Guest KC Guests Posted January 5, 2007 Posted January 5, 2007 For the record, I thought Santana was only signed through 2007 not 2008.I still think trading everyone for him is a) a pipe dream, silly, c) rotowishin',and d) all of the above.
Guest Edgy DC Guests Posted January 5, 2007 Posted January 5, 2007 We can wish all we want, but there's six or seven of these bona-fide aceTM characters floating around. (Check your NL Cy Young ballot.) It's a sellers' market and the price is steep.The Mets had a chance to grow one in Scott Kazmir and few of us were pleased that they passed. If they want to tend the orchard right around now, I'm cool with that. And if they want to add some bona-fide mediocritiesTM to fill space while they sort out which young pitchers are ready, and to be utterly releaseable if they aren't needed, I'm OK with that also.Re-sign Bruce Chen and let him pitch his little heart out.
Guest patona314 Guests Posted January 5, 2007 Posted January 5, 2007 bona-fide mediocritiesTM what's w/the trademark?
Guest Edgy DC Guests Posted January 5, 2007 Posted January 5, 2007 If I've got to explain, my murky point is lost.Lost. And murky.
Guest patona314 Guests Posted January 5, 2007 Posted January 5, 2007 Edgy DC wrote:If I've got to explain, my murky point is lost.Lost. And murky.remember, i'm a noob. i'm about 3000 posts behind all of you boneheads
Gwreck Old-Timey Member Posted January 5, 2007 Posted January 5, 2007 If the Mets want that bona-fide ace , Carlos Zambrano of the Cubs is a free agent after 2008. Of course, if Zito is 126/7, you'd think Zambrano would be 150/6 or 7.
Guest Edgy DC Guests Posted January 5, 2007 Posted January 5, 2007 I simply mean that terms like Ace and Bona Fide #1 are nebulous, but easy enough to throw around as if they're just filling the store.
Vic Sage Old-Timey Member Posted January 6, 2007 Posted January 6, 2007 i'm not panicking. I'm not saying Omar has been terrible, or that we're doomed. I didn't demand an ace or a "bone fide" #1.I made what i think are totally valid points about what the Mets needs were going into the off-season, and what Omar has or has not done to address them. I don't think he's addressed our needs, therefore he's not had a particularly good off-season. RES IPSA LOQUITORMost strong teams have at least one veteran pitcher (age 27-32 range -- ie, "in their prime"), who is at least a reliably above average pitcher you can pencil in for 200+ better-than-average innings. We don't. In LF, Alou's is likely to give us no more than 350 ABs. I'm not going to argue whether his 350 ABs are likely to be signficantly better than 350 ABs from FLoyd this season (its a debatable point, but lets assume he will)... ony that, at his age, with his injury history, he is not going to play enough to have more than a marginal impact, and we'll require another excellent year by Endy to support him. And Endy will have to split time with Green as well, since our RFer is (at this point) punchless and defensively limited. Ben Johnson doesn't impress me as much of a move to improve this area, either. And we're again counting on an old Valentin to play a full season at 2b, with no alternatives available if he fails. Damien Easley? Newhan? oy.As i said, i think we can still be competitive, but it would be nice if a move could've been made (or could still be made) to actually IMPROVE the team. As of yet, Omar hasn't done it. He hasn't screwed up either, but that's damning him with the faintest of praise.I don't think this is a controversial point.
Frayed Knot Old-Timey Member Posted January 6, 2007 Posted January 6, 2007 ]RES IPSA LOQUITOR I think this was one of our recently registered users.Came complete with a link to a Latin porn site.
Guest cleonjones11 Guests Posted January 6, 2007 Posted January 6, 2007 Can the latin Porn women pitch?Hey! Wheres Loduca!
DocTee Old-Timey Member Posted January 6, 2007 Posted January 6, 2007 Apparently Jeff Weaver is seeking 4 years, $40 million. This according to MLB.com's hotstove report
Guest cleonjones11 Guests Posted January 6, 2007 Posted January 6, 2007 DocTee wrote:Apparently Jeff Weaver is seeking 4 years, $40 million. This according to MLB.com's hotstove reportCmon Omar..do it!
Guest patona314 Guests Posted January 6, 2007 Posted January 6, 2007 cleonjones11 wrote:="DocTee"]Apparently Jeff Weaver is seeking 4 years, $40 million. This according to MLB.com's hotstove reportCmon Omar..do it!for the love god cleon where did that come from. he was released by the angels last year and won the lottery by being picked up by the dreaded cardinals. he sucks. weaver should pay the mets for the opportunity to play for a contender. besides, that growth on his face is disgusting. for christ's sake jeff. see a doctor.
