Standings in 2016

Master Index of Archived Threads

Standings in 2016

Edgy MD
Apr 25 2016 04:42 PM

Congratulations, your Mets start the week as the first-place team in the Wild Card race, and the hottest team in the league.

NL East Division Race
Place Team W L PCT GB NGB STRK G L10 W L10 L HEAT Div W Div L PCT Lg W Lg L PCT Div %
1 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/WAS.png[/fimg] Washington 14 4 .779 — — W 3 7 3 10 11 4 .733 11 4 .733 51.6%
2 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/NYM.png[/fimg] New York 10 7 .588 3.5 3.5 W 3 8 2 11 7 5 .583 7 5 .583 47.4%
3 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PHI.png[/fimg] Philadephia 9 10 .474 5.5 7.5 L 1 5 5 4 4 5 .444 9 10 .474 0.3%
4 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIA.png[/fimg] Miami 6 11 .353 7.5 13.5 W 1 3 7 4 5 7 .417 6 9 .400 0.7%
5 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ATL.png[/fimg] Atlanta 4 14 .222 10.0 23.5 L 5 4 6 -1 3 9 .250 4 14 .222 0.1%

NL Wild Card Race
Place Team W L PCT GB NGB STRK G L10 W L10 L HEAT Lg W Lg L PCT WC%
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/WAS.png[/fimg] Washington 14 4 .778 +3.5 +3.5 W 3 7 3 10 11 4 .733 33.7%
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/CHC.png[/fimg] Chicago 14 5 .737 +3.5 +3.5 W 1 6 4 7 12 5 .706 10.7%
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/LAD.png[/fimg] Los Angeles 12 7 .632 +2.0 +2.0 W 2 7 3 9 12 7 .632 9.1%
1 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/NYM.png[/fimg] New York 10 7 .588 +0.5 +0.5 W 3 8 2 11 3 5 .375 33.8%
2 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/STL.png[/fimg] St. Louis 10 8 .556 — — W 2 6 4 8 10 8 .556 27.8%
3 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PIT.png[/fimg] Pittsburgh 10 9 .526 — — W 1 5 5 6 9 6 .600 25.1%
T4 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ARI.png[/fimg] Arizona 10 10 .500 1.0 1.5 L 1 7 3 6 10 10 .500 10.1%
T4 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/COL.png[/fimg] Colorado 9 9 .500 1.0 1.5 L 2 5 5 3 9 9 .500 6.4%
T6 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PHI.png[/fimg] Philadelphia 9 10 .474 1.5 3.5 L 1 5 5 4 9 10 .474 2.0%
T6 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/CIN.png[/fimg] Cincinnati 9 10 .474 1.5 3.5 L 1 4 6 3 9 10 .474 5.7%
8 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/SF.png[/fimg] San Francisco 9 11 .450 2.0 6.5 L 1 3 7 2 9 11 .450 21.4%
9 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIL.png[/fimg] Milwaukee 8 11 .421 2.5 10.0 W 1 4 6 5 4 8 .333 5.0%
10 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/SD.png[/fimg] San Diego 7 12 .368 3.5 18.0 L 2 4 6 2 7 12 .368 3.2%
11 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIA.png[/fimg] Miami 6 11 .353 3.5 18.0 W 1 3 7 4 6 9 .400 5.8%
12 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ATL.png[/fimg] Atlanta 4 14 .222 6.0 43.0 L 5 4 6 -1 4 14 .222 0.2%

Centerfield
Apr 25 2016 05:47 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

It's very early, but I wouldn't be surprised if the current top 6 end up being the eventual playoff contenders. Maybe Arizona and SF make some noise.

I think Miami will be better than they have shown so far, and I think Philly will slow down.

TransMonk
Apr 25 2016 06:07 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Centerfield wrote:
It's very early, but I wouldn't be surprised if the current top 6 end up being the eventual playoff contenders.

I was thinking the exact same thing.

Edgy MD
Apr 25 2016 06:16 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

I wouldn't count the Giants out. It's an even year. They're due.

Lefty Specialist
Apr 25 2016 08:06 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Boy, the NL cleaves very easily into the haves and have-nots, doesn't it?

soupcan
Apr 25 2016 08:07 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

No one has any faith in Pittsburgh?

Centerfield
Apr 25 2016 08:07 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

I'm all for cleavage.

Frayed Knot
Apr 25 2016 08:11 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

soupcan wrote:
No one has any faith in Pittsburgh?

They're part of the top 6

soupcan
Apr 25 2016 08:14 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

I stand corrected.

Chad Ochoseis
Apr 25 2016 08:17 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

The funny thing about Pittsburgh is that they're absolutely killing it in batting average and OBP, but middle of the pack in runs scored. Power matters, more than I ever thought.

What does "HEAT" mean in that chart?

Edgy MD
Apr 25 2016 08:36 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

A simple number based on an arbitrarily derived formula to measure the league's hotter and colder teams.

Wins in your last 10 games plus the length of your current winning streak (or minus the length of your current losing streak).

That way, the heat on a hot team doesn't completely dissipate if they lose a single game, but it's a setback momentum wise. And if you're red-hot, but lose two in a row, it can take you back to square one, momentum-wise. I think that's a somewhat representative indication of how momentum works, or is perceived, anyhow.

Frayed Knot
Apr 26 2016 08:07 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Lefty Specialist wrote:
Boy, the NL cleaves very easily into the haves and have-nots, doesn't it?

Well there are a lot of .500-ish teams that could join one faction or the other as the year moves on.

Although, not that I put a lot of stock in 'Power Rankings', the one over on BP certainly contributes to the split league theory.
-- On their list for this week, five of the top six teams in baseball are NL clubs [Cubs, Nats, Dodgers, **White Sox**, Mets, Cards] while, at the same time, ALL of the bottom five are NLers also [Padres, Phils, Reds, Brewers, Braves]

Centerfield
Apr 28 2016 02:08 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Some interesting things going on so far in this early season:

1. Washington: I would have loved for them to stumble out of the gates and be mired in a terrible slump, but it's also kind of cool that they got off to that hot start, played about as well as they could have played, and now see their big lead shrink to a single game. Imagine if they don't even get out of April with the division lead despite not having played a team over .500 (and 9 games against what look like the 2 worst teams in baseball). That would be pretty demoralizing. Big game for them today. 1.5 versus .5 game lead going into a weekend series where they play a team that is actually good.

2. Philadelphia looks to be better than anyone expected. They definitely have some pitching. Maybe some bats too. I think both Philly and Miami will be pesky this year. Atlanta looks worse than expected. Which I didn't think was possible.

3. Cubs finish off against Milwaukee and then head to Atlanta. They might be playing close to .800 ball by the time that series is done!

TransMonk
Apr 28 2016 02:22 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

I think this weekend against SF will be good test for the Mets. The Giants are certainly the best team they have played since that wacky two-game series vs. KC to open the year.

John Cougar Lunchbucket
Apr 28 2016 02:32 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Could be a good demonstration of the power of rotation depth, as we have Matz-deGrom-Syndergaard on tap, and hard not to predict we get 2 of 3 with those guys going against anybody.

I don't know about you guys but it struck me shortly before Tyler Fucking Clippard and Muffy's error combined to ruin everything in Game 4 last year that this depth was the thing that was going to win the World Series for us. And it should have.

Benjamin Grimm
Apr 28 2016 02:37 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

My feeling right now is that the division will be determined by the head-to-head between the Mets and the Nationals. (Strange that their first meeting won't be until May 17; all of the other divisional opponents have already met the Mets.)

Six games in May: hopefully they'll come at a time when the Mets are hot and the Nats are not.

Edgy MD
Apr 28 2016 02:40 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Most of the head-to-heading will be after the Wheeler Equinox.

TransMonk
Apr 28 2016 02:43 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Benjamin Grimm wrote:
My feeling right now is that the division will be determined by the head-to-head between the Mets and the Nationals. (Strange that their first meeting won't be until May 17; all of the other divisional opponents have already met the Mets.)

Six games in May: hopefully they'll come at a time when the Mets are hot and the Nats are not.

Agreed. Ronnie in the booth last night was going through Harvey's next batch of starts (as long as the Mets stick with a five-man rotation). Essentially he was saying he wanted to continue to see Matt make improvements vs. weaker teams like ATL, SD and COL, but that Harvey needs to have his shit fully together (paraphrasing, obviously) by the time that first Nationals series rolls around May 17-19.

Frayed Knot
Apr 28 2016 03:06 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Nats currently best in NL at run prevention at 2.6 RA/G, exactly 0.4 R/G better than the 3rd-best Mets (3.0)
On the scoring side, the 8th-best Mets are exactly 0.3 RS/G better than the 9th place Nats: 4.4 vs 4.1
... so all that's kind of even so far.

Two ways to look at how the Nats are pitching to date:
- One is that their worst starter so far has been Max Scherzer and you figure that he'll manage to lower that 4.35 ERA sooner or later.
- On the flip side, they're probably not likely to continue to get a minuscule ERA from Joe Ross (0.54), or even as low as they're currently getting from Tanner Roark (2.63) & Gio Gonzalez (1.42)

Edgy MD
Apr 28 2016 03:34 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote:
Could be a good demonstration of the power of rotation depth, as we have Matz-deGrom-Syndergaard on tap, and hard not to predict we get 2 of 3 with those guys going against anybody.

I don't know about you guys but it struck me shortly before Tyler Fucking Clippard and Muffy's error combined to ruin everything in Game 4 last year that this depth was the thing that was going to win the World Series for us. And it should have.

I tend to think that pitching depth is a great way to build a great team, but not necessarily the best distribution of resources to get you through the post season. At least, that was my conclusion from watching the dynastic Braves coming up short year after year.

I mean, eight or nine pitchers can carry you through a season. But you can get through the playoffs with seven. Ease up on the restrictions and ride the best ones a little harder. The World Series? You can pound through that with six guys, if they're the right six guys. If you're Tommy Lasorda, you don't give crap about anybody's future. The future is now!

But if you've spent good money on building up far more pitching depth than you need for a short series, money that could have been spent on a slugging infielder, you may not end up being the World Series Champ you've looked like all season long.

Regular season baseball and post-season baseball are two different ballgames. I'm not sure how to reconcile that.

Frayed Knot
Apr 28 2016 11:45 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Centerfield wrote:
Some interesting things going on so far in this early season:
2. Philadelphia looks to be better than anyone expected. They definitely have some pitching. Maybe some bats too. I think both Philly and Miami will be pesky this year. Atlanta looks worse than expected. Which I didn't think was possible.

