Atlanta Braves ZiPS Projections 2010: More Trouble

It really just has not been a good off-season for us Mets fans. From the fact that we had very little money to spend, to the fact that the money we DID spend we spent stupidly, things have been difficult. Just when you think matters cannot get worse, the Atlanta Braves ZiPS projections were released on Friday and, well, they look dangerous.

Once again, a huge thanks to Dan Szymborski for putting all the work into this. If you follow the link above to Baseball Think Factory, there is a link you can click to donate via Paypal and help support all of those great projects.

A couple of weeks ago, I wrapped up my three part review of the Mets ZiPS projections and concluded:

As currently constituted, the Mets would need a LOT of luck to compete this season. At a minimum, we need Reyes to remain healthy, Beltran to come back soon and healthy, for one of Pelfrey/Maine/Perez to really take a leap forward, and for Francisco Rodriguez to halt his slide.

This was based on a number of factors - but the primary reason was the apparent weakness of our starting rotation. Here is a look again at how our current top five project by ERA+:

Mets 2010 ZiPS Projections, Part 3: Conclusions

Anyone who has followed Fonzie Forever for any amount of time knows my general attitude on the Mets and what I think they should be doing:

1. Make every move with a plan. Don't just acquire "stuff." Don't avoid risk because you're afraid of criticism. And...

2. Pitching, pitching, pitching. Oh, and also pitching.

In Part 3 of our series looking at the Mets ZiPS projections for 2010, we'll draw some conclusions as to what would be the best course of action for the Metropolitans.

To read Part 1, on hitting, click here.
To read Part 2, on pitching, click here.

Once again, all ZiPS projections courtesy of the great Dan Szymborski, via Baseball Think Factory. Listed below are the Mets projected opening day starting lineup, starting rotation, and bullpen, according to the projections:

1. Reyes, SS 117 OPS+
2. Castillo, 2B 94 OPS+
3. Beltran, CF 137 OPS+
4. Wright, 3B 140 OPS+
5. Bay, LF 126 OPS+
6. Murphy, 1B 95 OPS+
7. Francoeur, RF 94 OPS+
8. Santos/Thole C 69 OPS+/87 OPS+

Rotation

1. Santana, 133 ERA+
2. Pelfrey, 89 ERA+
3. Maine, 103 ERA+
4. Perez, 88 ERA+
5. Niese, 95 ERA+

'Pen

K-Rod, 138 ERA+
Feliciano, 110 ERA+
Green, 101 ERA+
Dessens, 98 ERA+
Stokes, 95 ERA+
Knight, 94 ERA+
Misch, 89 ERA+

It is an ugly, ugly picture. This is especially so with Beltran out of the picture for an unknown length of time. Let's go by unit here and see what we can predict.

Offense

What we have here projects to be a slightly above-average unit. Reyes, Wright, Beltran and Bay all project to have good seasons in 2010, Castillo and Murphy are somewhere around average, and Francoeur and our catcher bring up the rear. I'd say it is a line up with some potential to do some damage.

The bottom of the lineup looks weak, but no lineup in the world has eight starters all projected above average (okay except the Yankees). There is no need for all eight starters to be superstars. If Castillo can get on base early, and Murphy and Francoeur can drive in some of those runners while batting 6 and 7, we'll be great.

Here are the OPS+ numbers for the Mets 8 qualifying starters in prior years next to their projections for 2010:

2010: 140-137-126-117-95-94-94-69
2009: 143-123-120-119-98-95-82-69
2008: 141-129-127-123-118-106-87-77
2000: 155-147-123-110-98-98-98-76

Not an enormous difference between the two previous seasons, but that was the difference between being 2nd in the league in runs (2008) and 12th in the league in runs (2009). The Mets 2010 projections come in somewhat closer to the 2008 version than the 2009 version (with Jason Bay playing the role of Carlos Delgado) so the Mets have themselves decently well-positioned on offense.

