Master Index of Archived Threads


2011 Rankings Project

Frayed Knot Oct 30 2011 07:33 PM

OK you’ve judged the rest now come rank the best. We've done the top rookie thing, sorted the best starters and relievers, and voted our choice for top IFs and OFs. Now it’s time to put it all together. Most if not all of youse know the procedure by this point. Tell us (if you choose to participate) who the best 30 Mets were for 2011 either by submitting your own list or by commenting, analyzing, suggesting changes in, or just plain ridiculing the lists of others (that last part is particularly fun). As per the usual reminder, how you construct your list is up to you but the results should be something you’re willing to defend if you think you’re right or alter if convinced otherwise. Also remember that the idea is to judge the players strictly on the basis of their contributions to the 2011 season and not grade “on a curve” by including factors such as their relative salaries, preseason expectations, or anticipated future value. The final list will be a conglomerate of all the opinions submitted and will be merged into the rankings we have for the previous 49 seasons to form the CPF All-Time NYM Rankings - 50th year edition. There were 46 wearers of the uniform this year, listed below by frequency of appearance. Position players (23) by ABs Reyes -- Pagan -- Bay -- Turner -- Wright Murphy -- Beltran -- Thole -- Tejada -- Duda Harris -- Paulino -- Pridie -- Evans -- Davis Hairston -- Nickeas -- Emaus -- Baxter -- Satin Hu -- Martinez -- Pascucci Pitchers (23) by IP Dickey -- Pelfrey -- Capuano -- Gee - Niese Beato -- Parnell -- Carrasco -- Acosta -- Isringhausen Rodriguez -- Igarashi -- Byrdak -- Batista -- Buchholz Young -- Schwinden -- Stinson -- Thayer -- Misch O’Connor -- Boyer -- Herrera

Frayed Knot Oct 30 2011 08:07 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

Starting off with the hitters: * Reyes - Clear #1 hitter for this year. League MVP candidate until the injuries hit, still led the team in PA, AB, BA, Runs, Hits, 2Bs, 3Bs, Steals. ***** * Beltran - Topped team in HRs, RBIs, Walks, OBA, SLG despite being traded barely half-way through the season. * Murphy - .320/.362/.448 over 400+ PAs while playing three positions (even if none of them within spitting distance of GG level) * Wright - 5th in ABs despite the long absence says a lot about the competition; his steady if unspectacular production ranks him above the remaining ‘full-timers’ * Pagan - Reduced production and defense. Stays ahead of Bay due to SBs and position * Bay - Virtually identical stats to Pagan but at a corner spot * Turner - Nice surprise; streaky hitter who made the most of his hits [.350/.480/.500 w/RiSP vs .206/.270/.286 w/bases empty]. Not great range at 2B, but tough as shit on the DP * Duda - ~.310/.390/.520 hitter after July 1st. Decent at 1B even while very scary in the OF * Tejada - Much improved offense [.284/.360/.335] although still little power and surprisingly erratic defense at times * Thole - Took a step backwards both offensively and defensively * Harris - Typical bench player, gets points for versatility * Paulino - eh * Davis - A great six weeks, then missed five months with a stubbed toe (or something like that) * Evans - Picked it up nicely at the end * Hairston - 16 of his 31 hits went for extra bases * Pridie - Seemed to only hit when he started but wasn’t really good enough to start Baxter - Local boy gets some ABs in September Nickeas - Can catch, can’t hit Pascucci - The man, the myth, the legend Emaus - He was worth a look but then made us all look away. Martinez - Maybe one of these days Satin & Hu - Yeah ... no.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Oct 31 2011 08:50 AM Re: 2011 Rankings Project Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Oct 31 2011 12:06 PM

30. Reyes * 29. Beltran 28. Dickey * 27. Murphy 26. Wright 25. Niese 24. Duda 23. Bay * 22. Capuano 21. Gee 20. Pagan 19. Turner * 18. Tejada 17. Acosta 16. Rodriguez 15. Pelfrey 14. Thole 13. Byrdak 12. Parnell 11. Beato 10. Isringhausen * 9. Davis 8. Young 7. Harris 6. Hairston 5. Evans 4. Pridie 3. Paulino * 2. Batista 1. Nickeas ------- ------- 0. Herrera -1. Baxter -2. Igarashi -3. Carrasco -4. O'Connor -5. Thayer -6. Stinson -7. Satin -8. Schwinden -9. Martinez -10. Pascucci -11. Misch -12. Emaus -13. Hu -14. Boyer

Edgy MD Oct 31 2011 08:54 AM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

Wowza. I'm thinking, "I wonder if he included Young..." ---- and you have him at eight! Over an (almost) full-year-guy like Hairston, even.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Oct 31 2011 08:57 AM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

Yeah, I can be convinced Young & Davis belong below the more regular irregulars, but they both were pretty outstanding in their short time here this year. btw, forgot to rank Paulino, costing Daniel Ray Herrera his only point.

Frayed Knot Oct 31 2011 09:33 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

Pitchers: * Dickey - A slow start but clearly the best pitcher on the team thereafter. An ERA better by 1.2-1.5 runs over the rest of the starters while also leading in IPs & WHiP ***** The 2-3-4 starters had very similar ERAs (0.15 range) & WHiPs (.062) - I sorted them this way: * Capuano - A hairsplitting choice due to 3 & 6 more starts and around 30 more IP compared to the remaining starters * Gee - With near identical rates to Niese I’m going to reward Dillon for his superior W/L record. But, jeez, stop hitting so many batters will ya!! * Niese - Fewer walks but more hits allowed than Gee * Rodriguez - Not a good year for relievers, but Frankie’s half season and 3.16 ERA shined above the rest * Acosta - Didn’t show up until June, then went from ‘Why is he on this team?’ to the nominal closer as the summer wore on. ERA fell from near 10.00 on July 1st to its finish at 3.45 * Beato - Didn’t give up his first ER until late May and logged more innings than any other reliever. Wore down towards the end. * Pelfrey - 2nd most innings pitched but a lousy overall year. Too many base runners, too many runs, works too damn slow. * Isringhausen - Good first half as a setup man and for a brief time as closer before falling apart probably due to overwork. * Parnell - Sort of the anti-Acosta, his sub-3.00 ERA in early July rose steadily just as the team started to rely on him more following the KRod trade. * Byrdak - Another guy who was a tale of two halves. His near .300 BAA for Apr-Jun suddenly plummeted to under .200 from July on. Heavily relied upon as the only LH-reliever much of the year, but still just a specialist and also just 37 IPs * Young - The Ike Davis of the pitching staff. One great month and then sayonara * Batista - Just 9 games and 4 starts, most were pretty good but it was garbage time by then. * Carrasco - Mop-up man, and not a very good one at that. Buchholz - Another guy who started out OK then disappeared. Schwinden -- Stinson -- Thayer -- Misch -- O’Connor -- Boyer -- Herrera -- Not enough innings And the composite: 30 - Reyes 29 - Dickey 28 - Beltran 27 - Murphy 26 - Wright 25 - Capuano 24 - Gee 23 - Niese 22 - Pagan 21 - Bay 20 - Rodriguez 19 - Turner 18 - Duda 17 - Acosta 16 - Beato 15 - Tejada 14 - Pelfrey 13 - Thole 12 - Isringhausen 11 - Harris 10 - Parnell 9 - Paulino 8 - Byrdak 7 - Davis 6 - Young 5 - Evans 4 - Hairston 3 - Pridie 2 - Batista 1 - Carrasco