Just completed a sweep of the Nats, including back-to-back 3-0 shutouts. (3 runs allowed the whole series)

Always nice to gain ground on an off day.

Centerfield
Apr 29 2016 02:48 AM
Re: Standings in 2016

How great is it that it was the Phils beating Papelbon?

Half a game. We could be in first place in 24 hours. Amazing considering how the season started for the Mets and Nationals.

Benjamin Grimm
Apr 29 2016 09:55 AM
Re: Standings in 2016

And I didn't even have to go to Peru to make it happen!

Fman99
Apr 29 2016 12:08 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Centerfield wrote:
I'm all for cleavage.

Edgy MD
Apr 30 2016 12:12 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Bill James publishes a Heat Index too!

The hottest teams in baseball at this moment are:

New York Mets 113°
Chicago Cubs 110°
Pittsburgh Pirates 100°
Philadelphia Phillies 99°
Florida Marlins 93°

Edgy MD
May 02 2016 01:26 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

With the Mets' loss yesterday, the new hottest team in the National League is, shockingly, the Philadelphia Phillies.

Man, with an eight-game win streak, in the rain, on a getaway day, with the series already in the bag, against Madison Bumgarner, and three games into a 17-in-17 stretch, if there was ever a time to run the reserves out there, yesterday was the day. Terry's no fool. But with Washington completing a sweep yesterday, the Mets find themselves in a heat sandwich, with a hot team on top of them and a hot team below.

Meanwhile, the Giants' win puts them into a three-way tie at .500 atop the National League West. I'm putting Colorado in the division lead based on their superior interdivisional record, but it's heartening to see that the billion-dollar Dodgers can't find the gas pedal.

Columns are tightened up below, but still messy, due to our table-making limits.

Place
Team
W
L
PCT
GB
NGB
STRK L10
W L10
L
HEAT Div
W Div
L DIV
PCT LG
W LG
L LG
PCT BP
DIV %
1 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/WAS.png[/fimg] Washington 17 7 .708 — — W3 6 4 9 11 7 .611 14 7 .667 39.6%
2 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/NYM.png[/fimg] New York 15 8 .652 1.5 1.5 L1 8 2 7 7 5 .583 12 6 .667 58.0%
3 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PHI.png[/fimg] Philadephia 15 10 .600 2.5 3.5 W6 9 1 15 7 5 .583 15 10 .600 0.9%
4 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIA.png[/fimg] Miami 12 12 .500 5.0 11.0 L1 7 3 6 5 7 .417 12 10 .545 1.5%
5 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ATL.png[/fimg] Atlanta 6 18 .250 11.0 35.0 W1 2 8 3 3 9 .250 5 15 .250 0.0%

Place
Team
W
L
PCT
GB
NGB
STRK L10
W L10
L
HEAT LG
W LG
L LG
PCT BP
WC %
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/CHC.png[/fimg] Chicago 17 6 .739 +3.0 +3.0 L1 7 3 6 15 6 .714 9.9%
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/WAS.png[/fimg] Washington 17 7 .708 +1.5 +1.5 W3 6 4 9 14 7 .667 45.0%
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/COL.png[/fimg] Colorado 12 12 .500 +0.0 +0.0 W3 4 6 7 12 12 .500 5.0%
1 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/NYM.png[/fimg] New York 15 8 .652 +1.0 +1.0 L1 8 2 7 3 6 .333 31.8%
2 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PIT.png[/fimg] Pittsburgh 15 10 .600 +0.0 +0.0 L1 8 2 7 14 7 .667 33.3%
3 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PHI.png[/fimg] Philadelphia 15 10 .600 — — W6 9 1 15 12 10 .545 6.3%
T4 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/SF.png[/fimg] San Francisco 13 13 .500 2.5 5.0 W1 6 4 7 13 13 .500 16.7%
T4 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/LAD.png[/fimg] Los Angeles 13 13 .500 2.5 5.0 W1 3 7 4 13 13 .500 10.6%
T6 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIA.png[/fimg] Miami 12 12 .500 2.5 5.0 L1 7 3 6 12 10 .545 11.3%
T6 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/STL.png[/fimg] St. Louis 12 13 .480 3.0 7.5 L4 4 6 0 9 10 .474 19.6%
8 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ARI.png[/fimg] Arizona 12 15 .444 4.0 13.5 L3 3 7 0 12 15 .444 4.6%
9 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/CIN.png[/fimg] Cincinnati 10 15 .400 5.0 20.5 W1 2 8 3 7 12 .368 1.8%
10 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIL.png[/fimg] Milwaukee 9 15 .375 5.5 24.5 W1 3 7 4 7 11 .389 2.4%
11 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/SD.png[/fimg] San Diego 9 16 .360 6.0 29.0 L1 3 7 2 9 16 .360 1.6%
12 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ATL.png[/fimg] Atlanta 6 18 .250 8.5 54.0 W1 2 8 3 5 15 .250 0.1%

TransMonk
May 02 2016 01:45 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/201 ... edictions/

fivethirtyeight.com has the Mets rated as the second best team in the MLB (just behind the Cubs and just in front of the Nats) as of the games played through yesterday.

Per the site, the forecast is based on 50,000 simulations of the season and accounts for starting pitchers, travel distance and rest. The ratings update after each game.

Frayed Knot
May 02 2016 02:01 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

I'm thinking the Cardinals might be in a bit of trouble this year.
Already they've been swept by Pitt & Wash and have lost 2 of 3 to the Cubs while their near .500 record and wildly positive RS/RA ratio is largely due to blowouts vs the weaker sisters of the league (Atl, Milw, SD). It's still a small sample size, but I'm thinking that in this case the RS/RA ratio is more likely to start resembling the W/L record than the other way around.

They also seem to be only as good as they are thanks to out of nowhere contributions by guys nobody had heard of (don't they always though?): Almedys Diaz is filling in at SS for Jhonny Peralta and hitting a league-leading (.405/.435/.703); Jeremy Hazelbaker (no, really, that's his name) is a 28 y/o twice-released (including once by StL) rookie with 11 XBH in 64 ABs; they're also getting a near .400 average (18 for 48) out of their pinch-hitters including a ridiculous 7 HRs. There's a lot in there that doesn't seem sustainable.
Meanwhile on the mound, Adam Wainwright (34) seems lost and/or done (7+ ERA) while FA signing Mike Leake suxx. Then they have to count on the increasingly creaky duo of Molina (33) & Holliday (36) to stay healthy & productive at a time when the Cubs are threatening to run away and hide. We don't see them until late July.

As several comments above said, and as Gary mentioned the other day, with a split seeming to emerge in the NL this year, the early trend looks towards the Mets, Nats, Cards, Cubs, and Pirates fighting for four playoff spots (East, Central, both WCs) while a mediocre free-for-all in the west battles for the 5th slot.

Edgy MD
May 02 2016 02:08 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Peralta is due back at the start of June. That's one thing.

They also have a couple of good starting pitcher prospects cooking in Memphis, though who knows with that? Syndergaard spent a over a full season in AAA.

But the Cards are hard to count out.

Frayed Knot
May 02 2016 03:40 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Edgy MD wrote:
Peralta is due back at the start of June. That's one thing.

Sure but, when he does return, he'll likely represent a step back from his replacement.

batmagadanleadoff
May 08 2016 03:54 AM
Re: Standings in 2016

This division sure doesn't read like it's supposed to be baseball's worst. Meanwhile, the Braves are on pace to break the '62 Mets record for ineptitude.

Chad Ochoseis
May 08 2016 02:39 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

While the NL standings are surprising nobody, the AL is upside down. The Astros, who were a lock to win the West, are in last place, 7 1/2 out. The Central was supposed to be a tossup between the Indians and Royals, currently in a virtual tie for second at a game over .500 and 5 1/2 games behind the White Sox. In the East, the Blue Jays (4th place) were a sure thing, and the first-place Orioles were supposed to be the worst team in the AL.

The Orioles are starting to slump, and they probably won't be in first place for long.

Frayed Knot
May 08 2016 07:38 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Other oddities in this season so far:

- the NL is out-playing the AL in inter-league play, holding a 23-16 winning edge so far.
If this holds up it would be the first time the NL got the better of IL since 2003 and only the 5th time in the 20 seasons of IL

- the NL is also out-hitting and out-scoring the AL for the first time in who knows how long (maybe the entire DH era).
NL = .253/.324/.411 and 4.48 R/G
AL = .248/.315/.398 and 4.04 R/G

Edgy MD
May 08 2016 09:49 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Mets.

Rockin' Doc
May 09 2016 02:18 AM
Re: Standings in 2016

The Mets move into 1st place in the NL East. What a great bonus for Mother's Day.

themetfairy
May 09 2016 02:47 AM
Re: Standings in 2016

To all the mothers out there, Happy First Place Day!

Frayed Knot
May 09 2016 01:42 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

The Cardinals are probably the best example of the up/down nature of the NL so far.
They're currently sitting at 16-16 although with a [u:27mpxthw]plus 40[/u:27mpxthw] RS/RA which suggests they should be more like 20-12.
Problem is, they've been winning a bunch of blowouts vs the weak sisters (six wins of seven or more runs) but are 2-10 when matched against the Cubs (1-2), Pirates (1-5) & Nats (0-3)

Edgy MD
May 09 2016 01:43 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

It's always a dangerous point in the season when the leading team in the league is also the hottest team in the league. And that's what they Cubs are. And the ivy is green and Zobrist is starting to show his merits.

But the Mets played their best last year running from in front, so maybe this is their time. They've got a lot of good extra-divisional teams coming up. They don't show down against the Cubs until the end of June. It'd be nice to have some distance between them and the Nats by then.

Look at the Phillies, hanging in there as the second wild-card team.

