Master Index of Archived Threads


The 2020 Mets: Born Under a Bad Sign?

batmagadanleadoff Mar 25 2022 03:43 PM

[YOUTUBE]s_3-nAoa1QE[/YOUTUBE]

Edgy MD Mar 25 2022 05:35 PM Re: The 2020 Mets: Born Under a Bad Sign?

It's an argument that WRC+ is kind of not as representative as all that. Something of a Frankenstat. Obviously it was representative for most of those teams, but 2020 was a small sample size (the shortest season since 1873), and the Mets were first in GiDP, among other things. You can argue that it's bad luck or bad execution, but man, what a waste. But man, I know it makes me an old man, but that guy's tone made me want to break stuff.

Johnny Lunchbucket Mar 26 2022 07:21 AM Re: The 2020 Mets: Born Under a Bad Sign?

Bad execution is how I remember it playing out. The pitching wasn't any good for the club so it may have gone naught anyway but over a longer, normal season, amd with butts in the seats, I think it would have been a very different season.

Edgy MD Mar 26 2022 08:11 AM Re: The 2020 Mets: Born Under a Bad Sign?

Bad execution indeed. I would agree. There's seemingly this notion that if the percentages are there, the appropriate amount of runs will come out in the end, and presumably the appropriate amount of wins. I find that frustrating as hell. Plate that runner.

smg58 Mar 26 2022 09:31 AM Re: The 2020 Mets: Born Under a Bad Sign?

I guess the first question to ask is did the approach change with runners on base? If no, then they were horrifically unlucky. If yes, then why did the approach go so wrong, and why didn't they just stick to one approach since their basic one was working? It's also worth mentioning that OPS+ and wRC+ factor in the ballpark, so you would expect fewer runs with a given wRC+ from a team that plays its home games in Citi. So you have to be more scrutinizing of your pitching staff too.