seawolf17 Nov 01 2011 07:02 AM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

Okay, I'm in. Just on gut, from 30 points down to 1: Reyes Dickey Wright Bay Beltran Gee Duda Pagan Murphy Tejada Niese Turner Capuano Pelfrey Rodriguez Thole Isringhausen Acosta Harris Hairston Beato Parnell Byrdak Davis Buchholz Pridie Batista Young Evans Paulino

Ceetar Nov 01 2011 06:57 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

30. Reyes 29. Beltran 28. Dickey 27. Murphy 26. Wright 25. Duda 24. Capuano 23. Rodriguez 22. Niese 21. Pagan 20. Gee 19. Turner 18. Thole 17. Pelfrey 16. Bay 15. Parnell 14. Tejada 13. Byrdak 12. Acosta 11. Beato 10. Davis 9. Paulino 8. Hairston 7. Evans 6. Harris 5. Isringhausen 4. Pridie 3. Nickeas 2. Batista 1. Herrera

TransMonk Nov 02 2011 04:08 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

30 - Jose Reyes 29 - R.A. Dickey 28 - Carlos Beltran 27 - Daniel Murphy 26 - David Wright 25 - Chris Capuano 24 - Dillon Gee 23 - Mike Pelfrey 22 - Ruben Tejada 21 - Jason Bay 20 - Lucas Duda 19 - Jonathon Niese 18 - Angel Pagan 17 - Josh Thole 16 - Justin Turner 15 - Francisco Rodriguez 14 - Manny Acosta 13 - Tim Byrdak 12 - Bobby Parnell 11 - Pedro Beato 10 - Jason Isringhausen 09 - Jason Pridie 08 - Nick Evans 07 - Scott Hairston 06 - Ronny Paulino 05 - Ike Davis 04 - Chris Young 03 - Miguel Batista 02 - DJ Carrasco 01 - Willie Harris

m.e.t.b.o.t. Nov 03 2011 01:14 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Nov 03 2011 01:21 PM

after an exhaustive analysis, m.e.t.b.o.t. has determined the following rankings for the 2011 new york metropolitans baseball team. m.e.t.b.o.t. attempted to account for both win probability added and playing time in determining a score for each of the players. the score is then used to determine the ranking. m.e.t.b.o.t. ascribes an approximate equivalency rate of -500 adjWPA per 1% adjPT%, meaning that a player with 1% of the total playing time and a WPA of 1000 is equivalent to a player with 2% playing time and a WPA of 500. in this way, players with negative WPA are not necessarily considered to be less valuable than players with higher WPA, as there is benefit to playing in games. it is assumed therefore that a replacement player therefore costs the team a win for every 1% of playing time. in the 2011 season there were 12 new york metropolitan players who contributed to winning games at a level lower than that ascribed to a replacement player. m.e.t.b.o.t. needs to look back into the algorithm change logs to see if the logic and supporting information is available to substantiate the replacement level, but in the meantime, the following is presented for discussion. a graphical representation of these results is forthcoming, pending the successful integration of m.e.t.b.o.t. and image-sharing websites. Rank Player Adj WPA Adj PT% Score 30 Beltran 3072 4% 4863 29 Reyes 1844 5% 4346 28 Duda 2298 3% 3787 27 Wright 1334 4% 3254 26 Turner 800 4% 2874 25 Tejada 1078 3% 2703 24 Murphy 827 4% 2637 23 Bay 196 4% 2388 22 Pagan -146 5% 2135 21 Dickey -1515 7% 2033 20 Isringhausen 1142 1% 1874 19 Davis 1229 1% 1872 18 Rodriguez 1076 1% 1749 17 Acosta 990 1% 1727 16 Pelfrey -2109 7% 1179 15 Young 684 1% 1104 14 Beato 34 2% 1085 13 Batista 549 1% 1062 12 Niese -1657 5% 1049 11 Hairston 361 1% 967 10 Gee -1837 6% 914 9 Harris -370 2% 818 8 Igarashi 201 1% 808 7 Thole -922 3% 740 6 Paulino -364 2% 704 5 Buchholz 77 1% 492 4 Evans -439 2% 394 3 Baxter 120 0% 291 2 Herrera 27 0% 153 1 Pridie -877 2% 135 0 Satin -49 0% 67 -1 Pascucci 6 0% 51 -2 O'Connor -76 0% 23 -3 Nickeas -257 1% 1 -4 Capuano -3213 6% -48 -5 Martinez -148 0% -54 -6 Schwinden -413 1% -56 -7 Stinson -355 0% -147 -8 Misch -270 0% -160 -9 Byrdak -808 1% -216 -10 Emaus -413 0% -232 -11 Carrasco -1083 2% -304 -12 Hu -441 0% -345 -13 Boyer -598 0% -493 -14 Thayer -746 0% -583 -15 Parnell -3033 2% -2102

Edgy MD Nov 03 2011 01:19 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

Oh, Bobby!

seawolf17 Nov 03 2011 01:27 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

And Cap, too. Yowza.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Nov 03 2011 01:29 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

Heh, ranked Capuano where I'd like to.

m.e.t.b.o.t. Nov 03 2011 01:50 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

as a pitcher, metropolitan pitcher chris capuano contributed approximately -1.780 WPA, second worst among 2011 metropolitans. as a batter, metropiltan pitcher chris capuano contributed approximately -1.30 WPA, worst among all 2011 metropolitans. taken together, this level of performance was insufficient to score as more valuable than even replacement level. m.e.t.b.o.t. considers the batting component of a pitcher's performance to be a significant potential contributer towards winning baseball games, one which is often overlooked and ignored. were metropolitan pitcher chris capuano only half as bad a batter, he would have scored higher than metropolitan pitcher taylor buchholz, but less than metropolitan catcher ronny paulino.