Place
Team
W
L
PCT
GB
NGB
STRK L10
W L10
L
HEAT Div
W Div
L DIV
PCT LG
W LG
L LG
PCT BP
DIV %
1 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/NYM.png[/fimg] New York 19 11 .633 — — W2 6 4 8 9 6 .600 16 9 .640 39.6%
2 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/WAS.png[/fimg] Washington 19 12 .613 0.5 0.5 L4 5 5 1 11 7 .611 14 11 .560 58.0%
3 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PHI.png[/fimg] Philadephia 18 14 .563 2.0 3.5 W2 6 4 8 9 6 .600 15 14 .517 0.9%
4 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIA.png[/fimg] Miami 16 14 .533 3.0 6.5 L2 7 3 5 6 9 .400 16 12 .571 1.5%
5 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ATL.png[/fimg] Atlanta 7 23 .233 12.0 42.5 L4 3 7 -1 4 11 .267 6 20 .231 0.0%

Place
Team
W
L
PCT
GB
NGB
STRK L10
W L10
L
HEAT LG
W LG
L LG
PCT BP
WC %
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/CHC.png[/fimg] Chicago 24 6 .800 +7.5 +7.5 W7 9 1 16 22 6 .786 9.9%
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/NYM.png[/fimg] New York 19 11 .633 +0.5 +0.5 W2 6 4 8 16 9 .640 45.0%
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/SF.png[/fimg] San Francisco 17 16 .515 +0.0 +0.0 L1 5 5 4 17 16 .515 5.0%
1 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/WAS.png[/fimg] Washington 19 12 .613 +1.5 +1.5 L4 5 5 1 3 11 .214 31.8%
2 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PHI.png[/fimg] Philadelphia 18 14 .563 — — W2 6 4 8 15 14 .517 33.3%
3 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PIT.png[/fimg] Pittsburgh 17 14 .548 0.5 0.5 W1 5 5 6 16 11 .593 6.3%
T4 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIA.png[/fimg] Miami 16 14 .533 1.0 1.5 L2 7 3 5 16 12 .571 16.7%
T4 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/LAD.png[/fimg] Los Angeles 17 16 .515 1.5 3.0 W2 4 6 6 14 14 .500 10.6%
T6 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/STL.png[/fimg] St. Louis 16 16 .500 2.0 5.0 L1 4 6 3 16 16 .500 11.3%
T6 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/COL.png[/fimg] Colorado 15 16 .484 2.5 7.5 W1 6 4 7 15 16 .484 19.6%
8 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ARI.png[/fimg] Arizona 15 18 .455 3.5 13.5 W3 4 6 7 15 18 .455 4.6%
9 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIL.png[/fimg] Milwaukee 13 18 .419 4.5 20.5 W2 5 5 7 7 14 .333 1.8%
10 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/SD.png[/fimg] San Diego 13 19 .406 5.0 24.5 L2 6 4 4 13 19 .406 2.4%
11 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/CIN.png[/fimg] Cincinnati 13 19 .406 5.0 24.5 L2 4 6 2 13 19 .406 1.6%
12 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ATL.png[/fimg] Atlanta 7 23 .233 10.0 74.5 L4 3 7 -1 6 20 .231 0.1%

Centerfield
May 09 2016 02:03 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

NL East has 4 of the top 6 teams in the league.

Centerfield
May 09 2016 02:05 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

By the way, how insane is that Cubs record? They are almost '85 Gooden as a team.

John Cougar Lunchbucket
May 09 2016 02:23 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Cubs can eat my asshole.

TransMonk
May 14 2016 12:45 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

After Friday's action, the Mets are a game back from Washington and are only a half game ahead of the Phillies. The Nats are scheduled to play two on Saturday.

Edgy MD
May 23 2016 02:16 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

As the Giants climb the beanstalk and the Reds fade to gray (slipping assuredly into Brave territory), the Mets find that they are no longer Baseball Prospectus' favorite to win the division, even as they continue sport a happy 89% likelihood of post-season play.

Place
Team
W
L
PCT
GB
NGB
STRK L10
W L10
L
HEAT Div
W Div
L DIV
PCT LG
W LG
L LG
PCT BP
DIV %
1 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/WAS.png[/fimg] Washington 27 17 .614 — — W1 6 4 7 17 11 .607 20 15 .571 52.3%
2 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/NYM.png[/fimg] New York 25 18 .581 1.5 1.5 W3 4 6 7 10 8 .556 22 16 .579 44.3%
3 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PHI.png[/fimg] Philadephia 25 19 .568 2.0 2.5 W1 6 4 7 14 10 .583 22 19 .537 1.0%
4 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIA.png[/fimg] Miami 22 21 .512 4.5 10.0 L1 4 6 3 10 15 .400 22 19 .537 2.4%
5 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ATL.png[/fimg] Atlanta 12 31 .279 14.5 50.0 L1 4 6 3 7 14 .333 10 26 .278 0.0%

Place
Team
W
L
PCT
GB
NGB
STRK L10
W L10
L
HEAT LG
W LG
L LG
PCT BP
WC %
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/CHC.png[/fimg] Chicago 29 13 .690 +6.0 +6.0 L1 4 6 3 27 13 .675 5.2%
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/WAS.png[/fimg] Washington 27 17 .614 +1.5 +1.5 W3 6 4 9 20 15 .571 33.4%
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/SF.png[/fimg] San Francisco 27 19 .587 +4.0 +4.0 W2 9 1 11 26 17 .605 18.7%
1 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/NYM.png[/fimg] New York 25 18 .581 +0.5 +0.5 W3 4 6 7 3 16 .158 37.7%
2 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PHI.png[/fimg] Philadelphia 25 19 .568 — — W1 6 4 7 22 19 .537 6.7%
3 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PIT.png[/fimg] Pittsburgh 23 19 .548 1.0 1.0 L1 5 5 4 22 16 .579 27.8%
4 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/STL.png[/fimg] St. Louis 23 21 .523 2.0 3.0 L1 5 5 4 20 21 .488 28.9%
5 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIA.png[/fimg] Miami 22 21 .512 2.5 4.5 L1 4 6 3 22 19 .537 11.0%
6 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/COL.png[/fimg] Colorado 21 21 .500 3.0 6.5 W1 6 4 7 21 21 .500 19.0%
7 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/LAD.png[/fimg] Los Angeles 22 23 .489 3.5 9.0 L4 4 6 0 18 18 .500 5.8%
8 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ARI.png[/fimg] Arizona 21 25 .457 5.0 18.0 W1 4 6 5 19 24 .442 4.1%
9 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/SD.png[/fimg] San Diego 19 26 .422 6.5 28.5 W2 4 6 6 19 26 .422 0.7%
10 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIL.png[/fimg] Milwaukee 18 26 .409 7.0 32.5 L3 4 6 1 12 22 .353 0.9%
11 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/CIN.png[/fimg] Cincinnati 15 29 .341 10.0 59.5 L7 1 9 -6 15 22 .405 0.1%
12 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ATL.png[/fimg] Atlanta 12 31 .279 12.5 84.5 L1 4 6 3 10 26 .278 0.0%

John Cougar Lunchbucket
May 23 2016 02:28 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Oh, chart foul. Very bad.

Edgy MD
May 23 2016 02:39 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Yeah, sorry. I've fixed two errors.

I was hoping our new home would make chart making and customizing easier. It has not.

Edgy MD
May 31 2016 12:17 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

One thing that really worked out last year is that, while the Mets hung in second, 1-3 games behind Washington six weeks in the mid-summer, they never panicked. Not only did they have players scheduled to return from injury (which is hard to count on), and trading chips (also no guarantee), but all summer long, oddsmakers looked to a meaningfully weak schedule over the last two months. And the Mets went and ate that up.

I don't think they can necessarily count on that this year. Still, for what seems like a luke warm stretch, they have won seven of their last 10. Can't complain about that.

Anyhow, Keith Hernandez said definitively last week that the West won't produce a Wild Card. Since then, San Francisco has had some serious helium elevating them ahead of the pack, but Los Angeles has entered the Wild Card picture after taking the series with the Mets. Everybody has pitching, but NL West is stacked with it this year.

Place
Team
W
L
PCT
GB
NGB
STRK L10
W L10
L
HEAT Div
W Div
L DIV
PCT LG
W LG
L LG
PCT BP
DIV %
1 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/WAS.png[/fimg] Washington 31 21 .596 — — W2 5 5 7 19 13 .594 24 19 .558 52.2%
2 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/NYM.png[/fimg] New York 29 21 .580 1.0 1.0 W1 7 3 8 12 9 .571 25 19 .568 45.5%
T3 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PHI.png[/fimg] Philadephia 26 25 .510 4.5 8.0 L4 2 8 -2 14 11 .560 22 23 .489 0.3%
T3 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIA.png[/fimg] Miami 26 25 .510 4.5 8.0 L1 5 5 4 11 17 .393 23 22 .511 2.0%
5 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ATL.png[/fimg] Atlanta 15 35 .300 15.0 50.0 W1 5 5 6 9 15 .375 13 30 .302 0.0%

Place
Team
W
L
PCT
GB
NGB
STRK L10
W L10
L
HEAT LG
W LG
L LG
PCT BP
WC %
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/CHC.png[/fimg] Chicago 35 14 .714 +6.5 +6.5 W6 7 3 13 33 14 .702 4.9%
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/SF.png[/fimg] San Francisco 32 21 .604 +4.5 +4.5 L1 7 3 6 31 19 .620 21.5%
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/WAS.png[/fimg] Washington 31 21 .596 +1.0 +1.0 W2 5 5 7 24 19 .558 32.2%
T1 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PIT.png[/fimg] Pittsburgh 29 21 .580 — — W1 7 3 8 27 21 .563 39.6%
T1 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/NYM.png[/fimg] New York 29 21 .580 — — W1 7 3 8 25 21 .543 35.3%
T3 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/STL.png[/fimg] St. Louis 27 25 .519 3.0 3.0 W1 5 5 6 24 25 .490 28.8%
T3 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/LAD.png[/fimg] Los Angeles 27 25 .519 3.0 3.0 L1 6 4 5 23 25 .479 20.1%
T5 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIA.png[/fimg] Miami 26 25 .510 3.5 4.5 L1 5 5 4 23 25 .479 9.4%
T5 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PHI.png[/fimg] Philadelphia 26 25 .510 3.5 4.5 L4 2 8 -2 22 25 .468 2.0%
7 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/COL.png[/fimg] Colorado 23 27 .460 6.0 17.0 L3 3 7 0 22 27 .449 3.0%
8 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIL.png[/fimg] Milwaukee 23 28 .451 6.5 20.0 L1 5 5 4 17 28 .378 1.3%
9 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ARI.png[/fimg] Arizona 23 30 .434 7.5 27.0 L1 4 6 3 21 30 .412 1.6%
10 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/SD.png[/fimg] San Diego 20 32 .385 10.0 47.0 L3 3 7 0 20 32 .385 0.3%
11 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/CIN.png[/fimg] Cincinnati 17 34 .333 12.5 69.5 W1 2 8 3 17 34 .333 0.0%
12 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ATL.png[/fimg] Atlanta 15 35 .300 14.0 84.5 W1 5 5 6 13 35 .271 0.0%

Edgy MD
Jun 06 2016 10:31 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Last year the Mets were able to ride out the injury storm, staying in striking distance, and murdering 'em down the stretch. But last year, the Mets had a soft schedule down the stretch, and Washington steadfastly refused to pull away.

