To reach the impossible height. . .

[Mex17]

All this drama with Harvey has me thinking back to 2013 when I actually thought that this guy had a chance to be the "next Seaver".

We all know that is not going to happen, but let's throw out the hypothetical anyway just for fun. . .

What would have to occur for some unnamed and perhaps not yet even born future Met to eventually surpass Seaver as the undisputed best player in the history of the franchise?

Let your imaginations run wild. . .

[DocTee]

During his heyday I recall a WATP thread where virtually none of the posters here said they would deal Harvey straight up for the Marlins' Giancarlo Stanton.

How the mighty have fallen, indeed.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Mex17 wrote: What would have to occur for some unnamed and perhaps not yet even born future Met to eventually surpass Seaver as the undisputed best player in the history of the franchise?

Ceetar declaring him the best ever would be good enough for me! Do'h, I'm
gonna get hit with a sneaker...

[Benjamin Grimm]

Mex17 wrote: What would have to occur for some unnamed and perhaps not yet even born future Met to eventually surpass Seaver as the undisputed best player in the history of the franchise?

Four Cy Youngs? Lead the team to two world championships? Pose for a yearbook cover with eight baseballs arranged in the shape of the number 8?

[stevejrogers]

Considering Seaver and some guy named Spahn are neck and neck for greatest pitcher to ever throw an MLB game pitch for the Mets, the heights of the second or third tier HOF guys (Pedro, Ryan, Glavine) seems more of a probable attainment.

[stevejrogers]

FWIW, Doc’s career trajectory was ruined just as much by arm injuries as his personal demon issues had.

But Doc was on the right trajectory for that “guy who will replace Seaver.” Blazing hot start, early championship with a second NL East crown. Pretty amazing that he still put in a respectable MLB career, aside from the Skank Stank years, after all the issues since the end of the 1980s.

[Edgy MD]

DocTee wrote: During his heyday I recall a WATP thread where virtually none of the posters here said they would deal Harvey straight up for the Marlins' Giancarlo Stanton. How the mighty have fallen, indeed.

Nah, I was wide open to it: http://archives.thecranepool.net/23600/f1_t23693.shtml

[Ceetar]

Mex17 wrote: All this drama with Harvey has me thinking back to 2013 when I actually thought that this guy had a chance to be the "next Seaver". We all know that is not going to happen, but let's throw out the hypothetical anyway just for fun. . . What would have to occur for some unnamed and perhaps not yet even born future Met to eventually surpass Seaver as the undisputed best player in the history of the franchise? Let your imaginations run wild. . .

undisputed? roughly everyone older than 45 or so would have to be dead, so first at least 60 years have to pass.

You'd need a career Met, give or take a few years, to accumulate the volume. Like, if David Wright didn't have stenosis he's probably there. (not undisputed though)

You're going to need a peak though, and pitchers just don't for generally very good reasons pitch with the volume you'd need to reach Seaver's '71 season. (Or Gooden's '85) But '13 Harvey and '16 Thor were roughly as good as Seaver that year, just for 2/3rds the innings.

so like, if Thor kept doing that over say a 12 year Mets career? It's not impossible. He'd still lack that shear volume based year though, unless maybe he did something like bumgarner did in the playoffs where he pitches a ton and they win it all?

[Centerfield]

A home grown Hall of Famer. Wins multiple championships and spends the majority of his career with the Mets. Goes in to the Hall undisputed as a Met.

Would help if he wasn't a dick.

[Ceetar]

Centerfield wrote: Would help if he wasn't a dick.

Well, Tom Seaver, you know..

[stevejrogers]

Centerfield wrote: A home grown Hall of Famer. Wins multiple championships and spends the majority of his career with the Mets. Goes in to the Hall undisputed as a Met. Would help if he wasn't a dick.

Also helps if his career totals wound up on the Probably should add Pedro on there/Spahn/Seaver level of iconic pitcherz

[Edgy MD]

One thing that would help is if somebody reversed this trend of the best pitchers pitching fewer and fewer innings.

Certainly no pitcher could otherwise approach Seaver's legacy.

