Carlos Beltran Retires

[dgwphotography]

Centerfield wrote: An important history lesson for those who think that the Mets injury issues might suddenly disappear in 2018.

The Mets injury issues won't disappear until they are no longer owned by a Wilpon.

[Edgy MD]

I don't think that necessarily follows. Nor do I think the Mets injury issues will ever disappear.

Though it doesn't take long to connect Jeff Wilpon to Mike Barwis.

[Frayed Knot]

dgwphotography wrote: The Mets injury issues won't disappear until they are no longer owned by a Wilpon.

That's absurd.

[Guest cooby]

I think of him as a Royal even now. Still remember the killer Bs.

[Guest cooby]

Or am I thinking of Killer Carloses?

[dgwphotography]

Frayed Knot wrote: dgwphotography wrote: The Mets injury issues won't disappear until they are no longer owned by a Wilpon. That's absurd.

Really? Am I the only one who remembers the stories of Jeffrey having a hand in the medical decisions?

[Ceetar]

All you have to do is look at other teams to realize that any effect the Wilpons have on these things is minimal at best.

[Centerfield]

If there's any truth to this article, it means the Mets injury issues go beyond just bad luck.

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/19404194/new-york-mets-injury-issues-go-far-disabled-list

It's based upon anonymous sources, which of course, begs scrutiny, but the author cites multiple sources.

The Yankees are subject to the same NY media. It's only the Mets that have this reputation.

So who's in charge? Multiple sources said the lack of a single medical point person allows for greater involvement by COO Jeff Wilpon in areas where he's lacking in professional expertise. They describe Wilpon as a micromanager who creates an environment in which the Mets simply whipsaw from one crisis to the next and are too often governed by how their decisions will be publicly perceived. "Jeff gets in the middle of everything that's going on, and he ends up doing more damage,'' said a person who has been involved in the Mets' internal operation. "He meddles. I can't come up with a more appropriate term.'' While Alderson concedes the Mets have room for improvement, he disputes the notion that Altchek isn't at the ballpark enough, or Wilpon is too involved in the medical and strength and conditioning operation, or Barwis' training methods have been less than effective.

[Ceetar]

The Yankees SHOULD have the same reputation, it's that the media has decided the Mets do and 'dig' for it. (I guarantee someone asked about Jeff's involvement versus no one asking about Hal's)

[Ceetar]

it took me only a few minutes to find an example of a Yankees injury that the Mets would've gotten killed for.

May second: The Yankees announced Tuesday afternoon they have placed the slumping first baseman on the 10-day DL with a right ankle bruise.

Bird initially hurt his ankle late in spring training

Oh, you hurt your ankle? meh, play through it for a month.

Oh wait you suck, I guess it's the ankle, let's get you some rest.

Three weeks later: He's supposed to leave Sunday for Tampa," Girardi said, along with quipping about the slugger "flying" around the bases when asked about his running program early on Friday at Yankee Stadium.

Oh, great. So he's fine now. just needed some rest right?

Mid July: has ankle surgery.

But it's fine, things happen right? not like the team would publicly blame the player right?

'The Daily News' Bill Madden reported earlier this month that team brass had become "exasperated" with Bird's inability to stay healthy and even was questioning his desire to return.'

oh.

[Centerfield]

Ceetar,

I don't know that there is a conspiracy to paint the Wilpons in a bad light while protecting the Yankees. I guess I can't say for certain, but I see no motivation for anything like this.

In fact, I feel like the NY press isn't critical enough of the Wilpons. But maybe that's just me.

Look, at the end of the day, there is a report, citing multiple sources, saying that this thing is real. If you choose not to believe it, that's fine. But I don't see how you can say it's "absurd" if dgw chooses to give it weight.

It's not like the report is based upon one anonymous source. And to be honest, this account is pretty much in line with everything that has ever been written about Jeff Wilpon. So I see why someone can find it credible.

Do you have evidence to refute that? Do you have instances where Crasnick was found to be not credible? Unless you have something like this, I don't think you can say it's absurd that someone believes it.

[Ceetar]

I didn't say it was absurd (and neither did Frayed Knot, he was responding to the idea that the injuries won't disappear until..)

But the Mets front office is huge. There are pretty much people you could get to 'confirm' roughly any opinion you have. This is why there is always someone willing to kick someone who's on his way out the door.

I'm not saying it's a conspiracy, I'm saying, especially in a dead period right now between the end of the season and actual trades/signings, there's a lot of sports writers just filling space. The Mets have this reputation because they have this reputation because we keep writing about this reputation because they have this reputation because it's easy to write about this..