The Nats are still refusing this year too, but how much can a team count on that?

Heating up are the suddenly Crawford-free Los Angeles Dodgers, now the co-owners of the second Wild Card spot, and Baseball Prosectus' still-favorite to win the West.

Place
Team
W
L
PCT
GB
NGB
STRK L10
W L10
L
HEAT Div
W Div
L DIV
PCT LG
W LG
L LG
PCT BP
DIV %
1 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/WAS.png[/fimg] Washington 34 23 .596 — — W1 6 4 7 21 13 .618 27 21 .563 56.5%
2 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/NYM.png[/fimg] New York 31 24 .564 2.0 2.0 L1 5 5 4 14 10 .583 27 20 .574 39.4%
3 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIA.png[/fimg] Miami 30 27 .526 4.0 6.0 W1 5 5 6 12 19 .387 27 24 .529 4.0%
4 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PHI.png[/fimg] Philadephia 28 29 .491 6.0 12.0 W1 2 8 3 14 13 .519 24 27 .471 0.2%
5 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ATL.png[/fimg] Atlanta 16 40 .286 17.5 58.0 L4 4 6 0 9 15 .375 14 35 .286 0.0%

Place
Team
W
L
PCT
GB
NGB
STRK L10
W L10
L
HEAT LG
W LG
L LG
PCT BP
WC %
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/CHC.png[/fimg] Chicago 39 16 .709 +9.5 +9.5 L1 8 2 7 37 16 .698 1.9%
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/WAS.png[/fimg] Washington 34 23 .596 +3.5 +3.5 W1 6 4 7 27 21 .563 30.7%
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/SF.png[/fimg] San Francisco 35 24 .593 +2.0 +2.0 L2 5 5 3 34 22 .607 28.7%
1 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/NYM.png[/fimg] New York 31 24 .564 — — L1 5 5 4 27 24 .529 37.2%
T2 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PIT.png[/fimg] Pittsburgh 30 26 .536 — — L1 3 7 2 27 26 .509 24.3%
T2 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/LAD.png[/fimg] Los Angeles 31 27 .534 0.0 0.0 W3 6 4 9 27 27 .500 20.8%
T4 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIA.png[/fimg] Miami 30 27 .526 0.5 1.0 W1 5 5 6 27 27 .500 14.5%
T4 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/STL.png[/fimg] St. Louis 30 27 .526 0.5 1.0 W2 6 4 8 27 27 .500 34.6%
6 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PHI.png[/fimg] Philadelphia 28 29 .491 2.5 9.0 W1 2 8 3 24 29 .453 1.7%
7 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIL.png[/fimg] Milwaukee 26 31 .456 4.5 19.0 L1 5 5 4 23 31 .426 1.4%
8 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/COL.png[/fimg] Colorado 25 31 .446 5.0 22.0 W1 3 7 4 24 31 .436 2.4%
9 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ARI.png[/fimg] Arizona 25 34 .424 6.5 32.5 W1 4 6 5 22 34 .393 1.4%
10 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/SD.png[/fimg] San Diego 23 35 .397 8.0 44.5 L1 4 6 3 22 35 .386 0.2%
11 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/CIN.png[/fimg] Cincinnati 21 36 .368 9.5 58.0 L1 6 4 5 21 36 .368 10.0%
12 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ATL.png[/fimg] Atlanta 16 40 .286 14.0 103.0 L4 4 6 0 14 40 .259 0.0%

Benjamin Grimm
Jul 05 2016 06:59 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

A comparison of the Mets ups and downs over the courses of this season and last.

Right now they have a better record than they did at this time last year, but there's a big surge ahead for the 2015 Mets.

Edgy MD
Jul 07 2016 05:49 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

We head into this series facing a Nats team that, while not exactly a blacktop-melting menace, is effectively the hottest team in the league.

Keith said earlier in the year that there certainly wasn't going to be Wild Card coming out of the West, but San Francisco has the best record in the league, and LA has gone a long way toward securing a Wild Card Spot.

The playoff odds are already looking dramatic. Let's win this series. Loudly, if possible.

Place
Team
W
L
PCT
GB
NGB Pyth
W Pyth
L Pyth
PCT
Diff. =#FF0000]
STRK =#FF0000]L10
W =#FF0000]L10
L =#FF0000]
HEAT Div
W Div
L DIV
PCT LG
W LG
L LG
PCT =#FF0000]BP
DIV %
1 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/WAS.png[/fimg] Washington 51 35 .593 — — 55 31 .637 -4 =#FF0000]W1 =#FF0000]7 =#FF0000]3 =#FF0000]8 27 13 .675 42 32 .568 =#FF0000]80.4%
2 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/NYM.png[/fimg] New York 46 38 .548 4.0 4.0 46 38 .542 0 =#FF0000]W1 =#FF0000]6 =#FF0000]4 =#FF0000]7 18 19 .486 40 34 .541 =#FF0000]17.0%
3 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIA.png[/fimg] Miami 44 41 .518 6.5 9.0 42 43 .497 2 =#FF0000]L1 =#FF0000]4 =#FF0000]6 =#FF0000]3 16 24 .400 40 34 .541 =#FF0000]2.6%
4 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PHI.png[/fimg] Philadephia 40 46 .465 11.0 22.5 33 53 .383 7 =#FF0000]W4 =#FF0000]8 =#FF0000]2 =#FF0000]12 17 16 .515 32 38 .457 =#FF0000]0.2%
5 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ATL.png[/fimg] Atlanta 28 57 .329 22.5 68.5 29 56 .341 -1 =#FF0000]L4 =#FF0000]2 =#FF0000]8 =#FF0000]-2 17 23 .425 26 49 .347 =#FF0000]0.0%

Place
Team
W
L
PCT
GB
NGB Pyth
W Pyth
L Pyth
PCT
Diff. =#FF0000]
STRK =#FF0000]L10
W =#FF0000]L10
L =#FF0000]
HEAT LG
W LG
L LG
PCT =#FF0000]BP
WC %
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/SF.png[/fimg] San Francisco 54 33 .621 +6.0 +6.0 51 36 .583 3 =#FF0000]W1 =#FF0000]5 =#FF0000]5 =#FF0000]6 48 27 .640 =#FF0000]26.1%
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/CHC.png[/fimg] Chicago 52 32 .619 +8.5 +8.5 58 26 .695 -6 =#FF0000]L2 =#FF0000]4 =#FF0000]6 =#FF0000]2 50 32 .610 =#FF0000]2.9%
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/WAS.png[/fimg] Washington 51 35 .593 +4.0 +4.0 55 31 .637 -4 =#FF0000]W2 =#FF0000]7 =#FF0000]3 =#FF0000]9 42 32 .568 =#FF0000]14.6%
1 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/LAD.png[/fimg] Los Angeles 48 39 .552 — — 50 37 .576 -2 =#FF0000]L2 =#FF0000]7 =#FF0000]3 =#FF0000]5 43 32 .573 =#FF0000]47.3%
2 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/NYM.png[/fimg] New York 46 38 .548 — — 46 38 .542 0 =#FF0000]W1 =#FF0000]6 =#FF0000]4 =#FF0000]7 40 34 .541 =#FF0000]44.5%
T3 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIA.png[/fimg] Miami 44 41 .518 2.5 2.5 42 43 .490 2 =#FF0000]L1 =#FF0000]4 =#FF0000]6 =#FF0000]3 40 34 .541 =#FF0000]16.1%
T3 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PIT.png[/fimg] Pittsburgh 44 41 .518 2.5 2.5 43 42 .503 1 =#FF0000]L7 =#FF0000]8 =#FF0000]2 =#FF0000]1 37 33 .529 =#FF0000]16.6%
5 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/STL.png[/fimg] St. Louis 43 41 .512 3.0 4.0 50 34 .594 -7 =#FF0000]W3 =#FF0000]4 =#FF0000]6 =#FF0000]7 38 31 .551 =#FF0000]30.7%
6 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PHI.png[/fimg] Philadelphia 40 46 .465 7.0 20.0 33 53 .384 7 =#FF0000]W4 =#FF0000]8 =#FF0000]2 =#FF0000]12 32 38 .457 =#FF0000]0.2%
7 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/COL.png[/fimg] Colorado 38 46 .452 8.0 25.0 40 44 .478 -2 =#FF0000]L1 =#FF0000]3 =#FF0000]7 =#FF0000]2 33 41 .446 =#FF0000]0.6%
8 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIL.png[/fimg] Milwaukee 37 47 .440 9.0 31.0 35 49 .411 2 =#FF0000]L1 =#FF0000]3 =#FF0000]7 =#FF0000]2 28 42 .400 =#FF0000]0.1%
9 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ARI.png[/fimg] Arizona 38 49 .437 9.5 34.5 39 48 .448 -1 =#FF0000]L1 =#FF0000]2 =#FF0000]8 =#FF0000]1 33 42 .440 =#FF0000]0.3%
10 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/SD.png[/fimg] San Diego 37 48 .435 9.5 34.5 38 47 .442 -1 =#FF0000]W1 =#FF0000]5 =#FF0000]5 =#FF0000]6 33 41 .446 =#FF0000]0.1%
11 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/CIN.png[/fimg] Cincinnati 32 54 .372 15.0 84.0 29 57 .340 3 =#FF0000]W2 =#FF0000]3 =#FF0000]7 =#FF0000]5 28 43 .394 =#FF0000]0.0%
12 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ATL.png[/fimg] Atlanta 28 57 .329 18.5 119.0 29 56 .341 -1 =#FF0000]L4 =#FF0000]2 =#FF0000]8 =#FF0000]-2 26 49 .347 =#FF0000]0.0%

Benjamin Grimm
Jul 07 2016 05:55 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

No word yet from Sweden on the NHOP for this year.

Edgy MD
Jul 08 2016 05:31 AM
Re: Standings in 2016

I've been trying to get that one for hours.

I'm up late tonight with a sick and restless doggie. LA has lost, putting the Mets in position for the top wild card slot.

Conforto went 3-4 with a walk and his second homer since his demotion, a three-run jobbie. He's hitting .333 as a 51.