I picked the 2000 team as well because I see some commonalities between that roster and this roster. The 2000 team had two offensive superstars in Piazza and Edgardo Alfonzo (blog namesake) and did very well with a cast of average roleplayers around them. The third-base regular on that team was probably Todd Zeile, who hit only .268/.356/.467 with only 22 home runs while playing first base (Daniel Murphy, anyone?).

The 2000 team finished 7th in runs. This team projects slightly better than that.

Pitching
This is, as usual, the place I perceive to be the weakness on this team. Of course, there are reasons to be optimistic about these Mets -- a computer projection cannot fully take into account the injuries to Maine and Perez, or the bad luck Pelfrey had last season -- but still, these raw numbers are eye opening.

1. Santana, 3.23 ERA
2. Pelfrey, 4.86 ERA
3. Maine, 4.20 ERA
4. Perez, 4.93 ERA
5. Niese, 4.57 ERA

Beyond that, our reserve starters include luminaries such as Nelson Figueroa (5.06), Fernando Nieve (5.19), Tobi Stoner (5.58) and I literally do not know who else. In comparison, the Phillies have TEN pitchers projected to have an ERA better than 5.00 (incl. Moyer, Pedro, and even Rodrigo Lopez). Even the Nationals have a better projected rotation than this, even with the loss of Jordan Zimmermann to surgery. By adding Jason Marquis to Stephen Strasburg and John Lannan, they have a formidable trio up top.

I say this every year - but there are going to be at least eight guys starting for the Mets this year, and probably closer to ten or twelve. In 2008, the Mets had 11 pitchers start a game for them. In 2009 it was also 11. In 2006 we had 13 starters. Even in 2000 we had 10.

In order to be competitive, I think we're going to need one of Pelfrey/Perez to beat their projection significantly and become a #2, AND to add a starter or for Maine to be healthy all year. Obviously, that is asking a lot. If this happens -- say for instance that Pelfrey bounces back to post a 110 ERA+, and we are able to sign Joel Pineiro who puts up a 110 ERA+ as well, I think we'll be okay.

Here's a look at some successful former Mets rotations by ERA+ and compared to a potential 2010 squad:

2010: 133-110-110-103-88 (Santana, Pelfrey, Pineiro, Maine, Perez, including the above assumptions)
2006: 114-88-97-107-121 (Glavine, Trachsel, Pedro, Duque, Maine, 3rd in ERA)
2000: 142-139-111-108-88 (Hampton, Leiter, Rusch, Reed, Jones, 3rd in ERA)
1986: 126-127-139-102-92 (Gooden, Darling, Ojeda, Fernandez, Aguilera, 1st in ERA... and who knew that Bobby Ojeda was so good that year?)

The common thread here is that all of those teams, 1986, 2000, and 2006 -- had good pitching. The only squad that wasn't exceptional was in 2006. Pitching wins. The rotation as currently constituted w/o Pineiro looks more like bad Mets teams we are used to:

2010: 133-103-89-88-95
2004: 133-119-107-87-94
1996: 117-91-95-84-75

Bullpen
As for this unit, well, anything goes. Bullpen construction from year to year is part planning, part luck. Since our last look at it, the Mets have added Kelvim Escobar and Ryota Igarishi to the fold. Both of these players are hard throwers and have the potential to really help. According to CHONE, Escobar is projected to deliver a very nice 3.00 ERA next season out of the bullpen if healthy -- a projection I'll take any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Even if neither are stars, the further down the depth chart we push guys like Pat Misch, the happier I am.

Conclusion
As currently constituted, the Mets would need a LOT of luck to compete this season. At a minimum, we need Reyes to remain healthy, Beltran to come back soon and healthy, for one of Pelfrey/Maine/Perez to really take a leap forward, and for Francisco Rodriguez to halt his slide.

