Omar's failure

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

This morning, I'm totally not getting the great job Omar supposedly did over the winter.

Like the Kaz-for-Zambrano deal, he didn't do much crucial prep in gauging the Benson-for-Julio deal: let me get this straight, Mazzilli exposed Jorge Julio's unknown weakness yesterday by having an old, slow guy run on him at will? You have to be the guy's former manager to come up witih that plan?

for this, we gave up a decent starting pitcher, that we only need slightly more than we need air itself?

Challenge deals like Benson (or Kaz, for that matter) rarely get the unanimous reaction that we dumb fans gave this one: "How the fuck can you do that?" we all pretty much said at the time. "Now we're short a starting pitcher." The optimets among us said that Julio must be much better than we thought--but in fact, he's much worse. Much, much worse. A pitcher who can be run on at will had better get nearly everybody he faces out, which ain't Julio, by a long shot. This trade was a total, reckless, irresponsible trade by Omar, showing how he can win without an actual rotation.

I'm sick of these WTF? challenge trades in which the Mets demonstrate that they're mentally challenged.

[Guest Rotblatt]

This seemed to be an appropriate thread for the following from the Post:

]Rival executives describe no GM as more aggressively pursuing a trade than Omar Minaya, who is hunting for pitching. And the key word is "pitching." Minaya sees a starting market that right now is underwhelming with Odalis Perez, Kyle Lohse and Bruce Chen. So he is also looking at late-inning relievers with the idea that would liberate Aaron Heilman to return to the rotation. Minaya, for example, has called Texas several times about closer Akinori Otsuka, whom the Mets GM has liked since the righty was with San Diego. He has been told no deal.

So NOW Minaya realizes that it's hard to get a decent fucking starting pitcher? And that relievers are easier to acquire?

Freakin' moron.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

The unseen part of this equation is how lucky he's been in some ways: If you told him that Glavine, Pedro and Trax would be healthy through May 20th, and have the w/l record they do (something like 13-6) and the ERA and K they have, even he would agree that would be totally unexpected. So if he was expected a worse record from them, just how good was he expecting the end of the rotation to be for the team to be competitive?

Challenge trades are great because they miminize the amount of "Yes, but..." deflective BS that GMs (and some fans) like to spread out to obscure the real issues. By acquiring relievers and trading starters this winter, Omar plainly declared the Mets' starting depth to be much stronger than it's been. No way around that. If the season continues like this (bad tail end of the rotation, and the bullpen not nearly compensating), no way does Omar get a pass. This is his staff, constructed just as he wanted it.

Even Victor's arm troubles can't be blamed on TB anymore. They fooled us? They lied to poor widdle defenseless us? Okay, but when you saw how VZ pitched, what did you do about it, Omar? WTF did YOU do, asshole? You traded off your rotation, that's what.

[Guest old original jb]

The great job he did over the winter was getting Delgado in trade. Minaya does his best work by being able to execute the obvious moves. This is in contrast to the "too clever by half" gyrations of the prior management group that brought us injured Moe and Jeromy Burnitz instead of seriously pursuing players like Vladimir Guerrero. They were unable to execute the obvious moves most of the time, and so instead presented "alternatives" as if they were what we should have wanted all along.

Did Minaya trade one starter too many this offseason? It really depends on what Soler, Pelfry, and Heilman are able to do and how long Bannister takes to recoup. If none of these guys will step up then the starting depth was indeed way overestimated. If one or more can, then the (admittedly) risky strategy of building bullpen depth at the expense of two starters won't look so bad.

My gut feeling is that MInaya is better able to recognize his failures than those who have held his office before him, less likely to cling to losing strategies once they stop working for him. He went out on a limb on this one, but I think he at least has the sense to crawl back in if he needs to rather than hold on until the branch falls off.

In sum, he did a great job getting Delgado and building the bullpen, but in building the pen took a big risk with starting pitching. Unfortunately, this represents a huge improvement in management over prior administrations

[nymr83]

]The great job he did over the winter was getting Delgado in trade

I don't look at this as a good trade as much as a "see i can spend fred's money" move.
The cameron trade is looking good so far despite all the negative reaction. I still don't like it, but Nady has been good.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

Could you not have done much of what Omar accomplished, given his budget and a six-week Berlitz course in Spanish?

I just don;t think we're sufficiently recognizing here that he CHOSE to deal Benson and Seo for middle relief, and now is hustling madly to find two mediocre starters (and failing so far.) This isn't an innocent oversight, this is an arrogant policy-decision that has blown up in his face almost immediately, that the Mets are trying desperately to spin as "who-knew?"

