213 Miles From Shea

Every spring at 213 we gather a whole bunch of projections for players and average them together to see what a conglomerate of baseball sources think a given player will perform over the year. It’s wholly unscientific – averaging averages and not weighting them for previous accuracy or amount of playing time they feel a player will see.

Brodie turned heads earlier this off-season when he stated that he improved the bullpen by signing Porcello and Wacha because now Seth Lugo and Robert Gsellman can still in the bullpen. This was an odd comment. Going into 2019 Gsellman was labeled as a bullpen person, on the depth chart after all of Familia, Diaz and Lugo. But the Mets bullpen was a mess last year and it was mismanaged.

In his projection article last year, we wrote about how Gsellman had a great 2016, horrible 2017 and improved dramatically in 2018. The computers were all in on this and had him performing at his 2018 level or better. Below is a summary chart followed by his 2019 numbers:

2019: 63.2 IP, 4.66 ERA, 4.12 FIP, 1.366 WHIP, 8.5 K/9, 0.0 WAR, 4.85 FIP

So Robert pretty much regressed in every projection with the exception of K/9, and I wonder if that is due to the rise in strikeouts generally in the league. What’s interesting is his HR/9 is almost identical (1.0 to 0.9) to his 2018 season, so it wasn’t the juiced ball making a difference. He just didn’t have the same stuff as 2018. That being said, his 2019 was vastly better than his 2017 season.

So the computers missed the mark on Gsellman. Yesterday we saw them miss the mark on Lugo in the other direction. It happens.

Every spring at 213 we gather a whole bunch of projections for players and average them together to see what a conglomerate of baseball sources think a given player will perform over the year. It’s wholly unscientific – averaging averages and not weighting them for previous accuracy or amount of playing time they feel a player will see.

Seth Lugo was pegged as a bullpen member before the 2019 season, a change for him as he was swinging between the bullpen and starting. Before last season, Lugo was seen as the 7th inning person behind Familia and Diaz. But Familia and Diaz struggled and the bullpen ended up falling on Lugo. The chart below was pulled from our projections article last March and it is followed by Lugo’s 2019 numbers:

2019: 80.0 IP, 2.70 ERA, 2.70 FIP, 0.900 WHIP, 11.7 K/9, 2.2 WAR, 2.71 DRA

The short story: Almost every projection with the exception of ESPN saw Lugo taking a step back from his 2018 performance. Instead, Lugo put up another year (1.1 runs better by DRA and almost a full win more depending on who you get your WAR numbers from).

This matches what we saw on the field. Lugo was a beast and was used a lot because of it. In reality, his inning numbers should have been down as most projections saw him starting a bit but Lugo was used in the pen and used a lot. ESPN is notorious for over projecting players as better as they are, so Lugo meeting them as the outlier shows how good he is.

Same statement as last year: if Lugo joins a strong Familia and Diaz, then this bullpen will be great. The difference was last year we were wondering if Lugo could repeat. This year we are wondering which Familia and Diaz we see.

Every spring at 213 we gather a whole bunch of projections for players and average them together to see what a conglomerate of baseball sources think a given player will perform over the year. It’s wholly unscientific – averaging averages and not weighting them for previous accuracy or amount of playing time they feel a player will see.

After four days of looking at players who had minor impacts on the 2019 Mets (Drew Smith, Jacob Rhame, Tim Peterson, Corey Oswalt) we finally return to a pitcher who actually played in 2019 – Steven Matz.

Matz ended 2019 pitching 154 innings with a 3.97 ERA and a 4.62 FIP. We wrote in 2019 that most computer projections, with the exception of Baseball Prospectus had Matz performing slightly worse than his 2019 numbers. Here’s a summary of his 2019 projections and results:

2019: 32 G, 160.1 IP, 4.21 ERA, 4.60 FIP, 1.341 WHIP, 8.6 K/9, 1.9 WAR, 4.39 DRA

COmputer models pretty much missed Matz in terms of ERA and FIP but nailed his K/9. More specifically, this is the first projection review we did this year that Baseball Reference nailed and Baseball Prospectus missed (with the exception of DRA). Baseball Reference was the outlier for a step backwards and they were pretty accurate on what that looked like.

Looking ahead, at 213 we hope that Matz stays in the rotation but who knows with how the Mets will balance Porcello and Wacha. Matz has more upside. I guess we’ll find out in a couple of months.

Every spring at 213 we gather a whole bunch of projections for players and average them together to see what a conglomerate of baseball sources think a given player will perform over the year. It’s wholly unscientific – averaging averages and not weighting them for previous accuracy or amount of playing time they feel a player will see.

We are still continuing a stretch of reviewing projections for Mets players who had little to no contributions in 2019 starting with Drew Smith on Saturday, followed by Jacob Rhame then Tim Peterson and now Corey Oswalt. Oswalt showed glimpses of promise in 2018 but was also completely mismanaged. He ended 2018 with 64.2 innings logged but a 5.85 ERA/5.70 FIP.