As you can probably tell, I am not a pie-in-the-sky optimist about my team. That said, there are a lot of ways that things could break IN FAVOR of the Mets. This is probably truer for the Mets than any other team -- we have many unanswered questions which could end up favorable.

I did write in the last article that I thought the projections for Oliver Perez, Brian Stokes, Nelson Figueroa, and Mike Pelfrey were too pessimistic. Players regularly return from injuries to recover their former levels of play. We have a couple young players on the cusp of delivering at the major league level, such as Fernando Martinez, Jon Niese, Dillon Gee, Jennry Mejia, and Ike Davis -- and there is no understating how much help those additions would be.

Based on what we've learned, I think the Mets would probably be best served by finding a way to improve their pitching. Whether that addition is someone safe like Joel Piniero[1] or risky like Erik Bedard is less important. What DOES matter is that the Mets spend their money improving the areas which give us the most marginal benefit. As we wrote a few days ago while advocating for Sheets or Bedard:

We need to look NOT ONLY at what our money will buy us --- but who the new player will be replacing. Signing Hudson to replace Castillo, or signing Molina to replace Blanco/Thole would make the Mets better -- but those are moves with NO upside. They would improve us by a win at most. In the Mets current position, they need to address areas of weakness with investments which could pay BIG dividends.

Those big upgrades will take place in the starting rotation ONLY. If we can add a guy like Pineiro, who was worth over 4 WAR last year, and bump from the rotation someone like Jon Niese, we improve ourselves dramatically. Not only do we improve from Pineiro to Niese, but then Niese then replaces whoever our emergency starter would have been. Niese bumps Figueroa, who bumps Nieve, and then hopefully we never have to stomach the likes of Jose Lima or Jeremi Gonzalez ever again.

The Mets project to have a decent offense already - it's time for Omar and the Mets to start living up to their promises and deliver us a team that can compete and win in Citi Field.

-------
[1] We looked at Pineiro a few weeks ago and declared his improvement "for real":

Piniero was 4.8 Wins Above Replacement last year, by far the best free agent remaining... Somehow, Joel Piniero was able to take his career ground ball to fly ball ratio, which has hovered around 1.5 for EIGHT seasons, and ramp it all the way up to 2.54.... His GB/FB ratio was the highest in baseball last year by HALF a point. Derek Lowe was second, at 2.18.

* * *

If you were looking only at the surface stats, everything about Joel Piniero's season last year would scream FLUKE. But because of his increase in ground balls, he allowed less home runs. He allowed less line drives. His unusually low BABIP of .293 might be close to sustainable.

Matt Holliday Signs: Compared to Bay and Who Is Left

As most already know, the Cardinals have resigned Matt Holliday to a massive, seven year and $120 million deal.

On the heels of Jason Bay's five year, $83 million deal with the Mets, there are undoubtedly going to be comparisons made between the two. With Bay about 15 months older than Holliday, the Cardinals end up committed to Holliday one year deeper into his career than the Mets are to Bay. The average annual value of the Holliday deal is $17 per season, while the Bay contract averages $16.6 million per year.

Who did better - the Mets or the Cardinals - is something we won't know for a long time. What we do know is that both are paying their players contracts which are near their market value, and for many years. Matt Klaassen over at fangraphs does a good job breaking down the contract, repeats a concept which I think most baseball fans should be familiar with:

It has been said before, but it’s worth repeating: paying average market value for a win isn’t necessarily a “dumb” move, but it isn’t “smart” either. It’s “average” …on average. Moreover, straight market value isn’t the only factor to consider in this particular case. Leaving aside the possibility that the actual value of a win might actually be lower this offseason (dropping it down to $4.4 million, the market value of a 4.5 WAR player over 7 years drops to about $109 million), seven years is a long time for a corner outfielder in his thirties.

Neither team got a discount for guaranteeing many years on their contracts. Both require their players to maintain their level of performance (or close to it) throughout the life of their contracts in order to come out "even". Both will likely lose.