Guest cleonjones11 Guests Posted January 7, 2007 Posted January 7, 2007 I think hes enough of an oddball to be an effective Met..I still love his sinker. That Hackettstown to Millburn Midtown direct must be gettin to ya
Guest patona314 Guests Posted January 7, 2007 Posted January 7, 2007 cleonjones11 wrote:I think hes enough of an oddball to be an effective Met..I still love his sinker. That Hackettstown to Millburn Midtown direct must be gettin to ya1. only one train leaves for manhattan out of hackettstown a day.2. the "midtown direct" has been out of my life for 7 years.3. jeff weaver still sucks.
nymr83 Old-Timey Member Posted January 7, 2007 Posted January 7, 2007 i'll take Weaver but not a 4 year commitment.
Guest Edgy DC Guests Posted January 11, 2007 Posted January 11, 2007 Mulder returns to St. Louis for two years, $13 million.Not too crazy to think that the Mets might have done better to blow the Schoeneweis money on Mulder, and if and when Mulder lost his rotation spot, develop him into a releiver.
smg58 Old-Timey Member Posted January 11, 2007 Posted January 11, 2007 The problem with Mulder is that he won't be ready for Opening Day. Between Pedro's injury, and Pelfrey and Humber likely becoming more major league ready as the season goes on, I don't really think the Mets need to add another pitcher they'd have to wait for. If I spend the money at all at this point, I'd rather it be on somebody we could send out there right away.
Guest Edgy DC Guests Posted January 11, 2007 Posted January 11, 2007 Good point. I had forgotten that.Add Guillermo Mota and (maybe) Duanere Sanchez to the list of pitchers who won't be off with the opening gun.
Guest Edgy DC Guests Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 The Favorites:Glavine O. Hernandez Maine Perez SosaThe Hopefuls:Williams Pelfrey Soler Humber Heilman A Cascade of Need Away:Vargas McLane McGinleyCollazo Standridge A Few Months and Series of Emergencies Away:Pinango Parnell Smith
metirish Old-Timey Member Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 I would hope Pelfrey would be a favorite over Sosa.
Guest Edgy DC Guests Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 Maybe by the end of spring. Maybe not. Guys with options have to knock out guys without. Sosa and Williams exist precisely to hold down jobs until Humber and Pelfrey take them away. And to keep Maine and Perez motivated to keep theirs.
RealityChuck Old-Timey Member Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 It'd be a big mistake in the long run (and probably in the short run) to include Pelfrey and Humber on the opening day roster. They both need more time in the minors.
metirish Old-Timey Member Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 RealityChuck wrote:It'd be a big mistake in the long run (and probably in the short run) to include Pelfrey and Humber on the opening day roster. They both need more time in the minors.I think that's very conserative thinking,what if Pelfrey has a great spring training,does he get sent down?
Guest iramets Guests Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 metirish wrote:="RealityChuck"]It'd be a big mistake in the long run (and probably in the short run) to include Pelfrey and Humber on the opening day roster. They both need more time in the minors.I think that's very conserative thinking,what if Pelfrey has a great spring training,does he get sent down?Much as I hate to repeat myself (almost as much as you do) the answer is: If he's with the Mets, he gets sent down. If he's with some other teams, not so much.The problem is the Mets' committment based on payroll, not on performance. If the Mets have money behind someone, he's got a job. They hate to cut players they owe money to (everyone does, of course), and they tend to1) owe big money to more players than most teams and2) show unusually poor judgment on scouting players to owe big money to (Zambrano, Matsui, Ordonez, Leiter, Looper notable among them),so we end up looking at big-salary, low-performance players for much longer than I'm happy with.An unseen advantage in scouting well is that you can fill your roster with young talent which, if you turn out to have misjudged, the $$$$ won't keep you from cutting them, benching them, swapping them out for parts, sending them down the minors. This is basically how low-budget teams like Oakland manage to compete, and we could all take a leaf from them.
Guest Edgy DC Guests Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 Who are these big-earning roadblocks? The Mets have certainly committed more money to Pelfrey and Humber than to Maine, Perez, Sosa, or Williams.
Guest Johnny Dickshot Guests Posted January 17, 2007 Posted January 17, 2007 I think Vargas might have a better than 'cascade of need' opportunity. Not like we didn't choose him. Good body of minor league work. Good hitter even.
Zach Thornton Syracuse Mets - AAA LHP On Sunday, the southpaw tossed five shutout innings as the bulk pitcher. He gave up 2 hits, walked 2 and had 5 strikeouts. Explore Zach Thornton News >
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.