Here We Go Again – Phillies & Mets
Since 2006, the Philadelphia Phillies and New York Mets have held fort atop the NL East. The Mets ended the Braves streak of 138 consecutive division titles three seasons ago, coming within one game of reaching the World Series. The following season, both the Mets and Phillies battled down to the wire, with the Phils winning the division on the final day of the season. Last season, both teams again battled into September, with the Phillies clinching the division right before the season ended. This time, they went on and actually won the World Series.
The offseason has proved to be very active for both Omar Minaya and Ruben Amaro, Jr, even though Minaya’s transactions have meant more to his team.
With the vast majority of last season’s squad returning, Amaro’s moves have primarily come in the form of little pieces here and there. He brought in Ronnie Paulino from the Pirates to challenge Chris Coste for the backup catcher spot. Scott Eyre and Jamie Moyer both re-signed. Chan Ho Park joined the team to either take on a similar role to that of Chad Durbin last season and/or battle for the fifth rotation spot. And Raul Ibanez, in a much-maligned deal by many, replaced Pat Burrell in left-field.
Minaya acquired Francisco Rodriguez, J.J. Putz, and Sean Green to sure up a bullpen that ultimately cost the Mets the division last season. The lineup will return, in tact, and Derek Lowe may even be added to the rotation. Minaya has made a 3-yr/$36 mil offer to Lowe, though I would bet my bottom dollar that Lowe eventually signs for closer to 3-yr/$45 mil.
How do these teams stack up in 2009? Even though the Marlins are young and offensively talented, and the Braves acquired a solid pitcher in Javier Vazquez, the Phillies and Mets are still the top two teams in the division. Does one have a projected advantage over the other? Let’s break the analysis down into different facets of each team. And, for the record, the projections I arrived at were derived from the results of several different systems, weighted and merged, not just one system.
LINEUP
Both the Phillies and Mets have very potent offensive lineups. Both are also quite solid defensively. Chase Utley, the best player on the Phillies, had surgery following the World Series and may or may not be available for opening day. In calculating these projections, I placed Utley at around 130 games and 520 PA. His offensive and defensive contributions are also lessened due to the likelihood that he will miss some time.
The Phillies starting lineup, not in Charlie Manuel‘s exact order, will feature the following players: Ryan Howard, Chase Utley, Jimmy Rollins, Pedro Feliz, Raul Ibanez, Shane Victorino, Jayson Werth, and Carlos Ruiz. As poor as Howard looks with the glove sometimes, he has actually been eerily close to average over the last few seasons, and projects to just barely below average next season. If he is considered to be a league average first baseman with the glove, then only Raul Ibanez projects negatively on defense for the defending champions.
Likewise, the Mets only project to feature one negative defender: Carlos Delgado. Luis Castillo could prove to be a poor defender with his injury history, but I currently have both he and Daniel Murphy as league average defenders. The remaining starters—Jose Reyes, David Wright, Carlos Beltran, Ryan Church, and Brian Schneider—all project positively on the defensive front.
All told, the Phillies project to +80 runs offensively in their lineup and +40 runs defensively. After adjustments to value production above replacement level as well as for their positions, the lineup comes out at +26.0 WAR. The Mets offense projects to +93 runs while their defense clocks in at +19 runs. After the same adjustments are taken into account, their lineup proves to be worth +26.1 WAR. Eerily similar.
STARTING ROTATIONS
Yesterday we examined the Mets rotation under a few different scenarios regarding whether or not they sign Derek Lowe, Oliver Perez, Randy Wolf, or Tim Redding. With an actual contract being presented to Lowe, and the likelihood that he will eventually sign, the Mets rotation should feature Johan Santana, John Maine, Mike Pelfrey, Derek Lowe, and Jonathan Niese. Assuming roughly 150 innings from Niese at a 4.45 FIP, this rotation projects to +14.3 WAR.
The Phillies will bring back Cole Hamels, Brett Myers, Jamie Moyer, and Joe Blanton. The fifth spot is going to be up for grabs between J.A. Happ, Kyle Kendrick, Carlos Carrasco, Chan Ho Park, and (gasp) Adam Eaton. As I mentioned yesterday, Happ is my pick to win the spot, which would place the Phillies rotation at +11.8 WAR. The teams may be virtually even in the starting lineup department, but the Mets have a +2.5 win advantage in the rotation.