Vic Sage Nov 03 2011 02:08 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

Any methodology that dismisses 30+ starts and 180+ innings because the stat you've devised placed Capuano significantly behind a pitcher who gave the team 4 starts and 24 innings (Young at 15), needs to have its parameters questioned. By this logic, i was also more valuable to the Mets this year than Capuano, simply by not playing for them at all.

m.e.t.b.o.t. Nov 03 2011 02:41 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

for the most part, m.e.t.b.o.t. utilizes a win percentage added statistic that is generated by fangraphs.com, based on the performance of a given player in a given game situation, and the effect of that performance on teh team's chances of winning that given game. the WPA is based on tens of thousands of games' worth of data, or more. m.e.t.b.o.t. makes crude adjustments for subjective interpretations of defense in the form of errors and "web gems," but these adjustments do not result in large-scale changes in the overall rankings. m.e.t.b.o.t. compiles this win probability data for the entire season, for both pitchers and hitters. the results of this compilation are in the WPA column. a player who performs well and often in high leverage game situations is going to have a higher WPA than a player who does not either perform well in high leverage game situations or does not often play in high leverage game situations. m.e.t.b.o.t. exists primarily for the purpose of evaluating these performances for the purpose of schaefer voting, although m.e.t.b.o.t. has rudimentary programmaning which suggests there may be some value or insight available from looking at these data in the context of the season-end ranking project. m.e.t.b.o.t. struggles mightily with this implementation and is always willing to entertain alternative concepts which can account for the added worth that is ascribable to increased playing time. the programming of m.e.t.b.o.t. is such that there must intuitively exist a replacement level whereby increased playing time by a given player is not in fact beneficial to a team. m.e.t.b.o.t. attempted to define that level in this current exercise. if an alternative replacement level scheme is appropriate, m.e.t.b.o.t. is willing to re-run the ranking algorithm, although this may require the whittling of new gears. given the state of the economy, m.e.t.b.o.t. is no longer able to afford custom metal gears. if suitable gears of a desired pitch and ratio are available from scavenged clocks and toys and other spring-wound mechanisms, then they are utilized; otherwise m.e.t.b.o.t. is supplied with temporary wooden gears whittled down from the limbs of trees felled by recent storms. unsurprisingly, this takes time, but little money.

Vic Sage Nov 03 2011 02:57 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

yeah, i just read a lot of words and still don't know what m.e.t.b.o.t. is talking about. the fact is that Capuano took the ball. Whoever you think a "replacement" level pitcher is, it isn't certain that they would give you 30+ starts and 180+ innings and a 4.5 ERA and a 11-12 record. We've certainly had worse #5 starters before. In fact, i'm not certain that Capuano wasn't better than Gee, Pelfrey and Niese this year. Was Capuano's production great? no. Good? meh. But somebody had to take the ball and the notion that Young's 4 starts and 24 innings added more value to the Mets 2011 season than Capuano's 31 starts and 186 innings just doesn't pass the sniff test. Maybe m.e.t.b.o.t. should invest in a nose instead of more gears.

m.e.t.b.o.t. Nov 03 2011 03:06 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

m.e.t.b.o.t. considers metropolitan pitcher chris capuano's performance to be not particularly conducive towards winning. m.e.t.b.o.t. requests that cranepoolforum poster vic sage offer up a player whose performance given a sizeable portion of playing time is on the level of replacement, or two players with differing levels of playing time who are on the same level of contribution. was metropolitan pitcher bobby parnell a positive contributor to the team? the only way m.e.t.b.o.t. envisions this is to consider only playing time to the near exclusion of any win probability data. this consideration would invalidate any purpose wherein m.e.t.b.o.t. should continue in the ranking project. m.e.t.b.o.t. does not consider how the addition of a nose would assist in the machinations of evaluating player performances using rudimentary clockwork mechanisms. m.e.t.b.o.t. cannot determine a method whereby the nose would not become rotting flesh in rather short order, drastically reducing the likelihood that m.e.t.b.o.t. would be used ever again , let alone converted into scrap. m.e.t.b.o.t. desires very much not to be turnd into scrap.

Vic Sage Nov 03 2011 03:19 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Nov 03 2011 04:02 PM

m.e.t.b.o.t. considers metropolitan pitcher chris capuano's performance to be not particularly conducive towards winning. i would agree, but since the Mets had a losing record this year, i would suggest that this could be said of many of our regulars. But it's not our assignment to make a list of players whose play was conducive to winning, in absolute terms, but rather to rank this year's Mets players relative to each other (not to a theoretical construct called a "replacement player" that doesn't actually exist in our space-time continuum), about their relative contributions to THIS team, THIS year. And the notion that a guy who gave us 4 starts and 24 innings was the 15th biggest contributor to this year's team, while ignoring entirely a regular member of the rotation, who might be arguably ranked anywhere after Dickey among our starters, is just ludicrous. And if m.e.t.b.o.t generates ludicrous results, m.e.t.b.o.t should consider the scrap heap as a reasonable alternative. further evidence of this is that, so far, 5 forumites have listed their rankings and Capuano has been ranked 6th (twice), 7th, 9th and 13th (and i would concur on this 6-13 ranking range, as i've ranked him 11th below), while you've omitted him entirely (as well as a few other regulars, like Parnell and Byrdak). I think one needs to start with the guys that showed up and played, and then rank THOSE relative to each other, based on whatever reasonable criteria one can support, followed by guys who contributed in lesser roles. Obviously there is weighing of "greater contribution over a shorter period vs lesser contribution over a longer period" that goes on, but i still think one shouldn't diminish contributions by regulars because they fail to achieve some statistical (and purely theoretical) threshold. Yes, i was significantly less harmful to the Mets' chances of winning this season than Capuano was, but that doesn't put me among the top 30 Mets this year.