Last year we wrote about how the Mets mismanaged him and didn’t really give him a chance. We then compiled several projections (shown below) and his 2019 stats (also shown below):

2019 MLB: 6.2 IP, 12.15 ERA, 6.36 FIP, 2.250 WHIP, 6.8 K/9
2019 MiLB (AAA): 86.2 IP, 2.91 ERA, 3.47 FIP, 1.14 WHIP, 8.2 K/9

Similar to Tim Peterson, Oswalt was much better in the minors than his cup of coffee in the majors. Unlike Peterson, Oswalt is still a Met. He didn’t make projections at all, mainly because he didn’t get any playing time so we can’t make a conclusion about whether the projections were right or not. What we can talk about is where does Oswalt fall on the depth chart. We think Walker Lockett as next on the depth chart after Porcello/Wacha and after that it’s Oswalt. Could he eventually put it together in the majors? Who knows. Let’s see what he can do in Syracuse next year.

Every spring at 213 we gather a whole bunch of projections for players and average them together to see what a conglomerate of baseball sources think a given player will perform over the year. It’s wholly unscientific – averaging averages and not weighting them for previous accuracy or amount of playing time they feel a player will see.

Today will be our third day in a row reviewing the 2019 projections for a pitcher who had little to no impact on the 2019 season. Saturday we looked at Drew Smith, yesterday at Jacob Rhame and today at Tim Peterson.

Last year we talked about how Tim Peterson had some amazing ERA’s since being drafted by the Mets, until he got to the major leagues in 2018 and posted a 6.18 ERA, 5.76 FIP over 27.2 innings. Tim Peterson is now a free agent, which foreshadows how the rest of this projection review is going to go. Here’s what computer programs thought Tim would do last year followed by what he actually did:

2019 MLB: 7.1 IP, 4.91 ERA, 7.44 FIP, 1.909 WHIP, 3.7 K/9
2019 MiLB: 55.0 IP, 2.95 ERA, 4.08 FIP, 1.00 WHIP, 8.8 K/9

In his short time in the majors, he just didn’t stand out. That being said, the Mets had awful bullpen management last year. His numbers in Syracuse, especially his 1.00 WHIP, are enough, in my opinion, to give him another chance on a minor league deal, assuming that he wants to do that again with the Mets organization. While right now there is no room for him in the major league bullpen, the Mets still haven’t done anything to improve their major league bullpen (article written on 12/21 so I’m just assuming that’s still true several days from now). Why not take another flyer on Tim.

Why not.

Every spring at 213 we gather a whole bunch of projections for players and average them together to see what a conglomerate of baseball sources think a given player will perform over the year. It’s wholly unscientific – averaging averages and not weighting them for previous accuracy or amount of playing time they feel a player will see.

We are in a stretch right now where we are reviewing projections for players who didn’t really impact 2019 at all although the thought back at the start of the year was, “maybe?”. Yesterday we reviewed the projections of Drew Smith who had TJ in spring training and didn’t pitch at all. Today we look at Jacob Rhame who struggled in the majors, in the minors, got a suspension in the majors for headhunting Hoskins (although how could someone with Rhame’s control at the time be headhunting), and then his season ended with shoulder nerve surgery. Let’s take a look at what we wrote last year, his projections for the season (below) and his 2019 stats (also below):

2019: 6.1 IP, 4.26 ERA, 7.95 FIP, 1.895 WHIP, 7.1 K/9

Right now, Rhame doesn’t really factor in the 2020 season unless if something major changes since his surgery. He was acquired in Curtis Granderson trade (2017) and never quite panned out (a theme so far of the 2017 prospect acquisition sell-off, a predictable trend when a team tries to shed salary instead of getting better)

Steamer seemed to have the right idea that he would see little play time. ESPN and Baseball Reference were more on my line of thinking of playing time for last year. We can’t look at his major league ERA to understand how much he struggled, the sample size is too small. In the minors he had an ERA of 5.49 and WHIP that was more reasonable at 1.27 (but in AAA, not the majors). Let’s see how he feels in spring, right now he is on the outside looking in for a roster spot.

Every spring at 213 we gather a whole bunch of projections for players and average them together to see what a conglomerate of baseball sources think a given player will perform over the year. It’s wholly unscientific – averaging averages and not weighting them for previous accuracy or amount of playing time they feel a player will see.

Last year I debated writing this article. Ten Days before it published, Drew Smith had season ending Tommy John surgery. I already pulled his data for the year though (I pull everyone’s in the same 3-day span, usually when during a mid-winter break from teaching). Ultimately I decided last year that since the Mets were operating as if Smith was part of the plan, then his projections are important. I went through the same internal debate this month, because there’s nothing to review for Smith – he obviously didn’t pitch in 2019.

Smtih may be a factor for 2020. Not a contributing piece we can depend on yet – he needs to get healthy. But if he is healthy during this season, and with the Mets lack of action on the bullpen front, they are going to need every lightning in the bottle they can possibly catch. So here are Drew’s projections from last year followed by his 2018 stats:

2018: 28 IP, 3.54 ERA, 3.66 FIP, 1.429 WHIP, 5.8 K/9, 0.5 WAR, 3.62 DRA

Who knows what, if anything we’ll get from Smith this year. All we can hope for him personally that he’s healthy and then any positive performance by him will be gravy. His 2018 season feels like forever ago, and it’s easy to forget that he showed promise and interest. Here’s wishing we get to see him on the field this year.