BULLPEN
The Phillies re-signed Scott Eyre and brought in Chan Ho Park, leaving the rest of the relief corps in tact. Players like Gary Majewski and Dave Borkowski were invited to Spring Training, but would only take the spot of Clay Condrey if either were to make the team. Brad Lidge returns as the closer, with Ryan Madson setting him up. After these two, the Phillies will rely on J.C. Romero, Chad Durbin, Eyre, Park, and Condrey. This bullpen projects to be worth +3.4 wins next season.
The Mets replaced Billy Wagner with Francisco Rodriguez; Aaron Heilman with J.J. Putz; and added a solid piece in Sean Green. These three will join the likes of Pedro Feliciano, Duaner Sanchez, Brian Stokes, and Bob Parnell to form a much more formidable bullpen. This relief corps looks like it could be worth +3.6 wins next season. Though this advantage over the Phillies is slight, the ‘pen was a major achilles heel for the Mets last season.
BENCH
Benches are tough to project, again given the small samples of playing time as well as the uncertainty surrounding who will fill certain spots. Assuming Paulino beats out Coste for the backup job, the Phillies will feature some combination of: Greg Dobbs, Matt Stairs, Geoff Jenkins, Eric Bruntlett, Ronnie Paulino, and Jason Donald. Donald may be the odd one out of this group. Dobbs is the best pinch-hitter in baseball but is still likely worth under one win next season. Without Donald, these five project to +1.5 WAR.
The Mets will have Fernando Tatis and Jeremy Reed on their bench, as well as Ramon Castro. After that, it does not seem that any backup infielders are on the roster, and the only other bench players that seem like viable candidates to make the team are Angel Pagan and Nicholas Evans. Their bench could range anywhere from +0.6 to +1.2 wins. We can call it +0.9 for now, though this will need to be updated before the season starts. The Phillies have over a half-win advantage here, but this is the only area where they come out on top.
TOTALS
For the Phillies, we are looking at +26 wins from the lineup, +11.8 from the rotation, +3.4 from the bullpen, and +1.5 from the bench. This adds up to +42.7 wins. Given that a team chock-full of replacement players would win 47-48 games, the Phillies are projected to win 89-90 games in 2009.
The Mets will get +26.1 wins from the lineup, +14.3 from the rotation featuring Lowe and the aforementioned Niese projection, +3.6 out of the ‘pen, and +0.9 from the bench. This adds up to +44.9 wins, which we will round up to +45 wins. Added to the replacement wins total, the Mets are projected to win 91-92 games next season.
Once again, the teams are extremely close, and 2009 should treat fans to another stellar battle between the Mets and Phillies.
17
Wow. With that kind of closeness, I think it’s fair to say the big factors are going to be the things you can’t really predict in the offseason: major injuries, unforseen skills implosions, or mid-season pickups.
Thanks for the analysis.
Or things you can predict but can’t quantify *CHOKE*
(Sad Mets Fan)
there is no way last year can be considered a choke. we all knew the bullpen was terrible. the previous year, however…
I’ve used a few different projection systems to approximate these things. Each system I’ve looked at has put the Mets about 4-5 games behind the Phillies except for CHONE seems to have the Mets about 8 games behind. That seems like an outlier. This is all before Lowe joins the Mets. Here are the numbers that I’m seeing. I didn’t include defense, because I assumed that the projections for pitcher ERAs and RAs were supposed to reflect the defense that was behind them last year. Regardless, with the Phillies better than the Mets at defense by your numbers, that should only help my argument that the Phillies project better than the Mets as currently formed. I’m not weighting the bullpen by leverage, so that could be another source of mistake.
I’m factoring in SB/CS but not other measures of baserunning. I’m not sure if baserunning is factored in your analysis or your dollar value of players, but it should be. There seems to be nearly as much variance among player contributions in baserunning as there is in defense if you believe Baseball Prospectus’ EqBRR.
