With last night’s no-hitter, the Mets are now 15-6 and their .714 winning percentage is the best in the majors. There’s no other way to describe it than as a terrific start. Of course, last year started off pretty good, too, and ended up in a mini disaster. But while last year’s start felt more like it was done with smoke and mirrors, this year’s opening stretch feels more real.
But depending on what you believe about the Phillies, maybe expectations should be tamped down a bit. No one doubts the validity of a 5-2 mark against the Giants and Cardinals. And everyone is happy they’re beating the teams they’re supposed to beat, as the Mets have a 7-3 mark against the Nationals and Diamondbacks. But is the Mets’ 3-1 start against the Phillies a nice start against a good team or is it just winning the games they should against a sub-.500 opponent?
The Phillies were expected to have one of the best offenses in the game and they made some major additions to their leaky bullpen. The starters still have question marks after their top two hurlers but if the defense didn’t sabotage things, it certainly felt before the season started that the Phillies were going to factor into the playoff picture, with an 87-win type of season on the table.
Yet the early results for Philadelphia don’t measure up to the preseason expectations.
A 10-11 start overall has to be a little disappointing. But just like the Mets have played all of their games against the D’Backs, the Phillies are finished with the Rockies. They went 5-2 against Colorado and if you take out those results, you have a 5-9 start against the rest of the league. They’ve scored 49 runs in those 14 games against non-Rockies opponents, an average of 3.5 runs per game.
But the Phillies have also played four games against the Marlins, four against the Mets and three against the Brewers. They’re 3-8 against those three teams. The Phillies are 7-3 against sub-.500 teams (2-1 versus OAK) – so they’re beating the teams they should. But, so far, they haven’t been competitive against the best teams on their schedule. In the 11 games against winning teams, Philadelphia has been outscored 51-35 and only a 10-run outburst against the Marlins on 4/16 keeps the run differential from being a disaster.
Right now, it’s too soon to say if these Mets wins against the Phillies are “good” or “expected.” The Phillies’ lineup certainly feels like they should be able to score runs against good teams. Yet they’ve scored just one run twice and have been shut out three times in 21 games. The Mets have yet to score fewer than two runs in any contest this season.
Anyway, enough on the Phillies.
In any stretch of the season, you’d expect a few guys to be playing really well, a few guys to be more or less what you’d expect and a few guys struggling. And that’s exactly what we’re seeing with the Mets’ hitters after 21 games. Going by OPS+, here are the breakdowns for those with at least 40 PA, compared to their career rates:
Exceeding – Eduardo Escobar, Francisco Lindor, Jeff McNeil, Brandon Nimmo
More or Less – Mark Canha (more) and Pete Alonso & James McCann (less)
Struggling – Robinson Cano, Starling Marte, Dominic Smith
The Mets are succeeding offensively not because everyone is doing well but rather because they start with a good talent base and they’re having normal “results vs. expectations” on a team-level. Nimmo has a lifetime 132 OPS+ – it’s nice to see a guy that good exceeding expectations. If we did this same breakdown at this time last year, the struggling category would have had Michael Conforto, Lindor, McCann, McNeil, and Smith. Last year would have been 381 struggling PA in April, compared to 171 here in 2022 with a game to play in the month.
The Mets went 10-11 last April, which was pretty good given how the offense struggled. May was when things really broke right for the team, as the bench mob led them to a 17-9 record and the smoke and mirrors offense was firing. The Mets are 15-6 right now, which is an exact match for their Pythagorean record.
You can make a case that the starting pitching is overperforming but if it was Jacob deGrom putting up the numbers instead of Tylor Megill, not many would feel that way, at least not so strongly. We’ll see if the starters can continue to give good results. But we should feel good that the offense can continue to give these types of results going forward, given the team-level production they’re received so far.
*****
At 15-6, the Mets are at a pace to win 116 games. No one expects them to do that and several of you roll your eyes whenever a pace-type stat is mentioned. And that’s okay. It’s brought up now just to compare it to an article from 3/29 which suggested that if exactly everything broke right and the starting position players and rotation matched their career-high in fWAR, that they would win 123 games. The playoff odds at FanGraphs have the Mets projected to 92.6 wins, up from a 90-win projection in late March.
Phillies are doing what they have to do. They win when they’re supposed to but have problems with the good teams. Their hitting , 6th in fWAR, isn’t at full throttle. Their starting pitching in 8th in fWAR and the relief pitching is 9th in fWAR. They’re just an average team and the Marlins might pass them.
Escobar, Lindor and McNeil with their OPS+ are 50 above their average. That would be unrealistic to expect it to be maintained. Marte should improve slightly but not 50 points worth. Cano’s spot will be improved in excess of 60 points when Davis replaces him as the DH.
Realitistly, the Mets are a top 3-5 team that is having a good start.
I think one thing to consider is that the season is so long that most teams are not either “good” or “expected (excellent)”, but a little of both. We know that the Mets are multiple teams throughout a season, so I think there is value in assessing your question at a more granular level – how is the competition doing say in the last 10 games. The Phillies came in to last night a bit on fire as you said, and so regardless of they finish 4th or under .500 in September, right now they are and expected excellent offensive team. Last nights no hitter was an epic win.
I do think you’re right in that some teams are different at different times.
The trick is to how to weight where the team is at the time when you play them. If the Phillies do end up a sub-.500 team, I’m not sure we should credit the Mets’ wins in April as “good” ones. It’s too soon for a lot of teams to have stamped themselves one way or another. We have history and expectations to consider in April. But for teams in the middle of the pack, it’s likely just not enough for us to consider written in stone. The Giants won 107 games last year and the expectations were that they were going to win 90+ this season. I feel good that those wins are legit “good” ones.
The Phillies won 82 games last year and expectations were a little better for this season. But that defense is likely bad, the starters are a question mark and the offense maybe not as good as expected. I’m just not confident that four wins against the Rockies automatically puts them in the “good column.” But it’s not written in stone either way.
Last year the Mets played the Padres 7 times in 9 games and went 4-3 against them, including 4-1 in the last five games against them. San Diego was 34-23 before the 7 in 9 stretch started. They finished the year 79-83. Did the Mets put them in their tailspin and should they get credit for that? Or did they play the Padres at the right time, when they were in free fall after a good start?
It’s a question that may be impossible to answer.