Who knew we'd need five starters?
Who knew starters would be hard to find?
Who knew Lima couldn't really pitch?
Who knew how often starting pitchers get injured?

Not Omar.

[Guest KC]

No, you are spinning it as, "who knew".

oe: spelled "as" wrong

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

So this was the plan if a couple of starters went down early? To pitch hopeless retreads who got bombed out for a few weeks and then promote kids from AA?

If that's knowing, I'll take ignorance.

[Guest old original jb]

Bret Sabermetric wrote: Could you not have done much of what Omar accomplished, given his budget and a six-week Berlitz course in Spanish?

No. The six week Berlitz course would have been the approach used in the past, and it would have resulted in Pedro and Carlos playing for a team in the Bronx. Plus I somehow don't think that Fred and Co. would have trusted me with as big a budget. What I'm saying is that I think that actually landing the big deals on a consistent basis is a lot tougher than it looks to us armchair GM's and this seems to be Omar Minaya's real strength--one which has been missing from the organization for a long time.

[Guest KC]

>>>promote kids from AA? <<<

I think you need to find out who Soler is, he's not a kid from AA.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

No, I'm not quite that ignorant.

Look, spin it how you like, they weren't telling us that "Soler is the solution, he's just a few more starts away, be patient" a few weeks ago. That's all I'm pointing out here.

NOW he's the solution because of a lack of other options. I'm just trying to point out that distinction. If you'd rather make this out to be some anti-Mets agenda thing on my part, and therefore discount it completely, color me shocked.

[Guest KC]

I don't need to hear how many starts a pitcher might be away from coming
to the bigs weeks before he might or not be needed from the front office.

I pay very little attention to what the front office says, why would they (or
should they) make their plans or wishes known?

Like Vito said, "never tell anyone outside the family what you're thinking again".

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

I don't see what so wrong about implying that you've got plenty of viable options in the minors. They implied the opposite for several weeks, up until this morning (or yesterday afternoon, technically).

Seems to me there's several options available once you've traded off the back end of your rotation:

1) .We have guys in our bullpen who can step into a starter's role if we need them to. Rejected

2) we have guys in the minors who are ready and rarin' to go. Likewise rejected

3) #5 pitchers are a dime a dozen, we can pick someone good up any time we want BZZZZZZZZZZ---wrong

4) We have some injured starters who could come back , maybe not immediately, but we're just talking about a few starts of tryout camp, max The cupboard is bare

5) There are some quality FA pitchers still available Not if you're the Mets. Clemens might do on other rosters, but never here.

so we're stuck with

6) Pray to God these five starters somehow make it through the seaon unscathed because the fans will rightly be howling for our skins if anyone on our staff of aged and fragile pitchers gets hurt

So you've got some howling here. Ignore it. Maybe it's the wind.

[metsmarathon]

my personal thinking all along was that soler was to be an option if anything untoward happened to our rotation.

that said, i'd still like to see heilman in there, but i guess there are still other options to explore. in a way, its a good, if frustrating, thing to know that he's still available as a last resort.

[Guest GYC]

Bret Sabermetric wrote: Could you not have done much of what Omar accomplished, given his budget and a six-week Berlitz course in Spanish? I just don;t think we're sufficiently recognizing here that he CHOSE to deal Benson and Seo for middle relief, and now is hustling madly to find two mediocre starters (and failing so far.) This isn't an innocent oversight, this is an arrogant policy-decision that has blown up in his face almost immediately, that the Mets are trying desperately to spin as "who-knew?" Who knew we'd need five starters? Who knew starters would be hard to find? Who knew Lima couldn't really pitch? Who knew how often starting pitchers get injured? Not Omar.

I can't blame him too much:
Pedro
Glavine
Trachsel
Zambrano - injured
Bannister - injured
Heilman - unwilling to use him (unrightfully so)
Iriki - suspension
Oliver - maybe didn't see him for rotation
Maine - injured
Lima - hahahha
Gonzalez - see above
Soler - coming up (apparently)
Pelfrey (?) - was supposed to come up but a poor performance prevented it

All potentional options... I don't think you can plan for 3 injuries and a suspension.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

So there's your vote for "Who knew?", KC.

[Guest GYC]

Bret Sabermetric wrote: So there's your vote for "Who knew?", KC.

