Winter 2017/18 non-NYM FA Deals

[Centerfield]

And the feeling is justified. Every indication they’ve been sending out suggests this. At least in Callaway they have a “plan” to fix the pitching. They don’t even pretend to want to improve the offense. Everything we have heard so far isn’t even anywhere near enough to offset what we traded away.

And I call bullshit on Sandy playing things close to the vest. The man telegraphs everything. Western Union, as Keith says. A few years ago the buzz was it would be Cuddyer then dick. And that’s what it was. The next year it was Zobrist or dick. And the only thing that saved that was the Cespedes market cratering and Yo coming back to them.

And last year he was very positive about bringing back Yo, and that’s what he did. He was public about needing to trade Bruce and he tried desperately to do so. The idea of Sandy being covert and close to the vest is a myth.

[Edgy MD]

Lefty Specialist wrote: Edgy MD wrote: Don't get exorcised. It's like this every offseason until it isn't. Yeah, but I kind of have a feeling in the pit of my stomach that they're not going to do much and just magically hope that the pitching will be fabulous because they hired a pitching coach as manager.

I think it takes just as much magic to believe in transactions.

[Centerfield]

Edgy MD wrote: Edgy MD wrote: Don't get exorcised. It's like this every offseason until it isn't. Yeah, but I kind of have a feeling in the pit of my stomach that they're not going to do much and just magically hope that the pitching will be fabulous because they hired a pitching coach as manager. I think it takes just as much magic to believe in transactions.

That’s silly and dismissive.

If you want a great team, get great players. Hiring a pitching coach is not a realistic path to success.

If that were true, the great players would be cheap and Mickey Callaway would cost a hundred million dollars.

[Edgy MD]

Centerfield wrote: That’s silly and dismissive.

It's certainly not meant as such.

It's just as legitimate, and my point of view, that if you want a truly great team, build one from the ground up, and don't believe that that you have to rebuild every offseason.

Transactions take a team south just as often as they take a team north, and in the case of the Mets, moreso.

[Guest d'Kong76]

My magic is 'when everyone doesn't want Walker for four years we'll
get him for two.' Merry Christmas!

[Centerfield]

Edgy MD wrote: Centerfield wrote: That’s silly and dismissive. It's certainly not meant as such. It's just as legitimate, and my point of view, that if you want a truly great team, build one from the ground up, and don't believe that that you have to rebuild every offseason. Transactions take a team south just as often as they take a team north, and in the case of the Mets, moreso.

Building a great team is not picking between buying free agents and building one from the ground up. It's both.

The Mets have done the "building" part. They have seven home grown starting pitchers. A home grown closer. Several home grown RP options. They have home grown position players at 1B, SS, C, RF and also currently at CF and 2B. They should be supplementing that core now.

Free agent transactions can certainly take you north. A bad free agent signing can take you south, only because it saps money that would have been spent elsewhere. But a free agent signing cannot take you south if you otherwise don't spend the money.

We are not arguing over who to spend on, it's whether to spend. And if the choices are spend, or not spend, choosing to spend literally cannot make you worse.

If the Mets had two options right now, spend nothing, or re-sign Jason Bay, today, to his contract over again, re-signing Jason Bay cannot make the Mets any worse.

And sure, you can talk about how a bad deal keeps us off the board next year. That's bullshit. There is no indication things will be any different next year, than this year, or years past.

[Centerfield]

And you know full well that bringing in players is far more likely to improve a team than changing a pitching coach.

Teams bringing in great players go from middle of the pack to division winners all the time. The other scenario has never happened. Ever.

[Edgy MD]

I didn't endorse winning by changing a pitching coach. I endorsed winning by building an organization.

[Edgy MD]

Teams bringing in great players go from middle of the pack to division winners all the time. The other scenario has never happened. Ever.

I'm not sure what the other scenario is. But teams thinking they are bringing in great players go to south all the time.

Not never.

[Edgy MD]

Centerfield wrote: We are not arguing over who to spend on, it's whether to spend.

That's certainly not what I'm arguing about.

I disagreed that the team isn't going to do anything this offseason. They are. And I disagreed that they are relying on magic. I don't think disagreeing with that is silly and I don't know why you want to throw down over that. I wasn't even addressing it to you.

[Centerfield]

I’m not throwing down. Just disagreeing. Sorry about the tone.

You said that it always feels like they will do something but they always end up doing something. That’s not true. Sometimes they do nothing.

Then you equated transactions to being the equivalent of bringing in a pitching coach. That’s also not true and you know that.