When I plug in the marginal lineup value compared to a replacement level player at their respective positions (I reverse engineered replacement level their previous years’ VORP to do this), I get the following numbers for a few projection systems:
Phillies Hitters + Bench WAR (Marcel, Bill James, CHONE, Shandler)
Howard: (4.3, 5.7, 5.1, 5.1)
Utley: (5.3, 5.4, 5.5, 5.8)
Rollins: (4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 5.7)
Victorino (2.2, 2.7, 2.8, 2.8)
Werth (2.4, 3.4, 1.8, 3.5)
Ruiz (0.3, 0.8, 1.1, 0.2)
Feliz (-0.2, 0.2, 0.8, -0.2)
Ibanez (2.2, 2.8, 3.3, 2.9)
Coste (1.3, 0.5, 0.3, -0.1)
Bruntlett (-0.1, -0.2, 0.2, -0.2)
Dobbs (1.4, 1.0, 1.2, 0.9)
Jenkins (0.2, 0.6, 0.7, -0.1)
Stairs (1.0, 0.6, 0.9, 0.5)
PHILLIES TOTAL (23.6, 27.9, 28.2, 30.8)– average 27.6
Mets Hitters WAR (Marcel, CHONE, Bill James, Shandler)
Wright (5.9, 6.6, 7.1, 7.1)
Reyes (5.1, 5.4, 5.0, 6.1)
Beltran (4.6, 4.3, 5.1, 4.8)
Delgado (2.1, 2.2, 3.3, 3.3)
Church (1.2, 0.9, 1.6, 1.4)
Schneider (0.5, 0.7, 0.7, 0.9)
Castillo (0.8, 1.1, 1.0, 0.9)
Tatis (1.2, 0.8, 0.4, 0.8)
Murphy (1.4, 1.1, 3.1, 2.2)
Anderson (0.1, 0.0, 0.0, 1.4)
Castro ( 1.1, 1.0, 0.6, 0.7)
Evans (0.6, 0.0, 0.8, 0.9)
Pagan (0.4, 0.5, 0.0, 1.3)
METS TOTAL (25.0, 24.6, 28.7, 31.8)– average 27.5
The lineups/benches do seem very comparable like you said. Where we really differ is the projections of the pitching staffs.
Phillies pitchers WAR w/ 6.00 RA as replacement level (Marcel, CHONE, Bill James, Shandler)
Hamels (4.9, 4.8, 6.2, 5.4)
Myers (2.3, 2.9, 3.3, 4.0)
Blanton (2.8, 3.9, 3.7, 2.7)
Moyer (2.6, 1.2, 3.1, 2.3)
Happ (1.0, 1.6, 0.0, 2.3)
Lidge (1.5, 2.0, 1.9, 2.2)
Madson (1.5, 1.6, 1.4, 1.8)
Romero (1.5, 0.9, 1.0, 0.9)
Durbin (1.6, 1.6, 1.0, 1.1)
Eyre (0.8, 0.8, 0.6, 0.9)
Condrey (1.2, 1.0, 0.7, 1.0)
Park (0.9, 0.8, 0.2, 0.6)
PHILLIES TOTAL (22.6, 23.1, 23.1, 25.0)– average 23.4
METS pitchers WAR w/ 5.50 RA as replacement level (Marcel, CHONE, Bill James, Shandler)
Santana (4.8, 4.4, 5.8, 5.0)
Maine (1.9, 1.8, 2.0, 2.3)
Pelfrey (2.3, 1.1, 1.9, 2.5)
Niese (0.5, 0.3, 0.0, 0.4)
Knight (0.4, 0.5, 1.0, 0.3)
Rodriguez (1.3, 2.1, 1.7, 1.9)
Putz (1.2, 1.5, 1.2, 1.3)
Green (0.5, 1.1, 0.9, 0.7)
Sanchez (0.7, 0.8, 0.7, 0.8)
Feliciano (0.9, 0.7, 0.7, 0.7)
Stokes (0.3, 1.2, 0.2, -0.1)
Muniz (0.3, 0.4, 0.0, 0.2)
METS TOTAL (15.1, 15.1, 16.1, 16)– average 15.6
Therefore I get:
PHILLIES PITCHERS & HITTERS (46.2, 51.0, 51.3, 55.8)–average 51.1
METS PITCHERS & HITTERS (40.1, 39.7, 44.8, 47.8)–average 43.1
The average is a little inflated from when I did this with runs scored. I adjusted the Phillies and Mets replacement level RS so that their Pythagorean record would be 45-117 if they had 6.00 and 5.50 RA respectively, and got that the Phillies beat the Mets by 4-8 games depending on the projection system. The real difference in between how we each did it was that you seem to give the Mets starting pitching a whole lot of credit. Did you adjust your wins above replacement for the fact the projections used reflected different parks? I assumed the Mets pitching projections were for a stadium with similar park factors as Shea. Otherwise, I don’t see how Maine, Pelfrey, and Niese look as good as they do in your numbers.
