 game stretch had a .311 wOBA?
That’s cute.
Two of those four faced the Jays earlier this year and shut them down…
It’s a good thing that the we’ve made no major additions since then.
To your lineup?
Apart from Tulowitzki who wasn’t even hitting well with you and may be out for the playoffs, who?
@New York Mets:
Ben Revere and the resurgence of Ryan Goins, for example. Would be a fun series.
Yeah man, since I do steroids now.
The Mets aren’t scary because the mean projected performance of Harvey-deGrom-Thor-Matz-Harvey is higher than the mean projected performance of Kershaw-Grienke-Wood-Kershaw-Grienke. The Mets are a scary team because the have that performance with a crazy-high variance. Harvey could get shelled in game one, and then the next three guys could all deliver Kershaw-level starts on normal rest. Matz already did it to the Dodgers one this year. Likewise, two of them could blow up and one could be merely average.
The Mets are scary because of their potential, not their 50% percentile projection, which is probably just about average for the NL playoff teams, when you consider their current lineup.
Why do you think their performance has a higher variance than anybody else’s? Is there evidence, or even a good theoretical argument, for why this should be?
Because they have more talent.
People talking about the right way to do statistical projections are missing how much Dave above is talking about “stuff”, which is actually more important for young players like these with limited statistical track records. The Mets basically have four guys right now with nasty stuff all pounding the strike zone with above average command/control.
Sure the Mets median ROS projection right now using Base Runs is similar to the Cardinals or Cubs, and behind the Blue Jays, Astros, and Dodgers.
But the Mets top 20th percentile projection would probably be up there with the best. What it really comes down to is, if Syndergaard and Matz are as good as some observers seem to think, the Mets could be right up there with anyone.
So debatable certainly whether the Mets would be the best playoff team, but they might be the biggest sleeper.
I think Greinke and Kershaw are currently the best starting 1-2 punch in the game. In that sense they are scary. But I think deGrom, Harvey, Syndergaard, and Matz are currently the best 1-4 rotation in the game. I would think any sensible Dodgers fan should find that scary.
Having said that, I know that all the starting staffs in the NL will be of high quality, and that on any given day the most elite pitcher can have a bad go of it while someone only middle-of-the-rotation can have the game of his life. So anything is possible. But I do like the Mets’ chances and, if given the chance, wouldn’t switch their starting staff for anyone else’s in the entire playoffs.
I’m also really looking forward to 2016 and beyond, especially when Wheeler is added to the current mix of young power arms.
What’s with your measured, rational take? Didn’t you know we’re supposed to be yelling about something on here?
I save the yelling and the insults for when I watch the games!
The Mets starting 1-4 could also be entering the playoffs as the most rested among the starters for the NL playoff teams. Seems like the other NL teams are still fighting for the division title or their starters are fighting for the Cy Young award, so they won’t be letting up till the end.
Being very well-rested could be a double-edged sword, but it’s important for the Mets young starters — two of whom are rookies, one is in his first year back from TJ surgery, and the fourth is just in his second year.
“With their pitching staff, they’re the team to beat. Noah Syndergaard is the real deal, he’s one of the nastiest guys I’ve faced, he’s No. 1 or No. 2 for sure. They’ve got Steven Matz, I don’t know how you can’t start that kid. The other two guns with deGrom and Harvey, geez, it’s lethal. The way they’re hitting, they’re rolling on all cylinders right now. Hopefully they can keep it up. It’s fun to watch and at the same time, I’m glad we don’t have to play them 19 games. I can’t think of four guns who throw in the high 90s with nasty off-speed stuff so I really feel like they are the team to beat.’’
-Todd Frazier
But I guess no one told him that the Mets FiP is slightly higher than some other teams. So maybe he would take back what he said about facing them in person. They probably wouldn’t be as scary if he knew about some other advanced metrics. Using nothing but the eyes in his head from inside the batters box during just once series is too small a sample to mean anything.
Todd Frazier. n=1.
(Not that their rotation isn’t super impressive, but taking a single anecdote as evidence of anything is…interesting.)
The point of the article is that the Mets are scary. That is not a stat. Anecdotal evidence is probably more appropriate than anything in this case.
It’s also fascinating how many people are taking the Mets lightly.
Who’s hot and who’s not? Between the Mets and the Dodgers that’s an easy call.
That matters about as much as which team’s pitchers have the most vowels in their middle names.