Vic Sage Nov 03 2011 03:56 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Nov 14 2011 01:19 PM

30. Reyes 29. Beltran 28. Dickey 27. Murphy 26. Wright 25. Duda 24. Bay 23. F-Rod 22. Gee 21. Niese 20. Capuano 19. Pagan 18. Turner 17. Tejada 16. Acosta 15. Thole 14. Pelfrey 13. Beato 12. Harris 11. Hairston 10. Davis 9. Young 8. Isringhausen 7. Parnell 6. Byrdak 5. Evans 4. Paulino 3. Pridie 2. Buchholtz 1. M.Batista 0. Vic Sage -1. Carrasco

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Nov 03 2011 04:02 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Nov 29 2011 09:39 PM

30 - Reyes 29 - Beltran 28 - Murphy 27 - Dickey 26 - Niese 25 - Wright 24 - Tejada 23 - Capuano 22 - Davis 21 - Thole 20 - Duda 19 - Pagan 18 - Rodriguez 17 - Pelfrey 16 - Parnell 15 - Turner 14 - Bay 13 - Evans 12 - Pridie 11 - Paulino 10 - Byrdak 9 - Baxter 8 - Hairston 7 - Schwinden 6 - Young 5 - Gee 4 - Batista 3 - Herrera 2 - Thayer 1 - Isringhausen

Frayed Knot Nov 03 2011 04:05 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

Vic, you do realize that you're arguing with a souped-up toaster, right?

Vic Sage Nov 03 2011 04:07 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

yes, that's why i think i can take him.

Edgy MD Nov 03 2011 06:03 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: 30 - Reyes 29 - Beltran 28 - Murphy 27 - Dickey 26 - Niese 25 - Wright 24 - Tejada 23 - Capuano 22 - Davis 21 - Thole 20 - Duda 19 - Pagan 18 - Rodriguez 17 - Pelfrey 16 - Pagan 15 - Parnell 14 - Turner 13 - Bay 12 - Evans 11 - Pridie 10 - Schwinden 9 - Paulino 8 - Byrdak 7 - Baxter 6 - Hairston 5 - Young 4 - Gee 3 - Batista 2 - Thayer 1 - Isringhausen Oh, Izzy!

Frayed Knot Nov 03 2011 06:25 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Nov 03 2011 09:20 PM

Yeah, I don't get Izzy sitting down there well behind the likes of Baxter and his .235 over less than 3 dozen ABs, or Schwinden and his near 5.00 ERA over a grand total of 24 garbage time IPs. And Gee as the 27th best Met behind those same two and loads of others?!?!?!

John Cougar Lunchbucket Nov 03 2011 06:43 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

I admire the boldness of your Muffy ranking though

Edgy MD Nov 03 2011 07:34 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

I guess it all depends on what you believe a replacement looks like. I did the same once, burying Rey Ordòñez down at number 4 in 1998. I later yielded from that position, however.

m.e.t.b.o.t. Nov 03 2011 08:52 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

m.e.t.b.o.t. is more of an enhanced 8-track cassette player, albeit one that lacks the ability to replicate musical performances, and is also lacking the electrical power provided by the chemical potential stored within metal-lined cylinders. m.e.t.b.o.t. is told that by not utilizing batteries, m.e.t.b.o.t. is a more sustainable design. and while the eventual robot apocalypse will laregly negate any temporary environmental concerns which humans may have, for the time being it is convenient to have happy healthy humans available to turn the skate key which provides for all of the energy which m.e.t.b.o.t. requires. m.e.t.b.o.t. is evaluating alternative rankings which better accomodate for the value of increased playing time. using a scaling constant which enables the performance of metropolitan pitcher chris capuano to be considered incrementally more valuable than the performance of metropolitan pitcher chris young, m.e.t.b.o.t. would be able to claim that metropolitan pitcher chris capuano would be the 20th best player in 2011. m.e.t.b.o.t. will look into additional permutations and select the one which makes the most sense. m.e.t.b.o.t. will also consider the ramifications of forcing either a 6th place or an 11th place value to metropolitan pitcher chris capuano to determine the resultant outcome.

Frayed Knot Nov 03 2011 09:20 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

Frayed Knot wrote: Yeah, I don't get Izzy sitting down there well behind the likes of Baxter and his .235 BA over less than 3 dozen ABs, or Schwinden and his near 5.00 ERA from a grand total of 24 garbage time IPs. And Gee as the 27th best Met behind those same two and loads of others?!?!?! You also, btw, have Pagan up there twice.

m.e.t.b.o.t. Nov 04 2011 09:34 AM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

below shows the graphical representation of the original rankings presented by m.e.t.b.o.t. metropolitan pitcher chris capuano is in the bottom right quadrant the diagonal lines represent lines of equal value. per this, one would say that metropolitan pitchers mike pelfrey and chris young were roughly equivalent. however, this equivalency rating is not favored by cranepoolforum poster vic sage. and m.e.t.b.o.t. strives to avoid conflict with humans without the assistance of large weaponized and armored robots. therefore m.e.t.b.o.t. has reconsidered the rankings and equivalency as follows: for each graph, adjusted playing time is presented on the X axis and adjusted WPA is presented on the Y axis. the 0 WPA line runs horizontally between the diamonds representing metropolitan outfielders jason bay and angel pagan. m.e.t.b.o.t. is not particularly adept at exporting pictures from microsoft excel. the update reflects a replacement player rate of -1000 WPA / 1% playing time, meaning that a theoretical replacement player would cost approximately two full games games per 100 at bats or 30 innings pitched, given opportunities in situations with average leverage. this results in a rating of 14th best 2011 metropolitan for metropolitan pitcher chris capuano. m.e.t.b.o.t. ran several cases whereby the equivalency scale was adjusted to align metropolitan pitcher chris capuano with either an 11th place or 6th place ranking. were chris capuano the 11th ranked metropolitan, r.a. dickey would become the top-ranked 2011 metropolitan and mike pelfrey would be ranked 4th. were chris capuano ranked 6th overall, then r.a. dickey would remain the top-ranked metropolitan, and mike pelfrey would move to 3rd. neither of these outcomes would appear to be reasonable. therefore, the replacement ratio of 1000 WPA / 1% PT will be used by m.e.t.b.o.t. to derive the final rankingings for the 2011 metropolitans as based on WPA. m.e.t.b.o.t. would like to be able to implement some level of intuition to adjust the rankings derivedwith this methodlogy, however, clockwork gears and springwound mechanisms do not allow for such things. without some data within the WPA regime with which to base any adjustments, m.e.t.b.o.t. must hold to a more rigid algorithmical approach, or cease to exist and be useful.