I realize free agents can fall short of expectations but they cannot make a team worse than doing nothing.

Let me illustrate.

Giving $5 million to Lincecum right now is foolish. That money is better spent on someone else. But if the choices are $5 million for Timmy, or $5 million to Fred’s boat payment, then you pick the $5 million on Timmy.

Lincecum will probably give you nothing, but he can’t make you worse. You cut him if he stinks. But Tim gives you a much better chance at contributing than Fred’s boat.

And this is my point. Bad free agent signings are bad because they prevent you from getting better players. But if the choice is bad free agents versus not spending at all and not investing elsewhere , you pick bad free agents.

[Edgy MD]

Centerfield wrote: I’m not throwing down. Just disagreeing. Sorry about the tone.

Thanks indeed.

Centerfield wrote: You said that it always feels like they will do something but they always end up doing something. That’s not true. Sometimes they do nothing.

Which offseason are you referring to? Last year they handed out the third-most money.

Centerfield wrote: Then you equated transactions to being the equivalent of bringing in a pitching coach. That’s also not true and you know that.

I certainly didn't mean to do that. I think it's untrue that the team is banking on a pitching coach and hoping for magic. I think we all know that. If they've not done a lot of transactions (and that will likely change at least somewhat), it's far more true to say they are banking on Yoenis Cespedes to produce more than 1.5 WAR and Noah Syndergaard to produce more than 1.4 fWAR, and so on.

Centerfield wrote: I realize free agents can fall short of expectations but they cannot make a team worse than doing nothing.

Well, I promise you I don't endorse doing nothing. But what signing a free agent can do is compromise your ability to do the next, smarter thing.

So I'll endorse some free agents, but not others. I don't endorse going aggressively after Todd Frazier (for instance), certainly. And if an aggressive pitch at him is currently the best option, I endorse looking for the next thing.

I want spending, but deliberate and thoughtful spending. That's why my interest is far bigger for the annual productivity that the Reds get out of Joey Votto's contract, over the eyepopping but unstable production the Marlins have gotten out of Giancarlo Stanton's.

He may be the MVP now, but he's far more likely (than some) to turn into a white elephant. And that hurts a team who is looking for next year's MVP.

Spend!

[Edgy MD]

From the other thread.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Plus, and this is just my own theory I tell myself, but I think its clear the problem with the ownership isn't that they're evil but that they're stupid, and the main stupid guy is 81 years old.

Yeah. And I'm thankful Sandy's smarter, though he's got his share of misses. And if Fred's restraints are Sandy's challenges, I'm certainly going to root for the latter to remain and do his best work within those restraints.

[Centerfield]

I think I was mainly referring to the Michael Cuddyer offseason where they didn’t do nearly enough.

After clarification I think I largely agree with you.

So I guess at the end, this is the order:

1. Spend wisely (meaning money you choose not to spend is set aside for reinvestment)
2. Spend foolishly
3. Don’t spend at all

[ashie62]

Edgy MD wrote: Centerfield wrote: We are not arguing over who to spend on, it's whether to spend. That's certainly not what I'm arguing about. I disagreed that the team isn't going to do anything this offseason. They are. And I disagreed that they are relying on magic. I don't think disagreeing with that is silly and I don't know why you want to throw down over that. I wasn't even addressing it to you.

Look, it takes savvy building, money, a lotta luck (and some magic) to get er done.

I dont see much yet. My best guess is the Mets lost bucco money in 2017 and we are now lean.

Sandy will try and we shall see. It hurts to see other teams get their xmas gifts while we wait.

Patience is a virtue that I struggle with.

Be well.

[Ceetar]

Centerfield wrote: I think I was mainly referring to the Michael Cuddyer offseason where they didn’t do nearly enough. After clarification I think I largely agree with you. So I guess at the end, this is the order: 1. Spend wisely (meaning money you choose not to spend is set aside for reinvestment) 2. Spend foolishly 3. Don’t spend at all

you mean the...the offseason prior to the 2015 season? that one?

They've been linked to roughly every second baseman. Some good, some meh, but it'd be surprising if they didn't get one. If the Mets were okay with a budget just under the luxury tax I don't think they'd just give Walker the 4 years because that's what he's asking for initially when there are so many other guys available too.