[Guest 41Forever]

Ceetar wrote: Centerfield wrote: Would help if he wasn't a dick. Well, Tom Seaver, you know..

Are you saying Tom Seaver was a jerk like Harvey?

[Benjamin Grimm]

He wasn't. But there's certainly evidence that he was a different kind of jerk than Harvey is.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Edgy MD wrote: During his heyday I recall a WATP thread where virtually none of the posters here said they would deal Harvey straight up for the Marlins' Giancarlo Stanton. How the mighty have fallen, indeed. Nah, I was wide open to it: http://archives.thecranepool.net/23600/f1_t23693.shtml

Oh, I was WIDE open to it.

Imagine if we'd offered Harvey and Rosario for Bogaerts and, say, a young arm like Rodriguez?

[Benjamin Grimm]

In hindsight, the winter after the 2015 season would have been the perfect time to trade Harvey.

My personal plan for Harvey and the Mets would have been to trade him after the 2016 season, but as actual events have shown, that would have been too late.

[G-Fafif]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: He wasn't. But there's certainly evidence that he was a different kind of jerk than Harvey is.

There's more transparency let alone immediacy today than there was when Seaver pitched and for quite a while thereafter. For the most part, we could only glean and gauge from stories in the next day's paper what these guys were like (putting aside the player who is never forgiven for dickishly not signing a ball or something). In Worst Team, as an aside, Klapisch and Harper called out the Mets from the late '80s who were the worst to deal with. It was a revelation in 1993 to learn that Jesse Orosco was an a-hole in 1986 (must be said I noticed nobody seemed more genuinely friendly meeting with reporters from the old days at the 2016 reunion than Jesse). Certainly some guys' "moodiness" transcended day-to-day norms and prehistoric communications -- and occasionally a columnist would let loose -- but the bit where several reporters report several hours before the game that somebody doesn't want to talk and implies he was a jerk about it, and everybody who cares about the team is aware of it instantly, and it's talked to the high heavens in advance of first pitch...that didn't exist in Seaver's day, in Orosco's day, in Bonilla's day, not fully until this decade.

Thus, Seaver (when he played) wasn't a jerk. He was laser-focused on his next start.

Edited April 26, 2018 by Guest

[seawolf17]

David Wright, if he hadn't gotten hurt, would have probably been there by now. In what would have been 13 full seasons, he would have passed 2,000 hits and would be close to 300 homers.

[Benjamin Grimm]

It's true that a lot of players get a bad reputation based on the way they treat reporters (I think Eddie Murray was an example of that) but that's something I care nothing about. The rap on Seaver is that, while he does seem to appreciate the fans when he's on the field and they're in the stands, he's less appreciative of them when he's in a position to interact with them face-to-face.

I can appreciate that someone going about his daily business doesn't always want to be bothered, but you can be polite about it or you can be rude about it. And from what I've heard, Seaver is often rude about it.

[Benjamin Grimm]

seawolf17 wrote: David Wright, if he hadn't gotten hurt, would have probably been there by now. In what would have been 13 full seasons, he would have passed 2,000 hits and would be close to 300 homers.

Yes, but that's still a long way from Seaver territory.

I'm very conservative when it comes to retiring uniform numbers, but I do think that David's 5 should be the next one retired. Even though Cooperstown isn't going to happen for him.

[G-Fafif]

I've often wondered what it would take to supplant Tom Terrific as No. 1 among all Mets. I don't think there'll ever be another starting pitcher who does what he did for as long as he did. Only Doc was on his level for a couple of years, and then a little less so every year until injuries and everything else took an irreversible toll. You also have to consider the narrative value of Seaver as the franchise's first true professional, first true star, best player on the most unlikely world champion ever. Instead of flaming out after bursting on the scene, he got better and for the most part stayed great right up to June 15, 1977 (with his truncated returns in 1983 and 1987 not detracting one iota from his legend).