For what it is worth, here are Dan Szymborski's ZiPS projections for Matt Holliday for the next seven years. Once again, this is not a prediction as to EXACTLY how Holliday will perform -- rather, it is a simulation of how Holliday and players like him will age over a given period of time. A look at the progression, and how Matt Holliday is likeliest to perform in 2015 and beyond, is enlightening:

BA OBP SLG OPS+
----------------------------
2010 .308 .387 .528 143
2011 .304 .384 .517 139
2012 .302 .381 .512 137
2013 .296 .375 .504 133
2014 .290 .370 .493 129
2015 .284 .364 .472 123
2016 .280 .358 .460 118
2017 .276 .354 .451 115 (option)

What does this all mean? Well ... for one thing, it might mean that, in a year with no marquee talent and with so much talent available in the middle tier, that it was foolish to pursue EITHER Holliday or Bay. Why pay Holliday or Bay their market value for five or seven years, exposing yourself to the risk they drop off in production or become injured, when you can get Johnny Damon or any other corner outfielder to do almost as well on a very short, safe contract?

Here are some of the remaining free agent outfielders, courtesy of Cot's Contracts:

Rick Ankiel STL
Johnny Damon NYY (A)
Jermaine Dye CWS (A)
Vladimir Guerrero LAA (B)
Reed Johnson CHC
Austin Kearns * WAS
Mark Kotsay CHW
Jason Michaels CLE
Xavier Nady NYY (B)
Gary Sheffield NYM
Fernando Tatis NYM (B)

Not that any of these players are the equal of Holliday or Bay -- but what if they provide half the production at a quarter of the cost? If Holliday is a 5-win player who costs $120 million, would Vladimir Guerrero or Jermaine Dye be a better deal as a 1 or 2-win player if we only committed $10 million to them?

It will be interesting to see how the rest of the offseason pans out, and where the many mid-level players end up -- and what they get.

-------
Other free agents of interest:

Russell Branyan SEA
Carlos Delgado NYM
Adam LaRoche ATL
Orlando Hudson LAD
Felipe Lopez MIL
Miguel Tejada HOU
Joe Crede MIN
Pedro Feliz PHI
Ryan Church ATL
Jack Cust OAK
Ryan Garko SF

Mets 2010 ZiPS Projections, Part 2: Pitching

In Part 2 of this series, I am going to take a look at Dan Szymborski's ZiPS projections for the 2010 New York Mets pitching staff.

[I broke down the hitters in Part 1]

First of all, let me just say that this is NOT a pretty set of projections. Unlike the hitters, who fared relatively well, the Mets pitching staff looks like an absolute wasteland. Time for Optimistic/Pessimistic/Just Right:

Too Optimistic
Francisco Rodriguez: 3.13 ERA, 72 IP, 37 bb, 88 k

I think this link tells you EVERYTHING you need to know about K-Rod. Of course, just because all of his stats have gotten worse for the last four years running doesn't necessarily mean that they will again this year -- but it's not a good sign. Simply put, there is no reason to believe that he is more likely to be 2006 K-Rod next year than a repeat of 2009 K-Rod. And 2009 K-Rod walked 5 batters per nine innings, had an ERA of 3.71, and had a WHIP of 1.31. u-g-l-y.

John Maine: 4.20 ERA, 122 IP, 57 bb, 103 k

Before John Maine's 7 inning, 7 strikeout performance against Houston on the third to last day of the season, a line like this would have seemed like complete fantasy. Now, however, there is at least a little reason for optimism. I still think he falls short of this goal, either because of ERA or innings. I have a hard time believing that his course of action last year will help the shoulder long term.

Jennry Mejia: 4.90 ERA, 75 IP, 44 bb, 55 k

Yep, believe it. According to ZiPS, our 20-year-old pitching prospect would be our fifth best starter next year if pressed into action at the major league level (behind Santana, Maine, Niese, and Pelfrey, but AHEAD of Perez). I think this is a little much. Mejia just finished putting up a 12 ERA in the Arizona Fall League, and has yet to throw a pitch above AA, where he posted a 4.47 ERA. I think the kid has a good chance to be a stud, but I doubt he can put up an 88 ERA+ this soon.