Edgy MD
Jul 26 2016 05:00 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

A brief return to the standings as the Mets return to Wild Card "leader" status, if only by percentage points.

This gives us a good picture of who will be buying and who will be selling over the next four weeks. Everybody below Pittsburgh is likely playing for the future.

Mets are surprisingly low percentage bet as a division contender. But numbers don't lie.

Also notable is that the Giants are expected to fall and these Cards we face twice today are a Wild Card favorite. We have a good chance re-write that future.

Place
Team
W
L
PCT
GB
NGB Pyth
W Pyth
L Pyth
PCT
Diff. =#FF0000]
STRK =#FF0000]Last
10 =#FF0000]
HEAT Div
W Div
L DIV
PCT LG
W LG
L LG
PCT =#FF0000]BP
DIV %
1 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/WAS.png[/fimg] Washington 58 41 .586 — — 63 36 .632 -5 =#FF0000]L1 =#FF0000]5-5 =#FF0000]4 30 14 .682 49 38 .563 =#FF0000]85.2%
2 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/NYM.png[/fimg] New York 52 45 .536 5.0 5.0 51 46 .525 1 =#FF0000]W1 =#FF0000]5-5 =#FF0000]6 23 24 .489 46 41 .529 =#FF0000]10.7%
3 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIA.png[/fimg] Miami 53 46 .535 5.0 5.0 50 49 .501 3 =#FF0000]L2 =#FF0000]5-5 =#FF0000]3 20 28 .417 49 39 .557 =#FF0000]3.9%
4 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PHI.png[/fimg] Philadephia 46 55 .455 13.0 29.0 39 62 .387 7 =#FF0000]W1 =#FF0000]4-6 =#FF0000]5 20 21 .488 38 47 .447 =#FF0000]0.0%
5 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ATL.png[/fimg] Atlanta 33 66 .333 25.0 77.0 33 66 .334 0 =#FF0000]L5 =#FF0000]2-8 =#FF0000]-3 17 23 .425 29 57 .337 =#FF0000]0.0%

Place
Team
W
L
PCT
GB
NGB Pyth
W Pyth
L Pyth
PCT
Diff. =#FF0000]
STRK =#FF0000]Last
10 =#FF0000]
HEAT LG
W LG
L LG
PCT =#FF0000]BP
WC %
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/CHC.png[/fimg] Chicago 58 41 .586 +5.5 +5.5 66 33 .671 -8 =#FF0000]W1 =#FF0000]5-5 =#FF0000]6 54 39 .581 =#FF0000]4.8%
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/SF.png[/fimg] San Francisco 59 39 .602 +4.0 +4.0 55 43 .563 4 =#FF0000]W1 =#FF0000]6-4 =#FF0000]7 52 29 .642 =#FF0000]41.8%
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/WAS.png[/fimg] Washington 58 41 .586 +5.0 +5.0 63 36 .632 -5 =#FF0000]L2 =#FF0000]2-8 =#FF0000]0 49 38 .563 =#FF0000]10.6%
1 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/LAD.png[/fimg] Los Angeles 56 44 .560 +2.5 +2.5 58 42 .579 -2 =#FF0000]L2 =#FF0000]6-4 =#FF0000]4 51 37 .580 =#FF0000]28.8%
2 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/NYM.png[/fimg] New York 52 45 .536 — — 51 46 .525 1 =#FF0000]W1 =#FF0000]5-5 =#FF0000]6 46 41 .529 =#FF0000]40.2%
T3 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIA.png[/fimg] Miami 53 46 .535 0.0 0.0 50 49 .501 3 =#FF0000]L2 =#FF0000]5-5 =#FF0000]3 49 39 .557 =#FF0000]21.3%
T3 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/STL.png[/fimg] St. Louis 52 46 .531 0.5 1.0 59 39 .603 -7 =#FF0000]L2 =#FF0000]6-4 =#FF0000]4 45 38 .542 =#FF0000]38.7%
5 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PIT.png[/fimg] Pittsburgh 51 47 .520 1.5 4.0 49 49 .497 2 =#FF0000]W2 =#FF0000]5-5 =#FF0000]7 46 37 .554 =#FF0000]13.0%
6 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/COL.png[/fimg] Colorado 47 52 .475 6.0 22.0 49 50 .494 -2 =#FF0000]L1 =#FF0000]6-4 =#FF0000]5 41 44 .482 =#FF0000]0.6%
7 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PHI.png[/fimg] Philadelphia 46 55 .455 8.0 32.0 39 62 .387 7 =#FF0000]W1 =#FF0000]4-6 =#FF0000]5 38 47 .447 =#FF0000]0.0%
8 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIL.png[/fimg] Milwaukee 42 55 .433 10.0 44.0 41 56 .426 1 =#FF0000]W1 =#FF0000]4-6 =#FF0000]5 33 50 .398 =#FF0000]0.1%
9 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/SD.png[/fimg] San Diego 43 57 .430 10.5 47.5 45 55 .445 -2 =#FF0000]L1 =#FF0000]4-6 =#FF0000]3 39 49 .443 =#FF0000]0.3%
10 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ARI.png[/fimg] Arizona 41 58 .414 12.0 59.5 41 58 .416 0 =#FF0000]L1 =#FF0000]3-7 =#FF0000]2 36 49 .424 =#FF0000]0.1%
11 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/CIN.png[/fimg] Cincinnati 39 60 .394 14.0 77.5 40 59 .408 -1 =#FF0000]W1 =#FF0000]7-3 =#FF0000]8 35 49 .417 =#FF0000]0.0%
12 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ATL.png[/fimg] Atlanta 33 66 .333 20.0 137.5 25 74 .257 8 =#FF0000]L5 =#FF0000]2-8 =#FF0000]-3 29 57 .337 =#FF0000]0.0%

Edgy MD
Aug 22 2016 01:21 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Two of the three divisions seem to be pretty secure (but you NEVER know), while five teams scramble for two Wild Card spots. Colorado refuses to quit, and even team-in-revolt Cincinnati is showing some heart.

Anybody who fears staying ahead of Philadelphia, Pythagoras doesn't like them. Like, at all.

Place
Team
W
L
PCT
GB
NGB Pyth
W Pyth
L Pyth
PCT
Diff. =#FF0000]
STRK =#FF0000]Last
10 =#FF0000]
HEAT Div
W Div
L DIV
PCT LG
W LG
L LG
PCT =#FF0000]BP
DIV %
1 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/WAS.png[/fimg] Washington 73 50 .593 — — 78 45 .635 -5 =#FF0000]L1 =#FF0000]6-4 =#FF0000]5 35 16 .686 62 45 .579 =#FF0000]99.5%
2 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIA.png[/fimg] Miami 65 59 .524 8.5 8.5 64 60 .513 +1 =#FF0000]W3 =#FF0000]5-5 =#FF0000]8 22 28 .440 60 50 .545 =#FF0000]0.4%
3 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/NYM.png[/fimg] New York 62 62 .500 11.5 14.5 61 63 .489 +1 =#FF0000]W2 =#FF0000]5-5 =#FF0000]7 23 24 .489 53 54 .495 =#FF0000]0.2%
4 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PHI.png[/fimg] Philadephia 58 67 .464 16.0 28.0 49 76 .389 +9 =#FF0000]L1 =#FF0000]6-4 =#FF0000]5 22 25 .468 50 59 .459 =#FF0000]0.0%
5 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ATL.png[/fimg] Atlanta 45 79 .363 28.5 78.0 44 80 .358 +1 =#FF0000]W1 =#FF0000]2-8 =#FF0000]3 21 30 .412 39 68 .364 =#FF0000]0.0%

Place
Team
W
L
PCT
GB
NGB Pyth
W Pyth
L Pyth
PCT
Diff. =#FF0000]
STRK =#FF0000]Last
10 =#FF0000]
HEAT LG
W LG
L LG
PCT =#FF0000]BP
WC %
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/CHC.png[/fimg] Chicago 78 45 .634 +12.0 +12.0 85 38 .690 -7 =#FF0000]L1 =#FF0000]6-4 =#FF0000]5 65 41 .613 =#FF0000]0.1%
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/WAS.png[/fimg] Washington 73 50 .593 +8.5 +8.5 78 45 .635 -5 =#FF0000]L1 =#FF0000]6-4 =#FF0000]5 62 45 .579 =#FF0000]0.4%
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/LAD.png[/fimg] Los Angeles 68 55 .553 +0.5 +0.5 68 55 .557 0 =#FF0000]W2 =#FF0000]4-6 =#FF0000]6 60 46 .566 =#FF0000]24.6%
1 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/SF.png[/fimg] San Francisco 68 56 .548 +1.5 +1.5 68 56 .546 0 =#FF0000]L2 =#FF0000]3-7 =#FF0000]1 60 44 .577 =#FF0000]44.9%
2 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/STL.png[/fimg] St. Louis 66 57 .537 — — 70 53 .570 -4 =#FF0000]W1 =#FF0000]7-3 =#FF0000]8 59 47 .557 =#FF0000]72.9%
3 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIA.png[/fimg] Miami 65 59 .524 1.5 1.5 64 60 .513 +1 =#FF0000]W2 =#FF0000]5-5 =#FF0000]7 60 50 .545 =#FF0000]30.7%
4 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PIT.png[/fimg] Pittsburgh 62 59 .512 3.0 4.5 61 60 .502 +1 =#FF0000]L2 =#FF0000]6-4 =#FF0000]4 54 50 .519 =#FF0000]11.6%
5 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/NYM.png[/fimg] New York 62 62 .500 4.5 9.0 65 59 .527 -3 =#FF0000]W2 =#FF0000]5-5 =#FF0000]7 53 54 .495 =#FF0000]13.2%
6 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/COL.png[/fimg] Colorado 60 64 .484 6.5 17.0 64 60 .514 -4 =#FF0000]W1 =#FF0000]5-5 =#FF0000]6 51 53 .490 =#FF0000]1.6%
7 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PHI.png[/fimg] Philadelphia 58 67 .464 9.0 29.5 49 76 .389 +9 =#FF0000]L1 =#FF0000]6-4 =#FF0000]5 50 59 .459 =#FF0000]0.0%
8 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/CIN.png[/fimg] Cincinnati 53 70 .431 13.0 53.5 51 72 .412 +2 =#FF0000]L1 =#FF0000]7-3 =#FF0000]6 49 59 .454 =#FF0000]0.0%
9 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIL.png[/fimg] Milwaukee 53 70 .431 13.0 53.5 52 71 .422 +1 =#FF0000]W1 =#FF0000]2-8 =#FF0000]3 43 63 .406 =#FF0000]0.0%
10 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/SD.png[/fimg] San Diego 53 71 .427 13.5 57.5 56 68 .450 -3 =#FF0000]W1 =#FF0000]4-6 =#FF0000]5 48 59 .449 =#FF0000]0.0%
11 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ARI.png[/fimg] Arizona 51 73 .411 15.5 75.5 49 75 .398 +2 =#FF0000]L1 =#FF0000]3-7 =#FF0000]2 46 61 .430 =#FF0000]0.0%
12 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ATL.png[/fimg] Atlanta 45 79 .363 21.5 135.5 44 80 .358 +1 =#FF0000]W5 =#FF0000]2-8 =#FF0000]7 39 68 .364 =#FF0000]0.0%

Edgy MD
Aug 28 2016 01:47 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Standings update after only two days? Sounds like a lot of work, but the key number below is that the Mets their Wild Card likelihood by 7.8 points over that period, seemingly all of which has been taken off of Pittsburgh's plate. That's worth reporting.