Every spring at 213 we gather a whole bunch of projections for players and average them together to see what a conglomerate of baseball sources think a given player will perform over the year. It’s wholly unscientific – averaging averages and not weighting them for previous accuracy or amount of playing time they feel a player will see.

The Mets have one of the best pitchers in baseball in Jacob deGrom, he can be made even better with a strong season from Noah Syndergaard. There was an open discussion among fans last year if the changes to the ball were impacting Syndergaard (both Noah and Diaz throw a hard slider, so maybe there was a connection there?). We’re not going to go down that rabbit hole here. For Noah his main problem last year was homers, he allowed 24 of them. In his only comparable season in terms of starts, 2016 (All-Star year), he allowed 11.

Last year the following projections were posted for Syndergaard:

And here are Noah’s 2019 stats:

2019: 197.2 IP, 4.28 ERA, 3.60 FIP, 1.234 WHIP, 8.8 K/9, 2.3 WAR, 3.40 DRA

Now if you just look at ERA, it looks like Syndergaard massively under performed last season. And if you look at other stats, like FIP, you’ll see slight under performance. What’s interesting is how different his ERA and FIP are while his WHIP is basically the same from 2018. His DRA is even better than what was projected (but a full run worse than the previous year).

Syndergaard didn’t perform as well as he did in 2018, and he did under perform against models. Initially I thought when writing this article that it was going to be a tremendous gap and I would start mourning the 2020 season mid paragraph 2. Noah’s 2019 doesn’t seem so bad right now and hopefully he can become the secret weapon the team needs in 2020 to take back the division.

Every spring at 213 we gather a whole bunch of projections for players and average them together to see what a conglomerate of baseball sources think a given player will perform over the year. It’s wholly unscientific – averaging averages and not weighting them for previous accuracy or amount of playing time they feel a player will see.

Jason Vargas had a terrible first half of 2018 and then rebounded in the second half. As such we were trying to balance the two Jasons we saw in our preview article last year. Generally we were upset that he wasn’t replaced. As 2019 went on he actually became somewhat dependable and then was traded in a salary dump to the Phillies, to later be replaced by Marcus Stroman, who is apparently replacing Zack Wheeler so Porcello and Wacha are the new Vargas. That’s confusing.

Last year Jason had the following projections:

And in 2019 he put up the following line:
2019 Mets: 94.1 IP, 4.01 ERA, 4.70 FIP, 1.272 WHIP, 7.7 K/9, 1.6 WAR, 4.73 DRA
2019 Total: 149.2 IP, 4.51 ERA, 4.76 FIP, 1.363 WHIP, 7.5 K/9, 1.2 WAR, 5.25 DRA

As a Met he significantly outperformed projections with the exception of Baseball Prospectus (who nailed Wheeler’s projections last year too). But then as a Philly the pendulum swung the other way and he regressed closer to the average of all projections.

Essentially the Mets sold him while his value was the highest last year, which would be great except all the Mets got was a salary dump that wasn’t reinvested back in the team and a back up, double A catcher who went to college with one of the owner’s sons. It would be lying by omission if we didn’t address that while statistically, Vargas was the best he had been for a while, his off the field antics with reporters was tanking his reputation and the Mets locker room.

Every spring at 213 we gather a whole bunch of projections for players and average them together to see what a conglomerate of baseball sources think a given player will perform over the year. It’s wholly unscientific – averaging averages and not weighting them for previous accuracy or amount of playing time they feel a player will see.

This one is going to sting. Zack Wheeler became a consistent rock in the rotation for the Mets last season and the Mets repaid him by not making him an offer, letting him go to Philly with a chip on his shoulder on a mega deal that compared to amount that other pitchers are getting – he deserves.

Last season we had the following to say about Wheeler, and summed up his projections below:

In 2019 he posted the following stat line:

2019: 31 G, 195.1 IP, 3.96 ERA, 3.48 FIP, 1.259 WHIP, 9.0 K/9, 3.5 WAR, 3.80 DRA

First off, Baseball Prospectus pretty much nailed Wheeler’s projections with the exception of playing time which everyone missed. Partially why Wheeler was so good was he went out there every 5th day and was consistent. Overall, while he under performed in terms of ERA, he over performed or just about matched everywhere else including a much better WAR and DRA than projected.

This is why Wheeler is going to be difficult for the Mets to replace in the rotation next year. At 213, we have a very similar to take to the majority of Mets fans that Stroman can’t replace Wheeler if they were in the same rotation at the same time, that’s not a replacement. Inking Wheeler would have put the Mets over the top and now the Mets will have hope that Vargas’ replacements in Porcello and Wacha over perform.

Speaking of Jason Vargas, we’ll do his projection step back tomorrow!