When you have 13 people who could potentially start in the majors, I mean, come on. Although, I'm definitely not giving Omar an excuse or pass because his complete refusal to use Heilman, or at least Oliver, in the rotation.

At the same time, shame on him for even thinking that Lima or Gonzalez would work in the rotation.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

GYC wrote: ]When you have 13 people who could potentially start in the majors, I mean, come on.

Actually there's 15, counting you and me.

[Guest KC]

BS: >>>So there's your vote for "Who knew?", KC.<<<

I wasn't aware that GYC was with the club's front office. I would have showered
or at least combed my hair.

[Guest GYC]

="KC"]BS: >>>So there's your vote for "Who knew?", KC.<<< I wasn't aware that GYC was with the club's front office. I would have showered or at least combed my hair.

Well, that was unnecessary.

[Guest KC]

You misunderstand GYC, I think. Bret says the front office is spinning then
uses your post as an example of "who knew" after I said he's the one who's
saying "who knew" and ....

Maybe I should go rent a movie, or pay more attention to the Sawx/Phils game.

[Guest GYC]

KC wrote: Maybe I should go rent a movie, or pay more attention to the Sawx/Phils game.

It's just me.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

Ridiculous. The Mets come up empty, and now they're claiming that they dealt off starting pitchers because no one could possibly anticipate this problem. A blind man on a galloping horse could see this coming, and almost every one here, sighted or not, did anticipate it.

The real way for you to frame this argument, KC, is to say that EVEN IF THE METS HAD HELD ONTO BENSON AND SEO and broken camp with seven viable starters, then Zambrano and Bannister and Maine and Lima and Gonzales AND BENSON AND SEO had been hurt or ineffective, I would stil be making this Met-hating argument. That's the way to go here. I have no rebuttal for that argument.

Get on the stick here, okay?.

[Guest KC]

BS: >>>and now they're claiming that they dealt off starting pitchers because no one could possibly anticipate this problem<<<

The Mets are claiming what? We're gonna need some quotes.

[Gwreck]

I really think at this point this thread is becoming pointless.

Nobody doubts the Mets had plenty of starting options after the 2005 season.
Nobody doubts that trading away Seo has worked out pretty well.
Few if any supported trading away Benson once we traded Seo.

Few if any doubt that the injuries/suspension this year are more than normal but Lima time could've been avoided if we retained a little more starting depth than before.

But we've reached point of Horse. Dead. Beaten.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

Go through the papers from this past winter.

Or are you claiming now that no one in the press wondered or asked about the back end of the rotation before Tuesday?

This is one of those situations where deflective BS and spin isn't not only insulting but completely unnecessary. No one ever dealt off two starters without having an answer for how they'd be replaced. It's just that Omar's answer--Zambrano and Maine and Bannister and Lima and Gonzales and a cast of thousands--is the wrong answer. No quotes needed. Omar's actions argue eloquently the case that he fucked up very badly, with an arrogant presumption that he had enough starting pitching. Remember, again, this wasn't caused by injuries or unforeseen circumstsances--it's was deliberately created by Omar as a planned decision.

My point is that is was wrong, and now everyone with eyes can see that.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

Gwreck wrote: pointless. Horse. Dead. Beaten.

Which is another way of saying "OK, The Mets fucked up, and we don';t wanna hear about it any more, Bret."

I recommend you join the hordes who don't read any thread I've posted in, Gwreck.

As to your content--How fast would you swap Sanchez back for Seo now, Gwreck?

[Gwreck]

No, it's another way of saying that I don't think there's much of a fundamental disagreement and the thread seems to be getting repetitve.

I don't disagree that the Mets fucked up. We disagree perhaps as how many times one can say "Omar screwed up!" I personally think that after a certain point, it becomes unproductive to keep going back to a particular screwup. Much more interesting: considering who will actually play. What options we have. Relative merits of Heilman in bullpen vs. rotation. That's going to be the interesting stuff.

As to the other question, which I think is interesting...
I'd put Heilman in the rotation before I'd trade for Seo back. (I wasn't nearly as big a fan of Seo as some were, though).

[Guest KC]

The Mets have not "claimed that they dealt off starting pitchers because no one
could possibly anticipate this problem".

Until you provide substantiation for this or retract it, it's just a big red sore thumb
at the noses of any attempt at fair discussion of the subject.

[Guest Bret Sabermetric]

Action speaks louder than words. By trading Seo and Benson, they were claiming they had enough starting pitching without them.