In addition to the change in BaseballProspectus likelihoods, also included now are the postseason likelhoods as they are calculated at MLB.COM.

Place
Team
W
L
PCT
GB
NGB Pyth
W Pyth
L Pyth
PCT
Diff. =#FF0000]
STRK =#FF0000]Last
10 =#FF0000]
HEAT Div
W Div
L DIV
PCT LG
W LG
L LG
PCT =#FF0000]BP
DIV % =#FF0000]BP DIV
Delta MLB
DIV %
1 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/WAS.png[/fimg] Washington 75 54 .581 — — 80 49 .621 -5 =#FF0000]L1 =#FF0000]5-5 =#FF0000]4 35 16 .686 63 46 .578 =#FF0000]99.0% =#FF0000]0.2% 99.5%
2 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIA.png[/fimg] Miami 67 62 .519 8.0 8.0 66 63 .512 +1 =#FF0000]L1 =#FF0000]5-5 =#FF0000]4 22 28 .440 61 51 .545 =#FF0000]0.4% =#FF0000]-0.2% 0.2%
3 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/NYM.png[/fimg] New York 66 63 .512 9.0 10.0 65 64 .506 +1 =#FF0000]W3 =#FF0000]6-4 =#FF0000]9 25 24 .510 57 55 .509 =#FF0000]0.6% =#FF0000]0.0% 0.3%
4 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PHI.png[/fimg] Philadephia 59 70 .457 16.0 31.0 48 81 .374 +11 =#FF0000]L2 =#FF0000]3-7 =#FF0000]1 22 27 .449 50 61 .450 =#FF0000]0.0% =#FF0000]0.0% 0.0%
5 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ATL.png[/fimg] Atlanta 48 82 .369 27.5 77.0 47 83 .364 +1 =#FF0000]W1 =#FF0000]4-6 =#FF0000]5 21 30 .412 42 71 .372 =#FF0000]0.0% =#FF0000]0.0% 0.0%

Place
Team
W
L
PCT
GB
NGB Pyth
W Pyth
L Pyth
PCT
Diff. =#FF0000]
STRK =#FF0000]Last
10 =#FF0000]
HEAT LG
W LG
L LG
PCT =#FF0000]BP
WC % =#FF0000]BP WC
Delta MLB
WC %
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/CHC.png[/fimg] Chicago 82 46 .641 +14.0 +14.0 89 39 .692 -7 =#FF0000]L1 =#FF0000]7-3 =#FF0000]6 69 42 .622 =#FF0000]0.0% =#FF0000]0.0% 0.0%
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/WAS.png[/fimg] Washington 75 54 .581 +8.0 +8.0 80 49 .621 -5 =#FF0000]L1 =#FF0000]5-5 =#FF0000]4 63 46 .578 =#FF0000]0.9% =#FF0000]-0.1% 0.7%
DIV [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/LAD.png[/fimg] Los Angeles 72 57 .558 +2.0 +2.0 72 57 .562 +0 =#FF0000]W1 =#FF0000]5-5 =#FF0000]6 64 48 .571 =#FF0000]17.3% =#FF0000]-2.4% 19.7%
1 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/SF.png[/fimg] San Francisco 70 59 .543 +1.5 +1.5 71 58 .548 -+1 =#FF0000]L1 =#FF0000]4-6 =#FF0000]3 62 47 .569 =#FF0000]51.6% =#FF0000]-1.3% 52.7%
2 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/STL.png[/fimg] St. Louis 68 60 .531 — — 73 55 .568 -5 =#FF0000]L1 =#FF0000]6-4 =#FF0000]5 60 50 .545 =#FF0000]63.6% =#FF0000]-6.8% 63.1%
T3 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PIT.png[/fimg] Pittsburgh 66 61 .520 1.5 1.5 70 57 .553 -+4 =#FF0000]W3 =#FF0000]5-5 =#FF0000]8 57 50 .533 =#FF0000]18.0% =#FF0000]-7.8% 25.4%
T3 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIA.png[/fimg] Miami 67 62 .519 1.5 1.5 66 63 .512 +1 =#FF0000]L1 =#FF0000]5-5 =#FF0000]4 61 51 .545 =#FF0000]22.2% =#FF0000]10.7% 14.8%
5 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/NYM.png[/fimg] New York 66 63 .512 2.5 4.5 65 64 .506 1 =#FF0000]W3 =#FF0000]6-4 =#FF0000]9 57 55 .509 =#FF0000]25.9% =#FF0000]7.8% 23.4%
6 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/COL.png[/fimg] Colorado 61 68 .473 7.5 24.5 65 64 .507 -4 =#FF0000]W1 =#FF0000]5-5 =#FF0000]6 52 57 .477 =#FF0000]0.4% =#FF0000]-0.1% 0.2%
7 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/PHI.png[/fimg] Philadelphia 59 70 .457 9.5 34.5 48 81 .374 +11 =#FF0000]L2 =#FF0000]3-7 =#FF0000]1 50 61 .450 =#FF0000]0.0% =#FF0000]0.0% 0.0%
8 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/MIL.png[/fimg] Milwaukee 56 73 .434 12.5 52.5 55 74 .429 +1 =#FF0000]L3 =#FF0000]4-6 =#FF0000]1 46 66 .411 =#FF0000]0.0% =#FF0000]0.0% 0.0%
9 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/CIN.png[/fimg] Cincinnati 55 73 .430 13.0 56.0 54 74 .420 +1 =#FF0000]W1 =#FF0000]6-4 =#FF0000]7 50 61 .450 =#FF0000]0.0% =#FF0000]0.0% 0.0%
10 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/SD.png[/fimg] San Diego 54 75 .419 14.5 68.0 57 72 .444 -3 =#FF0000]W1 =#FF0000]4-6 =#FF0000]5 49 63 .438 =#FF0000]0.0% =#FF0000]0.0% 0.0%
11 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ARI.png[/fimg] Arizona 54 76 .415 15.0 72.5 51 79 .392 +3 =#FF0000]L1 =#FF0000]4-6 =#FF0000]3 49 64 .434 =#FF0000]0.0% =#FF0000]0.0% 0.0%
12 [fimg=25]http://www.kcmets.com/CPF/ATL.png[/fimg] Atlanta 48 82 .369 21.0 132.5 47 83 .364 +1 =#FF0000]W1 =#FF0000]4-6 =#FF0000]5 42 71 .372 =#FF0000]0.0% =#FF0000]0.0% 0.0%

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr
Aug 28 2016 02:50 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

The problem is, there's the teams that are division leaders, the teams we have to pass... and then, a whole lot of terrible teams. And weirdo Colorado.

There aren't a lot of mediocre, more-than-a-puncher's-chance-to-win squads to help us with the dirty work, here. Basically, we root for the division leaders and Rockies (and AL teams) to kick wild-card-contender patoot, and hope for the occasional manna shower from the Pod or Bravo contingent.

John Cougar Lunchbucket
Aug 28 2016 03:09 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Those W-L figures in your standings ain't accurate today, are they?

Goes without saying, one game at a time, never rely on schedule strength, etc etc, but this upcoming 4-gamer with Miami is pretty huge.

33 left beginning today:
1 with Philly at home
4 with Miami at home
3 w/ Washington at home
3 at Cincy
--offday--
3 at ATL
3 at WSH
--offday--
3 with MIN at home
3 w/ ATL at home
4 with PHL at home
3 at MIA
--offday--
3 at PHL

Can we pull a Rush and go 21-12?

Edgy MD
Aug 28 2016 04:55 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote:
Those W-L figures in your standings ain't accurate today, are they?

Well, if they aren't, then I'm wasting a lot of time.

Somebody buy LWFS some ice cream.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr
Aug 29 2016 06:47 AM
Re: Standings in 2016

[Screams into pillow, as per nightly ritual]

John Cougar Lunchbucket
Aug 29 2016 11:21 AM
Re: Standings in 2016

Edgy MD wrote:
John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote:
Those W-L figures in your standings ain't accurate today, are they?

Well, if they aren't, then I'm wasting a lot of time.

nm, was looking at pyth

Edgy MD
Aug 30 2016 01:59 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Crane Pool Standings, Updated More Clearly
(because our table-making tools at this place are for shit)

NL EAST

NL WILD CARD

Those changes in playoff odds represent a two-day swing, rather than merely last night, so it isn't particularly indicative, but it will be moreso going forward as I get the hang of this. You wanted the Mets to be the hottest team in the league? Well, they are, if only barely.

Note that I rank the Mets nominally ahead in the division, based on their superior division record, but the Marlins get the razor thin edge in the Wild Card race, based on their stronger league record. You've got to mentally break those ties somehow.

Centerfield
Aug 30 2016 02:16 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

That Pittsburgh loss last night was soul-crushing.

Edgy MD
Aug 31 2016 01:37 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

All you've got to do is look at the change in playoff odds in the Wild Card standings to glean what a reversal of fortune last night's win represented.

CRANE POOL STANDINGS

NATIONAL LEAGUE EAST

WILD CARD

Just an absolute theft of Miami's lunch. Now to get out the door with it.

