SaberMets.com

Eric, I liked your use of VORP to evaluate the Cameron trade. Wondering if it could be used to evaluate the impact of signing Delgado.

According to my back of the envelope calcs, it seems like the Mets need Delgado to have a legitimate shot at making the '05 playoffs.

1) I used the Bill James Pythagorean formula for expected wins and assumed that the Mets would need between 93 and 95 wins to have a good chance of making the playoffs.

2) I used the very aggressive assumption that the Mets pitching upgrades will cause them to allow 71 fewer runs than '04 and allow the same number of runs as the best pitching team in the NL in '04, the Cardinals (660 RA).

3) According to my math, even using those assumptions, the Mets would need to score 82-102 more runs than they did last year (in-line with the Dodgers on the low-end and the Cubs on the high- end).

4) At 1B, the Mets performance was pretty dismal: Piazza 273 PA: .707 OPS, Zeile 168 PA: .714 OPS, Phillips 116 PA: .537 OPS. Delgado's 900-1000 OPS could add a lot of runs.

Let me know what you think.

Pythagorian win percentage is a reasonably good predictor of a teams theoretical win percentage, but even in it's most precise iterations, the margin of error is still roughly 4.1 games and the aggregate number of wins often sways beyond that. In 2004, the Mets scored 684 runs and allowed 731- making a theoretical Pythagorian win % of .467 or roughly 76 wins. We won 71 games in reality.

Assuming Pedro keeps to his career trend,h e has averaged roughly 2 runs (earned and unearned per GAME not adjusted for innings) while Leiter has avg'd roughly 2.6 runs/game over his career. Over a full season (34 starts by a pitcher) the swing is 21 runs. That is to say, it is reasonable to expect Pedro to surrender 21 fewer runs over the course of the season than Al Leiter (not park adjusted).

Now for Beltran. In 2004, his RC was 128.9 (or 11th in the Majors). Mike Cameron had 76 RC's in 2004. Making a net increase of 53 runs. I know they are both in the outfield as of now, but i am assuming Cameron takes off as it sounds like he may well be gone by opening day and is replaced by a replacement-caliber player (Valent/Diaz, etc).

The theoretical result of the Beltran-Pedro signings is a net gain of roughly 74 runs. As the roster currently stands (not taking Miguel Cairo/Andres Galaragga into account), it is reasonably safe to assume a .519 winning percentage in 2005- or roughly an 84-78 record (plus/minus 4.1 games due to margin of error). Barring injury, that would be solid, but just short of the playoff record.

If we add Delgado, his career RC avg is 89 with a peak of 174 in 2000 and 89 in 2004. Assuming standard depretiation due to Park Factors (Skydome #4 hitters park in 2004, and Shea #16) Delgado projects to hit at roughly .87% of his production at Skydome- making his projected 2005 RC about 79 runs based on his career RC average. If you add Delgado's theoretical 79 runs to our formula earlier, you get: a theoretical winning % of .569 or 92 wins (plus/minus 4.1 wins)- which would put us in the playoff hunt barring injury.

Great analysis Gene. I have a couple of additional points/questions.

1)I think that you have to assume that the Mets had a mediocre hitter at 1B who Delgado is replacing so they wouldn't pick up the full 79 runs. According to my calcs above, the aggregate Piazza/Phillips/Zeile 1B had an OPS of around .675.

2) Negating the minor point of the replacement 1B, the Mets probably will save some runs with the combination of Benson and Zambrano v. Ginter, Baldwin, et al.

3) If we're using last year as a baseline, the Mets would only have to be relatively more healthy than they were last year. Which means that outside of Delgado and Beltran, they can be pretty injured on offense (Floyd, Reyes, Wright, and Matsui all missed significant time due to injury or being in the minors). However, they have to be pretty healthy pitching-wise (Trachs & Glavine had solid, healthy years).

Let me know if you'd agree with those points. Either way, it seems like the addition of Delgado would significantly increase the Mets' likelihood of making the playoffs which would likewise increase the likelihood of a successful cable network launch.

Completely agree with you. I was going to calculate Delgado's/Pitching Staff's VORP, but didn't have time to since I posted near quittin time at work. The other thing I didn't consider is what are the ramifications if we keep Cameron. While his production relative to right field is below average; his production can easily be projected as an improvement over Karim Garcia/Shane Spencer/et al in right. Cameron had a 2004 RC of 73 runs; while he has a career average of about 74.125 RC's. Karim Garcia had 21 RC's for the Mets last year and has averaged 29.83 RCs/yr. Spencer created 24 runs and has averaged 33 RC's/yr over his career. All this means is that Cameron theoretically created 29 more runs than the 2004 RF platoon and projects to create roughly 10 runs more per season on average. IF we assume the same for 2005, (all other things being equal) the Mets would score roughy 827 runs and allow 710 in 2005 (assuming 0 production from 1B in 2004. In reality, our 1B generated roughly 60 RCs))

Long story short (and to not bore anyone else with math), Cameron+Delgado+Pedro+Beltran will equal roughly 90 wins (accounting for the 2004 1B-men and VORP) with a 92% confidence interval of 84 to 93 wins. So it's safe to say that if all goes well, we'll definately be in the playoff wildcard hunt.

Thanks, Gene. Analysis confirms my belief that we either need Delgado, a similiar asset, or a lot of luck (2 sigma +) if we want to be a win-now contender. Furthermore, however much "Rome wasn't built in a day" rhetoric we get out of Minaya, the Mets will remain a laughingstock if they don't contend this year after Pedro/Beltran.

Therefore, by syllogism, the Mets should sign Delgado or a similiar asset (Magglio?) at all reasonable costs. I think that Delgado probably represents the highest value over replacement left in the FA market.

The Mets with Delgado are a much (much!) better team than without him. There's also nobody left on the market like him. Even with assurances that Magglio were healthy (which of course we can't have), he's not the hitter Delgado is.

If the Mets lose out on Delgado, the impact is twofold, since he will likely have gone to the Marlins, probably pushing the Mets back down to fourth-best in the NL East. Simply put, you can't overstate the importance of acquiring Carlos Delgado.

If the three of us realize how crucially important Delgado is for next year's team to not be another PR disaster, I have to beleive that Omar understands it. I guess the big question is whether he can convince the Wilpons to understand it.

Earlier this year, you might remember that I didn't like the Mets acquisitions of any of these 3 free agents independent of each other. But as a whole, the three of them combined present a very viable lineup/staff that could really make some noise next season (seasons beyond next are up in the air and are too difficult to forecast).

But the combination of the top 3 free agents on the market (or 3 of the top 4 if you project Drew as being healthy) creates a team that will score roughly 100 more runs and give up roughly 20-30 fewer runs which would create DRASTIC changes around Shea. Now, whether the other holdover Mets improve, rather than regress is another story altogether. Either way, 2005 will be a really exciting season.

PS- any thought by anyone of putting the Anna Benson reality show on the Mets Network? That show, in and of itself, would generate the ratings needed to launch the network- especially if Benson cheats on her or wins the Cy Young.

Eric,

What about Seattle? Do you see any likelihood that Cameron could wind up back there. They could use a CF, although they are close to their payroll limit. What could Seattle offer the Mets? How do the numbers look with a Raul Ibañez and (put another name here) trade?