Too Pessimistic
Oliver Perez: 4.93 ERA, 142 IP, 87 bb, 132 k

Okay, I have a soft spot for Ollie. Maybe it's the fact that everyone gets on his case but he really seems like a nice guy who tries hard. And -- despite the ulcers -- he's not been a bad pitcher for us. In 2007 he was phenomenal, with a 3.56 ERA. And in 2008, he had a 3.56 ERA the final 2/3 of the season. Then, in a stretch of 13 starts stretching into September, he pitched 6 innings or more in every start. He might not be an ace, but he's been better than people give him credit for.

So 2009 was a lost season. He pitched in the WBC, came back out of shape, got injured, and struggled mightily. He has to come back this year and REALLY prove something to us. But it would be foolish of us to forget what he did in 2007 and 2008:

371 IP, 184 bb, 354 k, 3.91 ERA, 1.35 WHIP

Instead of looking at what Ollie is not, let's look at what he is. If he comes back this year healthy and in shape, there is no reason to think he can't pitch to an ERA right around 4. And I think that is exactly what he will do.

Nelson Figueroa: 5.06 ERA, 131 IP, 46 bb, 91 k

Okay! I give up. I'm on the Figgy bandwagon. I for one doubt that gets the opportunity to pitch 131 innings for us this year, but facts are facts - he posted a 4.57 ERA for us in 2008 and a 4.09 ERA in 2009. He shredded AAA this season to the tune of a 2.25 ERA, and for his career, has a 3.49 ERA over a whopping 1,758 innings. Sure, some pitchers are Quad-A guys who never break through. But Figueroa has 115 innings in the majors as a Metropolitan and he hasn't looked bad. He won't be great, but I wouldn't be surprised to see him provide some servicable innings with around a 4.50 ERA.

Brian Stokes: 4.54 ERA, 81 IP, 38 bb, 56 k

Brian Stokes wins my 2009 Heath Bell Award, for the player that management wasted or misused the most. He appeared in games anywhere from the 4th to the 11th inning. He pitched on zero to six days rest. A closer look is also instructive.

There were FOUR appearances this year where Stokes gave up more than three runs -- one was on five days rest, and the other was on EIGHT days rest. Opponents OPS numbers against Brian on normal rest were miniscule - 680 with zero days, 681 with one day, 775 with two days, 706 with three days, 403 with four days. They balloon to 1418 with five days and 1058 with 6 or more days.

Brian put up a 3.51 ERA in 2008, and a 3.91 ERA in 2009. If he's used properly, Stokes and his 95 mph fastball ought to beat that projection handily. I'd project him around a 3.75 ERA if he were used regularly.

Mike Pelfrey: 4.86 ERA, 189 IP, 69 bb, 111 k

The thing about Mike Pelfrey that confuses me, is why everyone expects him to be good. He's never shown us anything. His best stretch ever was in 2006 in AA, when he posted a 2.71 ERA. The next year, in AAA, he was getting hit around at a 4.01 ERA and 1.35 WHIP pace. There was room for growth, but as a 23-year-old, he didn't have the makings of an ace.

I was glad when he broke through in 2008, but I wasn't really expecting it. The truth is, he was a little lucky in 2008 and a little unlucky in 2009. His tRA (a metric which is available on fangraphs and is explained here) has his tRA as 4.49 in '08 and 4.52 in '09. And all things considered -- like, with what we saw with our naked eyes -- Pelfrey was very much the same guy. The real difference between that year and this one was that more hits made it through the infield and less guys got stranded on base - his fastball was the same speed, he walked and struck out about exactly the same number of batters.