Matt, cannot speak for how you arrived at your numbers, but the way we tend to calculate WAR may differ from yours.
First, we don’t use RA or ERA. We use FIP. Starting Pitchers are compared to an FIP of 5.50 up to 150 IP, and after 150 IP, to a 4.60 FIP for a reliever. And then we throw in a little bonus, a few runs for pitchers who log over 180 or so innings because they are keeping the bullpen fresh, preventing replacement relievers from entering.
So, a 3.50 FIP pitcher in 200 innings would give up 78 runs. The replacement level would give up ((150*5.5)/9) + ((50*4.6)/9) = 118 runs. Therefore, this pitcher is +30 runs above replacement. With 200 innings, I would give him another +3 runs. This makes the pitcher +3.3 wins.
As far as the Mets new park, we really have no idea how everything will work there, so I wouldn’t want to adjust something that we are unsure about yet. I could see it depressing their pitching by 1-1.5 wins if it isn’t as favorable of a pitcher’s park, but at the same time, that difference could be made up for in the offense.
You also have Knight in there and Niese without a lot of innings. I put in Niese at a 4.45 FIP in 150 innings and Derek Lowe, who adds over 3 wins himself.
I also don’t use Bill James Projections because they tend to be too offensively-happy. I do use EqBRR but there is only 2 yrs of data at BP and so I do not want to use something with such a low level of reliability at this point. With just 2 yrs for that, why not estimate it based on what we see, you know? That could be a source for our differentials. Here are my player by player projections:
Howard: +30 wRAA, 0 UZR, +10 adj, +3.9 WAR
Utley (with injury): +20 wRAA, +12 UZR, +18 adj, +5.0 WAR
Rollins: +15 wRAA, +7 UZR, +28 adj, +4.9 WAR
Feliz: -11 wRAA, +12 UZR, +20 adj, +2.0 WAR
Ibanez: +9 wRAA, -13 UZR, +17 adj, +1.2 WAR
Victorino: +5 wRAA, +5 UZR, +22 adj, +3.1 WAR
Werth: +16 wRAA, +12 UZR, +12 adj, +4.0 WAR
Ruiz: -8 wRAA, +4 def, +24 adj, +2.0 WAR
The bench is highly variable but I have them at a combined +1.5 WAR.
Hamels: +4.0 WAR
Myers: +2.1 WAR
Moyer: +1.4 WAR
Blanton: +2.7 WAR
Happ: +1.5 WAR
Delgado: +18 wRAA, -6 UZR, +9.6 adj, +2.1 WAR
Castillo: -6 wRAA, 0 UZR, +18 adj, +1.2 WAR
Reyes: +14 wRAA, +5 UZR, +30 adj, +4.9 WAR
Wright: +40 wRAA, +3 UZR, +25 adj, +6.7 WAR
Murphy: +11 wRAA, 0 UZR, +10 adj, +2.0 WAR
Beltran: +28 wRAA, +6 UZR, +23 adj, +5.6 WAR
Church: +4 wRAA, +3 UZR, +10.4 adj, +1.8 WAR
Schneider: -12 wRAA, +4 UZR, +25.5 adj, +1.8 WAR
Santana: +4.5 WAR
Maine: +2.1 WAR
Pelfrey: +2.8 WAR
Lowe: +3.7 WAR
Niese: +1.6 WAR (150 IP at 4.45 FIP)
I wasn’t using my own projections. . Those also have the Phillies about 4-5 wins ahead before adding in Lowe which would close the gap to 1 win or so. But I figured I would only use reliable sources.
You used FIP and then made adjustments for defense. I used projected ERAs by each of those four sources, and did not include adjustments for defense. If those four sources accounted for defense effects on RA/FIP differential as well UZR. Tom Tango, Bill James, Sean Smith, and Ron Shandler are all aware of FIP and I’m sure they did their RA/ERA projections trying to proerply account for defense.