TransMonk
Aug 31 2016 02:39 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

[youtube:1l3iqozj]EhZba-P7R18[/youtube:1l3iqozj]

Edgy MD
Aug 31 2016 02:57 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Yeah, who knew it would be such a hopeful life to go into September seventh among 15 teams in the league? #betterthanthemean

d'Kong76
Aug 31 2016 04:07 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

What is Heat in the Momentum section?

d'Kong76
Aug 31 2016 06:39 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

TransMonk
Aug 31 2016 07:09 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

From page one of this thread:

[fimg=1500:1y9uxo7y]http://i.imgur.com/zcKcrSD.png[/fimg:1y9uxo7y]

d'Kong76
Aug 31 2016 07:22 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Thanks! For some reason I didn't notice HEAT in the brown tables.

Edgy MD
Aug 31 2016 07:25 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Brown tables suck.

d'Kong76
Aug 31 2016 07:27 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Search sucks worse!

Benjamin Grimm
Aug 31 2016 08:13 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

I think you've both caught whatever batmagadanleadoff has. Did he sneeze on you or something?

d'Kong76
Aug 31 2016 08:37 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Ewww haha... the tables aren't really brown but more a dried out
Gulden's mustard color.

Benjamin Grimm
Aug 31 2016 08:53 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

We can change the brown. Maybe we can have a poll to pick the new table background colors.

Edgy MD
Aug 31 2016 09:00 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

It's more than the brown, though. I've been trying to figure out how we can allow the user to put some customizing code in there. Padding ... centering ... merging. I can't program any of that in there.

d'Kong76
Aug 31 2016 09:29 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

I'm not complaining. I don't really use the table feature, I think the only time I've
posted something detailed I did it in Excel and then made a .gif file.

I love the roster table, it's CPF!!

Edgy MD
Sep 01 2016 01:20 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

I don't know what's going on, but Baseball Prosectus, who usually update their odds during the 4:00 AM hour, haven't done it yet for this morning. So ignore the odds columns for the time being. Suffice it to know that the Mets have done what only the bold and the crazy dare to attempt. They have stolen from Pirates.

[fimg=1000:3s21a41t]https://metsinpeace.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/screen-shot-2016-09-01-at-9-26-13-am.png[/fimg:3s21a41t]

[fimg=1000:3s21a41t]https://metsinpeace.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/screen-shot-2016-09-01-at-9-26-39-am.png[/fimg:3s21a41t]
[fimg=1000:3s21a41t]https://metsinpeace.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/screen-shot-2016-09-01-at-9-27-04-am.png[/fimg:3s21a41t]

If they finish the job tonight, they can take aim at St. Louis.

Edgy MD
Sep 02 2016 12:03 AM
Re: Standings in 2016

Coming in late with this morning's standings, but I think I finally got the playoff percentages right.

[fimg=1000:4wcw2h9s]https://metsinpeace.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/screen-shot-2016-09-01-at-7-58-01-pm.png[/fimg:4wcw2h9s]

[fimg=1000:4wcw2h9s]https://metsinpeace.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/screen-shot-2016-09-01-at-7-58-42-pm.png[/fimg:4wcw2h9s]
[fimg=1000:4wcw2h9s]https://metsinpeace.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/screen-shot-2016-09-01-at-7-59-15-pm.png[/fimg:4wcw2h9s]

d'Kong76
Sep 02 2016 02:38 AM
Re: Standings in 2016

So in four days it went from 3½ to 2... guess we have to be happy with
a whole month to play?

Edgy MD
Sep 04 2016 02:54 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

If you can't be the hottest team in the league, it's nice to be the next-hottest, with the heat crown instead going to the team at the bottom of the standings. Bless you, Braves. And an extra helping of oatmeal for the Reds, too.

I don't really have the MLB percentage right in the last column. I think the WC change is a two-day delta, instead of a one-day. And I bagged it on the division one-day delta, but it's likely about zero, or perhaps a tenth of a percentage one way or another.

[fimg=1000:3fgeuvts]https://metsinpeace.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/screen-shot-2016-09-04-at-1-03-51-pm.png[/fimg:3fgeuvts]

[fimg=1000:3fgeuvts]https://metsinpeace.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/screen-shot-2016-09-04-at-1-04-11-pm.png[/fimg:3fgeuvts]
[fimg=1000:3fgeuvts]https://metsinpeace.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/screen-shot-2016-09-04-at-1-04-29-pm.png[/fimg:3fgeuvts]

Frayed Knot
Sep 04 2016 03:05 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

They put up a graphic in the middle of sat night's game showing how all the NL WC contestants have below .500 records since some date in early/mid August - about 20 or so games.
Last night's win moved the Mets up TO .500 during that stretch while most of the others moved an extra notch lower so we've actually been gaining even going back to the beginning of that bad ARZ/SF road trip although most of that during this recent 9-4 run.

Nymr83
Sep 05 2016 02:45 AM
Re: Standings in 2016

Frayed Knot wrote:
They put up a graphic in the middle of sat night's game showing how all the NL WC contestants have below .500 records since some date in early/mid August - about 20 or so games.
Last night's win moved the Mets up TO .500 during that stretch while most of the others moved an extra notch lower so we've actually been gaining even going back to the beginning of that bad ARZ/SF road trip although most of that during this recent 9-4 run.

that explains how a team that felt dead and still feels like it is treading water has actually closed the gap, nobody wants to make the playoffs!

Frayed Knot
Sep 05 2016 02:49 AM
Re: Standings in 2016

Today's loss for the Pirates, for instance, was their [u:28pqpbqg]sixth straight[/u:28pqpbqg]!!, including three to the lowly Brew Crew.
They win just two of those six and we're one spot lower in the packing order right now.

Edgy MD
Sep 05 2016 12:14 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

My computer is in the shop (meaning, in the care of a friend of a friend who clearly smokes a LOT of weed), so there'll be no new standings posted today. Suffice to know that he Mets' likelihood of winning the division increased yesterday and last night from 0.2% to 0.3% according to Baseball Prospectus, and their likelihood of winning a wild card increased yesterday and last night from 42.9% to 49.9%, according to the same source.

That's most of what you need to know right there.

Edgy MD
Sep 06 2016 12:32 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

The Mets are now a better-than-even-money bet to see the post-season.

[fimg=900:1z6gr6ub]https://metsinpeace.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/screen-shot-2016-09-06-at-8-21-14-am1.png[/fimg:1z6gr6ub]

[fimg=900:1z6gr6ub]https://metsinpeace.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/screen-shot-2016-09-06-at-8-21-39-am1.png[/fimg:1z6gr6ub]
[fimg=900:1z6gr6ub]https://metsinpeace.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/screen-shot-2016-09-06-at-8-21-58-am1.png[/fimg:1z6gr6ub]

Benjamin Grimm
Sep 09 2016 12:41 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

The Mets have a magic number! And it's... 23!

Edgy MD
Sep 09 2016 05:18 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Sorry. I'm on vacation without my laptop.

Just when I come up with a coherent way to present standings, and the standings are getting awesome.

Benjamin Grimm
Sep 10 2016 12:18 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

The Mets are 4-3 against the Giants this year, so I assume that if they finished in a tie for the first Wild Card spot, the do-or-die game would be played at Citi Field.

The Mets are 3-3 against the Cardinals, so I'm not sure who would get home field if those two teams tied for the first spot.

I assume that a tie for the second Wild Card would result in a one-game playoff to determine who would get to play the first Wild Card team. In that case, home field might be determined by a coin toss?

And given how close the race currently is, there's always the possibility that the Mets, Cardinals, and Giants end in a three-way tie. Unless some space opens between the three teams in the next couple of weeks, I imagine that we'll be seeing an announcement from MLB about how that would be handled.

Edgy MD
Sep 10 2016 12:39 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

The morning odds report at Baseball Prospectus give the Mets &3.3% chance at post-season money., including a 73% shot a wild card, and a 0.3% chance at NL East title.

The World Series championship likelihood is 1.7%.

Frayed Knot
Sep 10 2016 12:58 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

One thing that's helping the Mets WC odds -- aside from things like 5 more vs ATL, Minn x 3, Phil x 7, etc -- is that, starting this coming Thursday, the Cards go to SF for a four-game series (Sept 15-18)

Cards also have six left against the Cubs (including a series leading into the SF trip) and the Giants have six more vs LAD

Benjamin Grimm
Sep 10 2016 01:37 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Frayed Knot wrote:
...starting this coming Thursday, the Cards go to SF for a four-game series (Sept 15-18)

Well, that's interesting! My first instinct was that we should root for a spit of that series, but perhaps a four-game sweep by one team or the other would be better. It benefits the Mets more if one of those two teams is dealt a fatal blow.

Chad Ochoseis
Sep 10 2016 01:44 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Frayed Knot wrote:
One thing that's helping the Mets WC odds -- aside from things like 5 more vs ATL, Minn x 3, Phil x 7, etc -- is that, starting this coming Thursday, the Cards go to SF for a four-game series (Sept 15-18)

This also implies that the Braves were mathematically eliminated last night, even though the standings still have their elimination number as 1. Either the Cardinals or the Giants are guaranteed to win at least two more games.

OE: WRONG! It's still mathematically possible for 75 wins to get a wild card. So, Braves fans - all six of you - don't lose hope yet!

Benjamin Grimm
Sep 10 2016 02:30 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Another late-season spike by the Mets. However this season turns out, I hope that the 2017 Mets don't wait until August to start scoring runs.

Ashie62
Sep 11 2016 09:29 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Bobbing like a great horse race.

Centerfield
Sep 13 2016 01:23 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Status quo never felt so good.

Let's start winning and not have to rely on the kindness of strangers tonight.

Benjamin Grimm
Sep 13 2016 01:32 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

The team that had the worst day yesterday was the Giants. The Mets and Cardinals, at least, crossed one game against a first-place team off their schedule without losing any ground. The Giants lost one of the "soft" games that they should have won.

John Cougar Lunchbucket
Sep 14 2016 11:43 AM
Re: Standings in 2016

Geez went to bed figuring we'd just hold serve but good morning: San Diego scored 5 times in the 9th to beat the Giants last night.

Frayed Knot
Sep 14 2016 12:26 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Unbelievable how many 9th inning leads the Giants have blown this year, and particularly lately.
Santiago Casilla was the latest to get demoted from the closer role so they trusted last night's four-run lead to Hunter Strickland. It looks by the game descriptions like he was getting mostly dinked to death but when he walked in one run and allowed another on a ground-out Bochy went to rookie lefty Steve Okert for the final out ... and that's when SD rookie lefty Ryan Schimpf hit a 1-2 pitch for a 3R HR.
Posey, Hunter, and Crawford then went down in order in the bottom 9th without getting the ball out of the infield.