See, there are always. ALWAYS going to be disagreements on which players the mets should or shouldn't sign, what they should or shouldn't do. There will ALWAYS be expensive players or 'all in' scenarios that the Mets reject on no more than difference of opinion or separate valuations that we aren't privy too. Medical decisions are the same way. There are always difference courses of action, different protocols, different workout regimes. It will ALWAYS be possible for a disagreeing writer to paint that as them being cheap or disfunctional because you happen to dislike Barwis or Jeff snubbed you once or Ray Ramirez looked like your ex's new boyfriend. Or you had a hamstring strain once and your doctor said THIS so why are the Mets disagreeing with that treatment? they must be full of it.

I'm not saying Jeff doesn't "meddle" but I bet more than half of the employees in the world would describe their boss, or their bosses boss, as meddling. Listen to any water cooler talk in any office and there will be grumblings about the way upper management runs things and what they prioritize. Now take one or two of those quotes, and apply it vaguely to the whole direction of the organization, and tell me it means something? nah.

Maybe Jeff (definitely Jeff?) shoved Barwis at the Mets because of a personal relationship/history. But it's not like he picked a cobbler and told him you're in charge of the uniforms or picked a pre-med student he went to school with who switched fields. He's an actual trainer who's qualified for the job. If I asked YOU to pick someone for a job you'd be more likely to hire someone you're familiar with too.

In summary, I think Jeff probably meddles too much, is not a very good owner (but it's so hard to evaluate this stuff) and pays too much attention to expected public/media response. But I think these things are extremely minor and are no way hamstringing the Mets in any meaningful way.

[Centerfield]

Forgive me. I read quickly and thought that you wrote the comment.

dgw didn't say injuries would stop when the Wilpons were no longer owners. He said injury issues. And he was referring to the issues I raised in my post, which was the mishandling of the Beltran injury.

There is a report out there that states that these issues, mishandling, miscommunication, etc., is directly linked to Jeff Wilpon.

I maintain that it's not absurd to believe that report. Especially since it's in line with everything ever written about Jeff Wilpon.

Sure, everyone grumbles about their boss. But there are few public figures that are as unequivocally despised as Jeff Wilpon. Every report is the same. I don't remember seeing a single article that says "All these reports are wrong, Jeff is actually a very good guy."

In summary, I think Jeff probably meddles too much, is not a very good owner (but it's so hard to evaluate this stuff) and pays too much attention to expected public/media response. But I think these things are extremely minor and are no way hamstringing the Mets in any meaningful way.

This is dead wrong. He is a terrible owner. He's so shitty at running his business that he can't fund a big market payroll despite playing in NY. Nothing is hamstringing the Mets more than the Wilpons. Not injuries, not poor scouting, not bad luck. All of these things hurt, but the Wilpons hamstring them the most.

[Ceetar]

I've said this before but I'm pretty sure you're deluding yourself if you think [random owner inserted] would suddenly just start pouring their own money into the Mets above and behind what the Mets themselves generate.

[Centerfield]

Ceetar wrote: I've said this before but I'm pretty sure you're deluding yourself if you think [random owner inserted] would suddenly just start pouring their own money into the Mets above and behind what the Mets themselves generate.

Nothing like that needs to be done to get the Mets back to a top tier payroll. All you have to do is find owners that will not intentionally divert baseball revenue for their own purposes.

It's undisputed that the Wilpons, to offset the losses from Madoff, took out loans that were hundreds of millions of dollars against SNY and the Mets. SNY and the Mets, have been saddled with those payments, while the principal went into the owners pockets. (Or more accurately, into the pockets of the owners' creditors.)

Those loans (ranging from $450 to $700 million depending on reports) have saddled the Mets and SNY with incredible overhead. Overhead that has nothing to do with baseball.

New owners wouldn't have to bankroll the Mets to get them competitive in payroll. All they would have to do, is not pilfer them for cash.

[Ceetar]

Again, we don't know their finances and it depends on how you define 'Mets' revenue. Does that include SNY? naming rights? revenue from renting out Citi Field to Beyonce?

We know they took various loans. We don't know if they're specifically using 'Mets' revenue to repay those loans.

What we know is that the Wilpons have additional expenses that are loans from these things. (this isn't exactly unique to them) Those expenses also don't go away in a sale. It'd be part of the equation.

And a new owner would've just spent a billion dollars and would be unlikely to want to operate something at a loss. they might even want to make a little profit to start recouping some of that.