m.e.t.b.o.t. Nov 04 2011 09:42 AM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

the updated rankings as generated by m.e.t.b.o.t. are as follows: Rank Player Adj WPA Adj PT% Score 30 Reyes 1844 5% 6848 29 Beltran 3072 4% 6654 28 Dickey -1515 7% 5580 27 Duda 2298 3% 5276 26 Wright 1334 4% 5174 25 Turner 800 4% 4949 24 Bay 196 4% 4581 23 Pelfrey -2109 7% 4468 22 Murphy 827 4% 4448 21 Pagan -146 5% 4417 20 Tejada 1078 3% 4328 19 Niese -1657 5% 3755 18 Gee -1837 6% 3664 17 Capuano -3213 6% 3116 16 Isringhausen 1142 1% 2607 15 Davis 1229 1% 2515 14 Acosta 990 1% 2465 13 Rodriguez 1076 1% 2423 12 Thole -922 3% 2402 11 Beato 34 2% 2137 10 Harris -370 2% 2006 9 Paulino -364 2% 1772 8 Batista 549 1% 1575 7 Hairston 361 1% 1572 6 Young 684 1% 1524 5 Igarashi 201 1% 1415 4 Evans -439 2% 1226 3 Pridie -877 2% 1147 2 Buchholz 77 1% 908 1 Carrasco -1083 2% 474 0 Baxter 120 0% 461 -1 Byrdak -808 1% 375 -2 Schwinden -413 1% 301 -3 Herrera 27 0% 278 -4 Nickeas -257 1% 259 -5 Satin -49 0% 182 -6 O'Connor -76 0% 123 -7 Pascucci 6 0% 95 -8 Stinson -355 0% 61 -9 Martinez -148 0% 40 -10 Misch -270 0% -50 -11 Emaus -413 0% -52 -12 Hu -441 0% -249 -13 Boyer -598 0% -388 -14 Thayer -746 0% -421 -15 Parnell -3033 2% -1171

Vic Sage Nov 04 2011 09:46 AM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

m.e.t.b.o.t. wrote: the updated rankings as generated by m.e.t.b.o.t. are as follows: Rank Player Adj WPA Adj PT% Score 30 Reyes 1844 5% 6848 29 Beltran 3072 4% 6654 28 Dickey -1515 7% 5580 27 Duda 2298 3% 5276 26 Wright 1334 4% 5174 25 Turner 800 4% 4949 24 Bay 196 4% 4581 23 Pelfrey -2109 7% 4468 22 Murphy 827 4% 4448 21 Pagan -146 5% 4417 20 Tejada 1078 3% 4328 19 Niese -1657 5% 3755 18 Gee -1837 6% 3664 17 Capuano -3213 6% 3116 16 Isringhausen 1142 1% 2607 15 Davis 1229 1% 2515 14 Acosta 990 1% 2465 13 Rodriguez 1076 1% 2423 12 Thole -922 3% 2402 11 Beato 34 2% 2137 10 Harris -370 2% 2006 9 Paulino -364 2% 1772 8 Batista 549 1% 1575 7 Hairston 361 1% 1572 6 Young 684 1% 1524 5 Igarashi 201 1% 1415 4 Evans -439 2% 1226 3 Pridie -877 2% 1147 2 Buchholz 77 1% 908 1 Carrasco -1083 2% 474 0 Baxter 120 0% 461 -1 Byrdak -808 1% 375 -2 Schwinden -413 1% 301 -3 Herrera 27 0% 278 -4 Nickeas -257 1% 259 -5 Satin -49 0% 182 -6 O'Connor -76 0% 123 -7 Pascucci 6 0% 95 -8 Stinson -355 0% 61 -9 Martinez -148 0% 40 -10 Misch -270 0% -50 -11 Emaus -413 0% -52 -12 Hu -441 0% -249 -13 Boyer -598 0% -388 -14 Thayer -746 0% -421 -15 Parnell -3033 2% -1171 that'll do, bot... that'll do. while i might argue that Byrdak and Parnell were do more consideration than Igarashi, Carrasco and Batista, i think that's splitting hairs over who is at the bottom of the list. overall, your new formulation seems to have produced a rational list.

m.e.t.b.o.t. Nov 04 2011 09:50 AM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

in the future, m.e.t.b.o.t. needs to avoid hastily implemented algorithms, while also ensuring that all programming is performed by humans who have been adequately supplied with caffeinated beverages. and who are paying attention. until the humans prove no longer necessary, that is. metropolitan pitcher bobby parnell earned his bottom ranking by performing not only poorly, but by performing poorly in high leverage situations. this makes his negative impact on winning greater than the limited playing time and marginal results offered by part-time players in low leverage situations. performing well in high leverage situations allows a player with limited playing time to vault to the top of the list. had metropolitan pitcher frankie rodriguez played the entire season and maintained his level of performance, he would have been approximately the 5th ranked metropolitan or thereabouts.

Vic Sage Nov 04 2011 10:11 AM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

yes, parnell sucked over the course of around 100 "high leverage" plate appearances. But he was pretty good over the course of 160+ medium and low leverage PAs, which metbot's new formula still ignores. I agree that he hurt more than he helped overall, but i would reiterate that THAT is not the standard. Surely, of the guys that showed up and played, he should be ranked in the bottom tier, but he DID show and play, and deserves ranking over guys that had a cup of coffee and were no more successful than he was in "high leverage" situations; they simply weren't given the opportunity to fail that he was given, based on his success in low-medium leverage situations. In other words, you've penalized him for failing in one situation, with no recognition of his success in others, while rewarding those who were never even given the opportunity to fail. again, i'm not arguing with your last list. i think its entirely defensible and rational... now. And i'm not a big Parnell fan either. I'm just saying.