Matthew Edward Harvey
Jacob Anthony deGrom
Noah Seth Syndergaard
Steven Jakob Matz
Donald Zachary Greinke
Clayton Edward Kershaw
Robert Alexander Wood
Brett Franklin Anderson
So that’s a clear lead for the Dodgers, 10.5-7.5.
It mattered a great deal in KC last year.
You’re commenting on FanGraphs. You are proposing that “who’s hot” is a meaningful term for baseball analysis. Are you quite sure this is where you want to do that? If so, do you have an empirical argument to offer?
Who’s hot is often decisive in the playoffs, unfortunately, AFAICT, there’s little or no actual evidence that being hot or not in September tells you who will be hot in October.
And it’s hot in October that matters here.
But, after the WS is over, we’ll be able to tell which team had a hot October and can reasonably say that being hot in October is why they won.
I would say who’s hot in October ALWAYS matters. EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. Of course, we only know that in hindsight, as the team that wins the World Series will clearly be the hottest team at the end. Because they won the most games of anyone in the playoffs, by definition (possibly tied for the most wins if the WS winner was a division winner who played a WC team that had to win one extra game, and the WS goes 7).
And yes, the team that wins the WS may not have the best winning % of all playoff teams if one team sweeps all series but loses the WS in 7, while the WS winner wins all series in 7. But they would have been the hottest over the last 7 anyway.
That Hansel, he’s so hot right now!
fearsome foursome?
Is this the same fearsome team that has played the Phillies, Braves, Marlins and Reds in September? Yawn***wake me up after the mets are swept in the NLDS.
So you’re saying you don’t follow baseball at all.
The Mets don’t make the schedule. But in order to win the division you have to beat the bad teams as well as the good ones. Just ask the Nationals how their “World Series” winning season has gone. You still have to play the games.
Cubs/Pirates certainly has potential for a great WC Game. The Cubs presence alone inject a ton of interest and excitement, to say nothing of the two probable starting pitchers.
However, it’ll be pretty tough to top last year’s AL WC game. I love extra inning games where runs are actually scored during the first nine. Plus it reminded us how fun stolen bases are!
Poor Oakland have not recovered since!
The Mets are playing really well and it should be a joy to see them play witht the Dodgers. I can’t wait to see how the pitching matchups turn out between Zack/Kershaw and the Mets monster rotation!
I want to see NYM/LAD and HOU/TOR Divisional match ups so bad.
If that happens, what’s the likelihood we see more HR in any one game of HOU/TOR than the entire LAD/NYM series?
very low.
Not only that, but ALL of the NL games feature great pitching matchups. Cardinals have great pitching, and the Cubs/Pirates 1-game playoff figures to be a pitching dual.
But you never know. Kershaw can turn out to be “playoff Kershaw” again, for example…
Great article Dave!
Kershaw is typically lights out in the regular season. In the post season, not so much. He falls apart in the playoffs and it makes little sense.
I am a Met fan, but I have nothing but respect for Kershaw. I think he’s the best pitcher in baseball. Still he is 1-5 in the post season.
If I were throwing a rotation out there for the Mets, it would be 2 righties and 2 lefties. Since almost all Met SPs are power pitchers, not having 3 right handers in a row is a better plan IMO. I’d have deGrom, then Matz, Harvey next and then Niese. If you look at quality starts, Niese ranks well in the NL. The added incentive can help him to avoid his occasional breakdown situation. I don’t think Thor has enough experience and Matz seems more polished, even with a limited showing.
Having a right, left, right left combo may keep hitters from getting used to a 98 MPH FB coming from the same side all the time.
I just don’t think Thor is ready for such a big stage, even with playing in NYC.
Lots of vitriol here, but can I just say thanks to Dave Cameron/everyone at Fangraphs for apostrophes in this article instead of open quotes for the two-digit years?
Thanks, guys!
Pitching KILLS!!
Disclaimer:
I didn’t think the Mets would even get this far. Everyone who down voted my previous posts about the Mets were correct and I was wrong.
With that out of the way … the problem with this article is that it assumes Harvey and Matz are going to pitch in the rotation. As it looks, Harvey won’t pitch more than a game a series, and Matz ( whose career seems to be paralelling James Paxton’s [ hard throwing lefty with lat and finger issues ] is iffy ). Take them out of the equation and their scary factor goes down quite a bit.