We saw this Schimpf guy during our recent series with the Padres and Gary kept remarking about his power for such a small-ish guy (5' 8" / 180). Well that was his 19th HR in less than 1/2 season (236 ABs) and of his 54 hits this season (and therefore in his ML career) [u:mz6kubj7]39 of them[/u:mz6kubj7] are for extra bases!! [15 doubles, 5 triples, 19 HRs]
I mean sure the guy's not your classic rookie phenom seeing as how he's already 28 y/o, is hitting .229, and strikes out a ton (84) but he has as many doubles as he does singles and more HRs than either and that's some pretty freaky stuff right there.

Edgy MD
Sep 14 2016 12:28 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Frayed Knot wrote:
Unbelievable how many 9th inning leads the Giants have blown this year, and particularly lately.

Just giving up on the idea that a team needs a closer can really get a manager a whole lot of freedom.

Frayed Knot
Sep 14 2016 12:46 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Edgy MD wrote:
Frayed Knot wrote:
Unbelievable how many 9th inning leads the Giants have blown this year, and particularly lately.

Just giving up on the idea that a team needs a closer can really get a manager a whole lot of freedom.

Yeah, but it hasn't helped Bochy lately.
In September alone they're 5-7 and lost 4 of those games on account of giving up late runs (including 3 in the 9th to lose by 1, and now 5 in the 9th to lose by 2). They even pulled out a couple of wins despite giving up late runs. In all it's pretty much been an across the board disaster for their pen even after Castilla had his closer's card taken away from him.

Team is now 20-34 since the All-Star Break. Put another way, pre-ASB they were 57-33 and on pace for 103 wins. Since then they've been playing at the rate of a team destined for 102 losses over a full season.
That's just a stunning reversal.

Centerfield
Sep 14 2016 02:35 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Benjamin Grimm wrote:
The team that had the worst day yesterday was the Giants. The Mets and Cardinals, at least, crossed one game against a first-place team off their schedule without losing any ground. The Giants lost one of the "soft" games that they should have won.

I'm going to put out there that the team with the worst day was, again, the Giants. I would love for the Giants to go away and to take Madison Bumgarner with them. For our lefty-laden lineup, he might be the toughest matchup not named "Kershaw".

Edgy MD
Sep 14 2016 02:45 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Kershaw in New York today, by the way, making his first ever start at the Mausoleum. It's only his second start since going on the DL in late July (the other being three innings against Miami on Friday night), so big playoff implications beyond just the two teams and their places in the standings.

Benjamin Grimm
Sep 15 2016 12:49 AM
Re: Standings in 2016

If the Cardinals beat the Giants tomorrow both teams and the Mets will be in a three-way tie.

Centerfield
Sep 15 2016 03:56 AM
Re: Standings in 2016

It occurs to me that I have no idea who to root for in that game. Or for the whole series for that matter. I guess at the end of it all, the Mets just have to beat the Twins.

Oh and trading water to get through this series, mission accomplished I guess.

Benjamin Grimm
Sep 15 2016 10:11 AM
Re: Standings in 2016

I don't know who to root for today either, but I hope today's winner goes on to sweep the series.

themetfairy
Sep 15 2016 11:42 AM
Re: Standings in 2016

I'm rooting for all of the Cardinals/Giants games to go 15 innings, minimum!

Lefty Specialist
Sep 15 2016 11:53 AM
Re: Standings in 2016

Benjamin Grimm wrote:
I don't know who to root for today either, but I hope today's winner goes on to sweep the series.

Good point, as it would probably doom the loser (provided the Mets take care of their business).

Frayed Knot
Sep 15 2016 12:47 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Gary put it well yesterday.
- if you're rooting for the best chance of the Mets making A WC spot then you root for a sweep so as to bury the losing team and keep the blue and orange afloat no matter how they do in the near future
- if you're rooting for the Mets' best chance to win the #1 WC slot then you root for a split while hoping the Mets take care of their own business

As for which team is the sweeper and which the sweepee, that's pretty much irrelevant unless you have a particular like/hate going on with one of them. The Giants are clearly the team headed in the wrong direction right now so the temptation is to root for them, but of course if they were to trash the Cards and use that to suddenly go on a roll like their 100+ win first half pace then they would no longer suck and everyone would go back to worrying about them and their even-numbered year post-season mojo again.

The other thing is that I still haven't given up on dragging the Dodgers back into this thing. Yeah they're now 5 up on the SFGs but those two play each other six more times, including the final three, and it never hurts to have one more team in the mix and have it so we just have to catch either/or of the West teams. So if the Giants are going to get hot somehow, it would help if they did it at the Dodgers expense and for whoever else the Dodgers are playing (now that the Yanx are out of the way) to bop them over the head now and then also ... although the Dadgers head to Arizona this weekend so maybe that's mostly wishful thinking. Even the Giants recently beat up on the Snakes.

TransMonk
Sep 15 2016 03:25 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

538.com is now giving the Mets an 85% chance of making the playoffs. San Fran is at 64%, St. Louis at 48% and the Marlins hanging around at 3%.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/201 ... edictions/

Benjamin Grimm
Sep 15 2016 03:37 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

By "making the playoffs" do they mean getting to that one-game Wild Card playoff, or do they mean advancing to the NLDS? (I'm assuming it's the former.)

Playing that Wild Card game and losing it would not be at all satisfying. It would technically make 2016 the Mets ninth postseason, but in such a minimal way that it would feel worthy of an asterisk.

I was much more excited about last year's race to the division title than I am this year. I haven't bothered figuring out the Mets' NHOP even once!

TransMonk
Sep 15 2016 03:42 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

It means making it to the Wild Card play-in game.

The Mets making it to that game and losing would be below my pre-season expectations for the 2016 club. But, I was literally a couple losses from completely writing them off due to injuries back in mid-August. Win or lose, I would consider simply making it to that play-in game a success given the obstacles this team has had to overcome.

Obviously, I still prefer they win the World Series.

Centerfield
Sep 15 2016 04:49 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

For me, if the Mets are pouring champagne on each other even once in a season, it's a pretty good season.

I know expectations were high coming in, but the injuries just killed them. If their post-season is only 1 game, so be it.

Besides, the Mets tend to do well once they get in. By my count, only once have they lost to their first opponent (88 Dodgers). And even that went 7 games.

1969: WS Champions
1973: NL Champs
1986: WS Champions
1988: Lost NLCS
1999: Won WC tiebreaker, beat Arizona in NLDS
2000: NL Champs
2006: Won NLDS vs. LA
2015: NL Champs

Benjamin Grimm
Sep 15 2016 04:52 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

That's right, 1988 was the Mets shortest postseason, with seven games. (The second-shortest was 1969, eight games, but I'd categorize that one as pretty successful.)

Centerfield
Sep 15 2016 05:14 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Also, I was thinking, how sweet would it be to beat Washington this year. You have to be at least a little nervous if you're a Washington fan right?

deGrom and Matz are hurt, but if they come back, along with Duda, suddenly this is a pretty good team. Noah, Jake, Matz and Colon. Lugo and Gsellman go to the pen. Lineup has speed at the top, a good tablesetter in Asdrubal, then followed by Cespedes, Duda, Bruce and Granderson. (Assuming Bruce ever arrives)

Benjamin Grimm
Sep 15 2016 05:15 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Duda is especially interesting. If in fact he does come back, will he have enough time to show that he merits a spot on a postseason roster?

Centerfield
Sep 16 2016 01:17 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

As of today, our lead for the second wild card is no longer a fraction.

Let the celebration begin!

(No really, I find I am actually pretty happy about this.)

TransMonk
Sep 16 2016 01:18 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Now that the Giants took the first game, I'm rooting for them for the rest of the weekend against the Cards (with the Mets taking care of business against the Twinkies being the primary objective, of course).

The Giants still have 6 with LA (and they are within striking distance in the NL West) which makes their remaining schedule tougher than the Cards'. St. Louis will still have three more with the Cubs, but with the Chicago having clinched, I'm not relying on them being at full force the remainder of the way as they rest and set up their team for October.

As of now, I kind of want to the Cards as many games back as possible going into next week.

Centerfield
Sep 16 2016 01:22 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

TransMonk wrote:
Now that the Giants took the first game, I'm rooting for them for the rest of the weekend against the Cards (with the Mets taking care of business against the Twinkies being the primary objective, of course).

The Giants still have 6 with LA (and they are within striking distance in the NL West) which makes their remaining schedule tougher than the Cards'. St. Louis will still have three more with the Cubs, but with the Chicago having clinched, I'm not relying on them being at full force the remainder of the way as they rest and set up their team for October.

As of now, I kind of want to the Cards as many games back as possible going into next week.

Yup. This is exactly how we should be thinking.

Still, there is not one bone in my body that feels right rooting for the Giants.

Benjamin Grimm
Sep 16 2016 01:36 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Half of my bones want to root for the Cardinals and half want to root for the Giants. (All in the interests of the Mets, of course.) I'm hoping that my skeleton gets fully synchronized within the next couple of days.

And I too am glad that we no longer have to worry about those pesky half games in the standings. In some strange way that I can't really define, they can be hard to relate to.

TransMonk
Sep 16 2016 01:41 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Some of the half games will return next week with the Cards playing next Thursday while the Mets are off and the Mets playing on Monday the 26th while the Giants are off.

Everything won't fully synchronize without half games until after the games of Thursday the 29th are played (barring rainouts).

Frayed Knot
Sep 16 2016 02:43 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Also not insignificant is that the Dodgers lost last night to Arizona.
So not only are they just 4 games up on the Giants but those two teams have Six head-to-head games remaining [Mon thru Wed, and again the final series of the season] which could put us in a situation similar to the current one where we automatically gain on one team or the other with each game we win.

We'll still need a couple more stumbles from the ex-Brooklynites, but they're not out of reach for either us or the Giants.

Centerfield
Sep 16 2016 02:53 PM
Re: Standings in 2016

Frayed Knot wrote:
Also not insignificant is that the Dodgers lost last night to Arizona.
So not only are they just 4 games up on the Giants but those two teams have Six head-to-head games remaining [Mon thru Wed, and again the final series of the season] which could put us in a situation similar to the current one where we automatically gain on one team or the other with each game we win.

We'll still need a couple more stumbles from the ex-Brooklynites, but they're not out of reach for either us or the Giants.

At the very least, it makes them motivated to go all out for the 6 games remaining with the Giants.

Kershaw in a 1 game playoff scares the hell out of me. I guess Bumgarner is not much better.