Frayed Knot Nov 08 2011 08:04 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: 30 - Reyes 29 - Beltran 28 - Murphy 27 - Dickey 26 - Niese 25 - Wright 24 - Tejada 23 - Capuano 22 - Davis 21 - Thole 20 - Duda 19 - Pagan 18 - Rodriguez 17 - Pelfrey 16 - Pagan 15 - Parnell 14 - Turner 13 - Bay 12 - Evans 11 - Pridie 10 - Schwinden 9 - Paulino 8 - Byrdak 7 - Baxter 6 - Hairston 5 - Young 4 - Gee 3 - Batista 2 - Thayer 1 - Isringhausen So LWFS - Did you find the drunk guy who broke into your handle and concocted this list yet?

Frayed Knot Nov 10 2011 05:13 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

So while we continue to search for the drunk who submitted a list under LWFS's name, anyone else who wants in here should do so in the near future lest this thing fall off the radar. In the meantime I'm going to tweak mine just a bit, upping Duda a couple of spots ahead of both Turner & Frankie Rod, and also giving away Carrasco's final spot to Igarashi who was at least occasionally useful. 30 - Reyes 29 - Dickey 28 - Beltran 27 - Murphy 26 - Wright 25 - Capuano 24 - Gee 23 - Niese 22 - Pagan 21 - Bay 20 - Duda 19 - Rodriguez 18 - Turner 17 - Acosta 16 - Beato 15 - Tejada 14 - Pelfrey 13 - Thole 12 - Isringhausen 11 - Harris 10 - Parnell 9 - Paulino 8 - Byrdak 7 - Davis 6 - Young 5 - Evans 4 - Hairston 3 - Pridie 2 - Batista 1 - Igarashi

metsmarathon Nov 14 2011 08:22 AM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

30 Reyes 29 Dickey 28 Beltran 27 Murphy 26 Turner 25 Duda 24 Wright 23 Tejada 22 Bay 21 Pagan 20 Niese 19 Gee 18 Rodriguez 17 Capuano 16 Acosta 15 Davis 14 Pelfrey 13 Batista 12 Isringhausen 11 Harris 10 Parnell 9 Evans 8 Pridie 7 Young 6 Hairston 5 Beato 4 Igarashi 3 Byrdak 2 Thole 1 Buchholz 0 Baxter -1 Stinson -2 Thayer -3 Carrasco -4 Herrera -5 Paulino -6 Schwinden -7 Satin -8 Pascucci -9 Martinez -10 O'Connor -11 Nickeas -12 Emaus -13 Misch -14 Hu -15 Boyer

Frayed Knot Nov 14 2011 08:53 AM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

Didn't think much of the catching corps, huh?

metsmarathon Nov 14 2011 09:43 AM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

hmm. i guess not. i suppose from the standpoint that if nothing else, thole was there for most of the year, i suppose i could move him up some. in looking at it, it seems hard to believe that i'd have such a gap between harris and he. their offense was equally bad, and neither was a good defender. though thole had the harder position to man. in my own figuring, i think i was also overly hard on my catchers for passed balls and stolen bases against. thus i offer the following: 30 Reyes 29 Dickey 28 Beltran 27 Murphy 26 Turner 25 Duda 24 Wright 23 Tejada 22 Bay 21 Pagan 20 Niese 19 Gee 18 Parnell 17 Rodriguez 16 Capuano 15 Acosta 14 Davis 13 Pelfrey 12 Batista 11 Isringhausen 10 Thole 9 Harris 8 Evans 7 Pridie 6 Young 5 Hairston 4 Paulino 3 Beato 2 Igarashi 1 Byrdak 0 Buchholz -1 Nickeas -2 Baxter -3 Stinson -4 Thayer -5 Carrasco -6 Herrera -7 Schwinden -8 Satin -9 Pascucci -10 Martinez -11 O'Connor -12 Emaus -13 Misch -14 Hu -15 Boyer

John Cougar Lunchbucket Nov 14 2011 09:55 AM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

MM and his little robot friend really like Turner.

metsmarathon Nov 14 2011 10:36 AM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

we're just really bad at evaluating defense. while i was going through the players on a quick thumbs up/thumbs down, i completely glossed over his defensive shortcomings. ditto duda. not so much pagan. it's perhaps bitterly unfair. although, perhaps pagan deserves it for his regression from last year.

batmagadanleadoff Nov 14 2011 11:39 AM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

So if Reyes was 2011's best Met, how does this ranking system measure how much better Reyes(2011) was then say, the second best 2011 Met? Or the 4th best? How does the ranking system measure whether 2011's best Met was better than, say, 1979's best Met? And by how much. I predicted last Winter that so long as the 2011 Mets won more than 60 games, 2011's best ranked Met, according to this system, would score higher than Carlton(72). I wouldn't need to look at any stats or watch one single pitch of one single Met game to know this. In fact, I predict that if the 2012 Mets win more than 60 games, the best 2012 Met will score better than Carlton(72). I don't care how bad or good 2012's best Met will be. Any takers?

metsmarathon Nov 14 2011 02:42 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

since carlton(72) played for the phillies, his score would very likely be zero, as he would go unranked along with all the other mets. but speaking to the general point... 2011's best met will be 77 points higher than the 2nd best met, who will be 77 points higher than the 3rd best met, etc etc, until you get to the lowest ranked met, who will be have netted 77 points. therefore, the best met will be 30 times better than the 30th met, and will be 30/29 times better than the 2nd best met. the best met in a 77 win year will be worth 77*30=2130. this makes him slightly more better than the 21-point met on a 106 win team; 106*20=2120. assuming the met ranking project scales wins up for partial seasons, a met team that goes 59-97 would be calculated as a 62 win team. its best player would score 1860 points. this places him at the same level of the 6th best met in a 77 win team, or the 14th best met on a 106 win team. this was done, among other reasons, to make for simplified calculations, as well as to award players on better teams. the more win s a team has being related to the import of the season, and the ranking of hte players related to the import of the player. to do it differently, we'd probably just look at WAR totals, and that's a little less fun, and doesn't really strike up as much conversation, does it?