I have a methodological disagreement with how you do your WAR for starters. It works in isolation to determine value of a pitcher, but when you then also count the relievers’ WAR, you are double counting the effect of innings being pitched by relievers.
The way that I do it is mathematically equivalent to assuming that the difference in between 1450 IP and the total innings of the 12 pitches listed would be 6.00 RA or 5.50 RA depending on which park.
Keep in mind that FIP includes park effects– QERA does not, but FIP includes HR projections which are based on park effects. I guessed that each of those projections that I named did their projections as though the Mets were staying in Shea. If they are using weighted averages with age adjustments (which I think is all Marcel does), then they pretty much are using projections of the Mets in Shea.
Bill James does tend to be offensively biased when it comes to offense, but he tends to be pitcher biased when it comes to pitchers. His numbers don’t add up. But this is irrelevant when comparing two teams. Unless he persistently biases two kinds of players differently– say, by not reverting superstars towards the mean enough– then his projections are an additional piece of data.
Your Hamels projection seems low, but so does your Santana. Certainly a source of bias is that Bill James and Ron Shandler both have Hamels markedly better than Santana.
My innings projections of Niese and Knight don’t really matter because they are replacement level and I have their non-innings being replaced by similar quality pitchers. If you’re using FIP, I’m confused how you get Pelfrey higher than Moyer, Myers, and Blanton. Niese seems wrong too. 1.6 WAR? that must be because of park effects.
I really think the main difference is that you are using FIP as though it is the same for both teams, when the projected FIPs are based on different HR effects. Even if Citi is neutral, CBP is not.
Condrey seems high at 1.2 wins for Marcel, but Marcel has him 65 IP at 4.43. That seems wrong, but that’s why I used 3 systems to check– all of which had him lower but others higher.
I agree that there is a problem that the bullpens are not weighted by leverage, but if the two teams are equally affected by this– as they are similarly talented and similarly distributed– that shouldn’t affect things. The real difference really seems to be rotations, and I think it’s largely HR where the difference lies. I think all four projection systems I’m using in my methodology are projecting the Phillies and Mets as having comparable lineups, benches, and bullpens (with the exception of Chone giving more credit to the Phillies), but the way that you are doing it gives the Mets rotation a boost and the Phillies less of a boost.
Also, your bullpen numbers seem incorrect. There is no way Clay Condrey is worth +1.2 wins, or that Romero and Madson are worth the same as Lidge. This is likely due to not including leverage. Again, small differences, but very interesting how it sways one set from a +2-3 advantage for the Phillies to +2 wins for the Mets.
Why does the value of the replacement player matter when compaing teams head to head? I gies the question I’m asking is why the Phillies lineup which you state with offensive and defense accounted for is +120 only worth 26 WAR when the mets lineup contributes +112 runs is worth 26.1 WAR. Seems like the phillies would be ~.7 wins ahead if 10 runs approximates a win. Thanks
Bradley,
It’s just a better baseline. The Phillies lineup would log less PA than the Mets in these projections, likely because Utley is only being counted at 130 GP and 520 PA. Before adjustments, the Phillies look ahead close to 0.7 wins, but with the adjustments for playing time and value above replacement, they are virtually identical. The difference is that Utley’s time would be made up for by the likes of Bruntlett, Donald, etc, whereas someone like Reyes or Wright would get the whole porton of playing time. That’s all.
Matt,
Yeah, it’s a methodological disagreement that is causing the differences. But, as you said, with Lowe, your projections call for a 1-win difference between the teams. That could easily tilt either way, so we’re very close including Lowe.
As far as Pelfrey vs. Myers/Moyer/Blanton, it shouldn’t be confusing since you know the methodology Dave and I use here.
Pelfrey projects to an FIP between 4.05-4.10. Myers and Moyer are markedly higher than that, and Blanton is virtually equal to that.
Niese at 1.6 comes from a 4.45 FIP in 150 IP. That equates to 75 runs allowed. A 5.50 FIP in 150 IP, or replacement level, gives up 92 runs.
How can you have a common replacement level with FIP, which is based on HR/9 which has a large park effect?