I see Pelfrey's luck turning again this year, at least back to average. A lot will depend what the Mets do with their infield defense (i.e. will Reyes be healthy? Will Castillo still be here?) but he is a better pitcher than he showed last year. In addition, he's got a year more of experience under his belt and he's a year further removed from his first season as a 200-inning workhorse. I think he'll be fine.

Just Right
Johan Santana: 3.23 ERA, 206 innings, 52 bb, 203 k
Jon Niese: 4.57 ERA, 143 IP, 55 bb, 103 k

Conclusion

Well, we're in trouble. Our rotation according to ZiPS (with ERA+ operating the same way as OPS+ ... 100 is average, above 100 is better):

Santana, 133 ERA+
Maine, 103 ERA+
Pelfrey, 89 ERA+
Perez, 88 ERA+
Niese, 95 ERA+

And our bullpen:

K-Rod, 138 ERA+
Feliciano, 110 ERA+
Green, 101 ERA+
Dessens, 98 ERA+
Stokes, 95 ERA+
Knight, 94 ERA+
Misch, 89 ERA+

We honestly have about three guys who can pitch on the entire staff. And I have no idea why the Mets as an entity, or the writers, or the blogosphere, are not worried about it. Granted, I am optimistic about Pelfrey, and Perez, and Stokes -- but luck can break both ways and there are reasons to be pessimistic about some of the better projections.

As 2009 demonstrated, we can't just depend on a superstar or two. Especially not when it comes to pitching. We are honestly one injury (Santana) and a continued regression (K-Rod) away from having ZERO pitchers who we can expect to be anywhere above league average.

This is why I think the Mets are more than a year away from contention, and this is what I'll address in Part 3.

Mets 2010 ZiPS Projections, Part 1: Offense

Dan Szymborski's ZiPS projections for the Mets have finally arrived!!! It's like an early Christmas. In short, ZiPS projections are a quick and dirty forecast of how players will perform in the upcoming year. You can read more here.

ZiPS, like any computer projection, are not perfect. But I do like to look at it often -- if only because it is purely mathematical. It doesn't get caught up in hype. It doesn't develop personal likes and dislikes. It'll give you a cold hard look at the statistics and how they indicate that a player might do the next season.

As for the Mets, ZiPS had a couple of personal victories last season with regards to players who the media felt strongly about. For example, many writers and bloggers loved Daniel Murphy's grit and toughness. They thought his approach at the plate was great. They thought he'd hit .300 for sure. Well, ZiPS didn't. ZiPS projected him to hit .273/.324/.422 and he ended up hitting .266/.313/.427.

Fernando Tatis: ZiPS: .262/.327/.431, Actual: .282/.339/.438
Luis Castillo: ZiPS: .279/.351/.348, Actual: .302/.387/.346
Mike Pelfrey: ZiPS: 4.24 ERA, Actual: 5.03 ERA
Bobby Parnell: ZiPS: 5.38 ERA, Actual: 5.30 ERA

It was more optimistic than most on guys like Tatis and Castillo, who were not favored sons of the media... and they had seasons better than the expectations of most. Conversely, it was cautiously pessimistic on Murphy, Pelfrey and Parnell, who were both disappointments this year. Of course, it had its share of misses, but no more or less than anyone else.

So now, this year's projection is out. Here are some of the projections that stand out to me:

Too Optimistic

David Wright: .307/.396/.507, 140 OPS+

David Wright is a great player - but he only slugged .447 last year. Sure, his career mark is .518, but it is hard to point at one factor explaining the decrease. He also managed to bat .307 last year, but he did it despite striking out a disturbing 140 times. He was lucky to put up as good stats as he did last year, and suffered a concussion. I'd sign up for his above line right now if I could, because I could see him not doing quite as well.

Fernando Tatis: .277/.345/.458, 113 OPS+

I love Fernando Tatis, but this projection has him hitting better than last year and better than his career line. He'll be playing this season at age 35, so I think a duplicate of this years .282/.339/.438 line is more likely.