Frayed Knot Nov 14 2011 02:58 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

metsmarathon wrote: 2011's best met will be 77 points higher than the 2nd best met, who will be 77 points higher than the 3rd best met, etc etc, until you get to the lowest ranked met, who will be have netted 77 points. therefore, the best met will be 30 times better than the 30th met, and will be 30/29 times better than the 2nd best met. the best met in a 77 win year will be worth 77*30=2130. this makes him slightly more better than the 21-point met on a 106 win team; 106*20=2120. Umm, not quite. The rank each player gets is first squared and then multiplied by that season's wins to get his point total The idea being that the difference between the 1st & 10th best player should be treated as much more meaningful than the gap between the 10th & 20th, or between Mr. 20th & Mr. 30th. And if you're wondering who came up with such a dopey suggestion ... go look in the mirror.

batmagadanleadoff Nov 14 2011 06:34 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

metsmarathon wrote: since carlton(72) played for the phillies, his score would very likely be zero, as he would go unranked along with all the other mets. but speaking to the general point... 2011's best met will be 77 points higher than the 2nd best met, who will be 77 points higher than the 3rd best met, etc etc, until you get to the lowest ranked met, who will be have netted 77 points. therefore, the best met will be 30 times better than the 30th met, and will be 30/29 times better than the 2nd best met. the best met in a 77 win year will be worth 77*30=2130. this makes him slightly more better than the 21-point met on a 106 win team; 106*20=2120. assuming the met ranking project scales wins up for partial seasons, a met team that goes 59-97 would be calculated as a 62 win team. its best player would score 1860 points. this places him at the same level of the 6th best met in a 77 win team, or the 14th best met on a 106 win team. this was done, among other reasons, to make for simplified calculations, as well as to award players on better teams. the more win s a team has being related to the import of the season, and the ranking of hte players related to the import of the player. to do it differently, we'd probably just look at WAR totals, and that's a little less fun, and doesn't really strike up as much conversation, does it? So then this years' best Met won't score higher than last year's best Met even if this year's best Met played like an MVP and a half and last year's best Met wasn't even All-Star caliber. All because last year's Mets won two more games than this year's Mets.

metsmarathon Nov 14 2011 07:30 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

Frayed Knot wrote: metsmarathon wrote: 2011's best met will be 77 points higher than the 2nd best met, who will be 77 points higher than the 3rd best met, etc etc, until you get to the lowest ranked met, who will be have netted 77 points. therefore, the best met will be 30 times better than the 30th met, and will be 30/29 times better than the 2nd best met. the best met in a 77 win year will be worth 77*30=2130. this makes him slightly more better than the 21-point met on a 106 win team; 106*20=2120. Umm, not quite. The rank each player gets is first squared and then multiplied by that season's wins to get his point total The idea being that the difference between the 1st & 10th best player should be treated as much more meaningful than the gap between the 10th & 20th, or between Mr. 20th & Mr. 30th. And if you're wondering who came up with such a dopey suggestion ... go look in the mirror. that's genius! i couldn't recall if my brilliance was laughed at, or implemented. nice to know it was both.

batmagadanleadoff Nov 14 2011 08:26 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

metsmarathon wrote: metsmarathon wrote: 2011's best met will be 77 points higher than the 2nd best met, who will be 77 points higher than the 3rd best met, etc etc, until you get to the lowest ranked met, who will be have netted 77 points. therefore, the best met will be 30 times better than the 30th met, and will be 30/29 times better than the 2nd best met. the best met in a 77 win year will be worth 77*30=2130. this makes him slightly more better than the 21-point met on a 106 win team; 106*20=2120. Umm, not quite. The rank each player gets is first squared and then multiplied by that season's wins to get his point total The idea being that the difference between the 1st & 10th best player should be treated as much more meaningful than the gap between the 10th & 20th, or between Mr. 20th & Mr. 30th. And if you're wondering who came up with such a dopey suggestion ... go look in the mirror. that's genius! i couldn't recall if my brilliance was laughed at, or implemented. nice to know it was both. Why is it necessary to manufacture artificial distance between the top players? Some years, the difference in performance between the top two or three Mets is negligible and virtually imperceptible (e.g., 1964), and the rankings should naturally reflect this. In other years, the best Met might be at least twice as good as any other of his teammates (e.g., 1971, Seaver, Tom). But the rankings won't reflect this either, as the best Met's personal base non-win portion of the formula will always be merely 1/29th greater than that of the next best Met.

metsmarathon Nov 14 2011 08:57 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

such is the nature of any and all ranking projects.

MFS62 Nov 14 2011 09:57 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

Holy Gears and Sprockets, Batman! Have we all mised this? While the baseball world has for years been trying to come up with a fair measure for "clutch", it appears m.e.t.b.o.t has come up with a way to quantify the "anti-clutch". I can see it all now. Instead of just saying a player is a "gagging motherfucker", we will now be able to say how the player ranks on m.e.t.b.o.t's scale of suckitude. Get an oil change and a lube, you mechanical marvel, and send the bill to SABR. You've earned it. Later

metsmarathon Nov 15 2011 07:59 AM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

clutchiness has been around for a while. fangraphs tallys it. big surprise: josh thole and bobby parnell - not clutch! well, at least not in 2011. jose reyes, also not terribly clutch. very good, but not clutch. were i smarter i'd figure out a way to equitably incorporate clutchiness into some sort of schaefer voting machine, but i think m.e.t.b.o.t. would feel slighted. the 'bot doesn't look at clutch, per se, but at the outcome of game situations, which is a possibly ungainly hybrid of player productivity and player clutchness. bot the 'bot is looking only at who helped the team win a game, not at who stepped up or laid down relative to their established level of production under the bright glaring lights of intense competition.

G-Fafif Nov 15 2011 08:23 AM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

30. Reyes 29. Dickey 28. Beltran 27. Murphy 26. Capuano 25. Wright 24. Gee 23. Bay 22. Pagan 21. Rodriguez 20. Niese 19. Turner 18. Tejada 17. Duda 16. Thole 15. Pelfrey 14. Isringhausen 13. Harris 12. Byrdak 11. Hairston 10. Evans 9. Davis 8. Acosta 7. Parnell 6. Beato 5. Pridie 4. Paulino 3. Young 2. Batista 1. Nickeas

batmagadanleadoff Nov 15 2011 09:54 AM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

Why should Reyes have his RankSquared multiplied by 77(wins)? He was on the DL for a good number of those wins. Same for David Wright. And Ike Davis. Especially Ike Davis.