If you could craft an everyday player out of the best of Wright, Strawberry, Hernandez and Piazza and have him spend an entire career with the Mets while the Mets win multiple championships and make regular visits to the postseason, then maybe there'd be some competition.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I think right now Conforto has the best chance to be that guy, but so much has to go right that the odds have to be against him, as they would for any player at this early stage in his career.

[Guest cooby]

Edgy MD wrote: One thing that would help is if somebody reversed this trend of the best pitchers pitching fewer and fewer innings.

yes, because otherwise this hypothetical dude will not be a pitcher

[G-Fafif]

seawolf17 wrote: David Wright, if he hadn't gotten hurt, would have probably been there by now. In what would have been 13 full seasons, he would have passed 2,000 hits and would be close to 300 homers.

Wright would have had to have racked up a couple of MVPs or at least been the no-doubt perennial All-Star starting third baseman and capture imaginations outside the Metsie confines to gain parity with Seaver (plus maybe win a World Series, though that can't fairly be put on a single player, no matter how great). Wright's hypothetically uninterrupted career would likely be considered very, very good, maybe excellent, the kind for whom pleas to appreciate his accomplishments would be written every January when he barely stayed on the Hall of Fame ballot. Seaver's career was and is universally acknowledged as one of the best ever. That's what an everyday player would have to put on the board to be half of "Seaver and [blank]," if not "[blank], then Seaver."

I agree Wright was en route to undisputed best position player in Mets history, and may still hold that honor as is. Throw in the entire career as a Met and how much he took the Captain role to heart, the only way No. 5 isn't retired for him is if Mets ownership clings to some dopey "only Hall of Famers who go in as Mets" rule.

[Ceetar]

G-Fafif wrote: I agree Wright was en route to undisputed best position player in Mets history, and may still hold that honor as is. Throw in the entire career as a Met and how much he took the Captain role to heart, the only way No. 5 isn't retired for him is if Mets ownership clings to some dopey "only Hall of Famers who go in as Mets" rule.

I think it depends if we're differentiating between 'best Met' and 'best player' Wright, without the Stenosis, almost definitely surpasses Seaver in strict baseball value to the team. Whether that includes 'championship' or 'intangible' value...

[batmagadanleadoff]

Are you saying that as of around 2015, Wright was on pace to surpass Seaver as greatest Met? Because I don't think Wright was ever anywhere near Seaver's legend. Ever.

[Ceetar]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Are you saying that as of around 2015, Wright was on pace to surpass Seaver as greatest Met? Because I don't think Wright was ever anywhere near Seaver's legend. Ever.

Wright has 52.2 fWAR. Seaver had 68.

Even factoring in a normal decline, let's say 4 a season he missed out on. so like 64? and he'd easily tick above the next few years.

And if just one of those was much better? if he had one more MVP caliber season in him? he'd be there. He'd also probably be a Hall of Famer.

[seawolf17]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Are you saying that as of around 2015, Wright was on pace to surpass Seaver as greatest Met? Because I don't think Wright was ever anywhere near Seaver's legend. Ever.

I'll cede my perspective on this is skewed because Seaver was before my time, but if David Wright had kept up his 2013 pace through the end of his contract -- and at only 30, that wasn't unfathomable -- then yes, he was on pace to be the Best Met Ever. (2014 was a slight step down, and then obviously everything fell apart.)

Just using his 2013 numbers -- even in only 112 games -- if he had done exactly that as an average for the next seven seasons, he finishes 2020 with almost 2,500 hits, almost 350 home runs.

Let's say he played an average of 130 games from 2014-2020 at that same 2013 pace. (That's 503 AB, 154 hits a year.) Then he finishes with 369 homers, which puts him even with Todd Helton and Ralph Kiner, and 81st all time in hits.

I'm just spitballing here, obviously, but yes, there was a point where he was on pace to be an all-time great, and yes, surpassing Seaver in my mind.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I would say that 2,500 hits and 350 homers is not even close to Tom Seaver territory.

[seawolf17]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I would say that 2,500 hits and 350 homers is not even close to Tom Seaver territory.

Career to career, no, of course not. But Met career to Met career, yes. To me, anyway, although I honestly can see both sides of the argument.