Luis Castillo: .290/.368/.349, 94 OPS+

Castillo's renaissance last year was great to watch, but this line projects him to be just about as good as last season's .302/.387/.346 line. He's hit about to that line over the last three years, but I see him falling off some at age 34 and on reconstructed knees.

Too Pessimistic

Daniel Murphy: .274/.326/.408, 95 OPS+

As much as I rag on Murphy, I think he's more of the hitter we saw in the second half than in the first half. With a year of experience I expect improvement - lots of players experience sophomore slumps. He hit .282/.313/.485 in the second half and I think he ought to have an OBP somewhere around .330 and slugging around .450.

Fernando Martinez: .251/.297/.406, 86 OPS+

I've spoken at length about Martinez before, so I'll be brief. When healthy, I think he'll hit better than this (though it's worth noting that his slugging percentage forecast here is generous).

Alex Cora: 251/.322/.336, 77 OPS+

Cora we've blogged about here as well. He's not a great player, but he did play last year with torn ligaments in his thumbs and had his stats hurt as a result. He hit .256/.330/.370 for Boston in 2007-2008, and I see him outperforming this projection.

Just Right

Carlos Beltran: .294/.381/.514, 137 OPS+
Jose Reyes: .294/.363/.455, 117 OPS+

Beltran and Reyes are absolute studs - potential future Hall of Famers who you build a team around. If they are healthy, they'll meet these. In fact, Reyes might do better than projected to - he was showing great discipline at the plate last year before he was hurt and is entering his prime, age 27 season.

Angel Pagan: .285/.335/.446, 107 OPS+

Angel had a great year last year, hitting .306/.350/.487. I love the guy, but he played over his head (probably). His career line is .281/.331/.443, so this projection has him hitting that almost exactly. I think he'll be a little better, but even if he does hit to a 107 OPS+, he'll be a fantastic player when you factor in his speed and defense.

Josh Thole: .273/.335/.360, 87 OPS+
Omir Santos: .247/.289/.342, 69 OPS+

Well... this has also been discussed at length on this blog. On November 3rd, I wrote "being conservative, I'd forecast [Thole] somewhere around .290/.320/.360." Santos, of course, can't hit a lick. With the addition of Blanco, this does not mean that Thole MUST start the year in the majors -- but it certainly is a compelling data point.

Jeff Francoeur: .269/.310/.425, 94 OPS+

Yeah. This looks basically like what Francoeur is and is going to be. As one of the commenters at BaseballThinkFactory pointed out, "He is 26 years old, coming of a 93 OPS+ season, and has a career OPS+ of 92. A projection of 94 is reasonable."

Conclusion

The Mets offense looks pretty good according to ZiPS, as it always does. Despite conventional wisdom, the Mets offense has been pretty good for each of the last few seasons (the last one, with the injuries, being the exception). If the Mets can remain reasonably healthy next year, they can put a good offense out there even without the addition of Matt Holliday or another frontline stud.

The OPS+ figure next to each player's name indicates their OPS relative to league average. A player with a 100 OPS+ is average. An OPS+ of 110 or 120 would be above average. For a position where hitters are typically poor, like second base for instance, an OPS+ of 90 might be perfectly acceptable.

The best possible Mets lineup, according to the forecast, and with the players we have right now, might look something like this:

1. Reyes, SS 117 OPS+
2. Castillo, 2B 94 OPS+
3. Beltran, CF 137 OPS+
4. Wright, 3B 140 OPS+
5. Pagan, LF 107 OPS+
6. Murphy, 1B 95 OPS+
7. Thole, C 87 OPS+
8. Francoeur, RF 94 OPS+

This team would be alright on offense. A short term solution like Delgado at first base, or perhaps a good platoon situation with Francoeur (who for his career has hit .298 against lefties) would help immensely.

Overall, and as will be obvious after Part 2 of this review, the money would be MUCH better spent on pitching.