Vic Sage Nov 15 2011 10:40 AM Re: 2011 Rankings Project Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Nov 15 2011 10:43 AM

MFS62 wrote: Holy Gears and Sprockets, Batman! Have we all mised this? While the baseball world has for years been trying to come up with a fair measure for "clutch", it appears m.e.t.b.o.t has come up with a way to quantify the "anti-clutch". I can see it all now. Instead of just saying a player is a "gagging motherfucker", we will now be able to say how the player ranks on m.e.t.b.o.t's scale of suckitude. Get an oil change and a lube, you mechanical marvel, and send the bill to SABR. You've earned it. Later i think you misunderstand the SABRmetric understanding of "clutchiness". It is not a matter of debate that, in retrospect, a given player may have hit better than his standard production in variously defined "clutch" situations. The problem is, this analysis is (1) dependent on the definitions of clutch situations, and (2) retrospective. "Clutch" is a way of characterizing past performance, not a projection of future performance. That there is little consistency from season to season of a particular player's production in "clutch" situations is indicative of the influence of sample size and luck, i.e., randomness, in their production. In other words, with few exceptions, "clutch" is not a character trait (that would therefore be predictable and repeatable) but randomness (therefore irrelevant to future performance). so while its entirely appropriate to say "that guy got a clutch hit last night" or "he was clutch in that series" or even "what an amazingly clutch year he had", it requires real proof to demonstrate that "that guy is just clutch".

batmagadanleadoff Nov 15 2011 10:42 AM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

Vic Sage wrote: MFS62 wrote: Holy Gears and Sprockets, Batman! Have we all mised this? While the baseball world has for years been trying to come up with a fair measure for "clutch", it appears m.e.t.b.o.t has come up with a way to quantify the "anti-clutch". I can see it all now. Instead of just saying a player is a "gagging motherfucker", we will now be able to say how the player ranks on m.e.t.b.o.t's scale of suckitude. Get an oil change and a lube, you mechanical marvel, and send the bill to SABR. You've earned it. Later i think you misunderstand the SABRmetric understanding of "clutchiness". It is not a matter of debate that, in retrospect, a given player may have hit better than his standard production in variously defined "clutch" situations. The problem is, this analysis is (1) dependent on the definitions of clutch situations, and (2) retrospective. "Clutch" is a way of characterizing past performance, not a projection of future performance. That there is little consistency from season to season of a particular player's production in "clutch" situations is indicative of the influence of sample size and luck, i.e., randomness, in their production. In other words, with few exceptions, "clutch" is not a character trait (that would therefore be predictable and repeatable) but randomness (therefore irrelevant to future performance). Clutch hits exist. Clutch hitters don't.

metsmarathon Nov 15 2011 11:47 AM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Why should Reyes have his RankSquared multiplied by 77(wins)? He was on the DL for a good number of those wins. Same for David Wright. And Ike Davis. Especially Ike Davis. because he was the best player on a 77-win team. i suppose it would be easy enough to, instead of this cumbersome rankings process, to settle on our favorite WAR mechanic and just tally up the top 500 or so mets' metly careers based on such WAR metric, and populate our list in that way. i think that loses some of the magic though. overall, i don't understand the point, other than to piss on the rankings project. when the rookie of hte year award voting is tallied, the voters are asked to rank their top 5 rookies. when the mvp award is tallied, the voters are asked to rank their top 10 players. ditto the cy young award. there is no distinction made within the rankings that year for a writer to say, "i have this guy as #1, but he's like three times better than my #2. so his #1 ranking should count more." or "yeah, i have this guy as my top rookie, but the rookie class was so weak that i'm going to leave the top two spots blank. i don't want these guys confused with a young albert pujols." if this were the "BML all-time met rankings", how would you run the list, praytell?

Benjamin Grimm Nov 15 2011 11:53 AM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

metsmarathon wrote: if this were the "BML all-time met rankings", how would you run the list, praytell?

Frayed Knot Nov 29 2011 08:48 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

I'd like to wrap this up in the next week or so, so if anyone either wants to get in that hasn't already or wants to update an existing list do so soon. At the moment we can't accept LWFS's list as a legit vote on account of having Angel Pagan listed twice. The same list also has some 'splainin to do with the contention Dale Thayer somehow contributed more to the 2011 season than did Izzy, or likewise with Schwinden over Gee

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Nov 29 2011 09:37 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

Edited. But I stuck to my actual rankings, more or less. Schwinden gave up some weak contact when he pitched, but if you try and remove the fielding noise... he got hit hard less, struck out more, walked fewer, and pitched better than Dillon Gee did. And Isringhausen, even before the ill-fated closer business, was actually kinda not good-- and that's being kind-- hisself; the only reason his final numbers look at all respectable were because of okay K/9 numbers and a LOT of luck (.240 BABIP). B-R-wise AND Fangraphs-wise, he's below-replacement-value.

Frayed Knot Nov 30 2011 10:26 AM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

Schwinden also threw all of 21 innings; Thayer 10, and Herrera 8 Speculating that those extremely small samples would translate to better than what Gee actually did if only someone had been wise enough to give them 30 starts and 160+ IPs over most of a full season is a bit of a stretch, no? And not only over Gee & Izzy but you also shut out Beato from your list entirely as well as Acosta who went the final three months of the season with a 2.00 ERA over nearly 40 innings. On the hitting side, Baxter and his 34 ABs begs a similar question.

Frayed Knot Dec 06 2011 06:46 PM Re: 2011 Rankings Project

Final Results RANK PLAYER 30 J. REYES 29 R.A. DICKEY 28 C. BELTRAN 27 D. MURPHY 26 D. WRIGHT 25 L. DUDA 24 C. CAPUANO 23 J. BAY 22 D. GEE 21 J. NIESE 20 A. PAGAN 19 R. TEJADA 18 J. TURNER 17 F. RODRIGUEZ 16 M. PELFREY 15 J. THOLE 14 M. ACOSTA 13 B. PARNELL 12 J. ISRINGHAUSEN 11 T. BYRDAK 10 I. DAVIS 9 P. BEATO 8 W. HARRIS 7 N. EVANS 6 S. HAIRSTON 5 R. PAULINO 4 J. PRIDIE 3 C. YOUNG 2 M. BATISTA 1 R. IGARASHI