yep typo - but you post these stats every year to justify that we were only a few runs behind or our ERA was one of the best, but we still can't finish better than 4th. This team is "still under construction" and there are plenty of holes to even be optimistic about contending. I would love if we finish .500, but I still see this team as a 74-76 win team.
Hey if they exceed expectations, I will only be happy, but I don't want to lose sleep over it anymore.
How can you justify adding and subtracting like that? Dickey should have had 25 wins had it not been for offense and BP. It's also highly possible that Harvey posts an ERA of 2.75 and still only wins 8-9 games.
It doesn't work like that, you can't just add or subtract runs just based on hypothetical scenarios. If Wright or Ike get injured for any period of time, we might not be able to score 600 runs.
Basing on history, Johan will probably get injured and that will propel Harvey as the #1 starter where he will be pitching against #1 starters of other team. Just there, he will be at a disadvantage.
Overall, the few guys on the team have potential, but as the team stands right now, you have to delusional to think that it's AT LEAST a .500 team. I would love to see that, but I can't put blinders and be objective about it.
Our biggest weakness, And the cause 29 of our 88 losses has on paper been fixed,
If our pen was just average last year just average with the offense we had including the well below average production we got over 1200 ABS from Bay, Torres, Thole and Shoppach and rotation that took many hits we would have been 81 and 83
NL Average 23 wins, 24 losesMets pen 16 and 29that is 7 wins below average and 5 loses worse then average
If our pen was 23 and 24 which again is just average not even good with the team and all its faults we would have been 81 and 83,
So with the pen upgrade alone we should be .500, Not even factoring in the increased offsense.
I am probably a depressed Mets fan but all I know is if the pen would have been average, we would have been below average on some of the other categories... maybe we might not have scored that many runs, maybe our starters would not have gone that deep. Barring a couple of seasons in the past 10-15 years, the Mets team has not put all facets of the game together to be a consistent team.
Can it change? maybe - am I hopeful? yes - I can only go with the state of the team and the current roster. It's not the kind of roster that would make us a contender. But I hope I will be wrong come July - don't see it happening though.
Yes, the words Mets con in your heading is apt.
The Mets are a year or two away from contending. .500 would be a big accomplishment. Think of 1968, not 1969.
"Point is Dickey's 20 wins will be made up for."