The other things they need are

1. a top flight catcher (not easy or necessarily available)
2. a good hitting CFer. Cain maybe, but there aren't a lot of these either, if they're serious about real defense. And nimmo and Lagares aren't worthless.
3. a backup first baseman that has flexibility elsewhere. For better or worse, they're going to give Rosario and Smith their reps, something most Mets fans begged for last year (and we wouldn't be much more informed if they'd each gotten another 100pa) These were high rated prospects and even if their promotion docked the system, we haven't actually reaped the rewards yet. So the guy they sign for this role is tricky..is he going to play 1B a lot or a little? is he going to be a 'veteran' that expects 500 pa or a role player that's fine filling in? Or is it just Wilmer Flores?

[Edgy MD]

I think Nimmo can be that good-hitting centerfielder, given a chance and a philosophically sound set of marching orders. If they land somebody with a good chance to be an all star, good, but otherwise, I like him. They need outfielders, certainly, but a righthanded guy of the Hairston or Byrd variety wouldn't kill me. Somebody who can get regular or semi-regular time until Conforto is healthy, and then mix in as a versatile sub.

Injuries kick in, and that guy is suddenly overexposed, so they probably need to be ready to deal in-season to fill a gap, which they haven't done in a while. They ride out crises, or find reserves on the cheap (waiver wire or a PTBNL trade or something), or (worst of all) rush players back from injury.

[Edgy MD]

Tom F. Koehler to the Dodgers on a one-year deal.

[ashie62]

Edgy MD wrote: From the other thread. John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Plus, and this is just my own theory I tell myself, but I think its clear the problem with the ownership isn't that they're evil but that they're stupid, and the main stupid guy is 81 years old. Yeah. And I'm thankful Sandy's smarter, though he's got his share of misses. And if Fred's restraints are Sandy's challenges, I'm certainly going to root for the latter to remain and do his best work within those restraints.

I would agree and would say that yes, Sandy has had his misses, but tries and will continue to do the best he can with what he has to work with. I very well understand it will rattle our nerves at times.

Fred Wilpon, for me its' a matter of having compassion for someone whose brain and body may very well be boggled.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Ashie62 wrote: Fred Wilpon, for me its' a matter of having compassion for someone whose brain and body may very well be boggled.

Compassion for his boggled mind? He should have some compassion
for us and sell an office building and put the proceeds into his baseball
team. Boggled? Bah.

[ashie62]

d'Kong76 wrote: Ashie62 wrote: Fred Wilpon, for me its' a matter of having compassion for someone whose brain and body may very well be boggled. Compassion for his boggled mind? He should have some compassion for us and sell an office building and put the proceeds into his baseball team. Boggled? Bah.

Yeah, I went pollyanna on that one. lol

[Guest d'Kong76]

It happens.

[seawolf17]

Edgy MD wrote: Tom F. Koehler to the Dodgers on a one-year deal.

Brandon Morrow: average starter for years. Signs with Dodgers at 32 after the Blue Jays switch him to the bullpen; throws 43 bullpen innings in 2017 to a 2.06 ERA.
Tom Koehler: average starter for years. Signs with Dodgers after the Blue Jays switch him to the bullpen; turns 32 in June.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Different guys, though. The issue with Morrow was never stuff or pitching acumen-- it's been staying hale. The odd dominant outing aside, Koehler's been workmanlike at best and never nearly as K-happy as Morrow, and, well... he pitches about as well as he was educated.

[seawolf17]

(I know all of this. I like nudging you all as much as you like nudging me.)

[ashie62]

We appreciate it.

Yelich expressed his winter of discontent as a Marlin. Also catcher J.T.R


It would be redundant to get him, but the kid is a natural.

[Ceetar]

seawolf17 wrote: (I know all of this. I like nudging you all as much as you like nudging me.)

So you're saying this odd obsession with these guys isn't going to end shortly? ;-)

[A Boy Named Seo]

Giving $5 million to Lincecum right now is foolish. That money is better spent on someone else. But if the choices are $5 million for Timmy, or $5 million to Fred’s boat payment, then you pick the $5 million on Timmy.

MAYBE IT'S NOT FOOLISH

http://m.mlb.com/cutfour/2017/12/19/263767180

[smg58]

Matt Adams to the Nationals for 1 year and 4 million. A good deal for the Nats, unfortunately.

Yonder Alonso gets two years and 16 million from the Indians.

Carlos Santana should be extra nice to his agent this Christmas.

[Ceetar]

smg58 wrote: Matt Adams to the Nationals for 1 year and 4 million. A good deal for the Nats, unfortunately.

A neutral deal for the Nats. he's younger than Adam Lind but he's basically Adam Lind, slightly cheaper. This doesn't make the Nationals better in any way, though it didn't stop hack Joel Sherman from skewering the Mets for it.