Backing into a Tie (Historical Mets GM Standings)

[Guest Edgy DC]

Backing into a tie this year is Omar Minaya, now tied for the title of second-most successful GM in Mets history*.

GM	Seasons	G	W	L	T	W%
Murphy	2	325	173	151	1	.534
Minaya	5	810	427	383	0	.527
Cashen	11	1723	907	814	2	.527
Phillips	6	971	502	469	0	.517
Scheffing	5	803	402	401	0	.501
McIlvaine	4	581	283	298	0	.487
Hunsicker	2	323	149	174	0	.461
McDonald	5	810	361	448	1	.446
Duquette	1	162	71	91	0	.438
Devine	1	162	61	101	0	.377
Harazin	1	162	59	103	0	.364
Weiss	5	811	260	547	4	.322

(George Weiss retains his title as tie-ingest GM in Mets history.)

*Fully acknowledging the reality that tenures are fluid things, and a GM can spend the early portion of his tenure cursed by/cruising on the work of his predecessor and/or leave his best or worst work to appear on his successor's record.

[Frayed Knot]

So if Minaya can hang on another six seasons averaging 85 wins/year during that time (maintaining that .527 pct) while snagging one WS title in the process does he get to be as celebrated as Cashen?

Ridiculously speculative I know, but somehow I doubt it.

[G-Fafif]

Harazin, McIlvaine and Phillips were all replaced midseason. Some of their wins/losses belong to their successors (though none of their ties).

[Guest Edgy DC]

Yeah, that's sloppy work regarding mid-season changes.

Worth noting is that Minaya's win percentage going into this season was a lofty .551.

[metirish]

Unfortunately I think Minaya's golden years were 06/07/08....in terms of wins anyway...

[Guest Edgy DC]

Maybe, but does that suggest that 2009 should be defining?

[Benjamin Grimm]

Unfortunately I think Minaya's golden years were 06/07/08....in terms of wins anyway...[/quote:9pmf5g6l]

We'll see. The next few months should show us how serious (and how capable) the Mets are about putting this season behind them and returning to contention.

If they do walk the walk (and I am skeptical about that) then, hopefully, history will see 2009 as an anomaly.

[metirish]

Here is a bit from the Snooze today....

Jeff Wilpon yesterday called this "a one-year thing," meaning a one-season commitment to these two guys. It was an urgent call to action and performance. But make no mistake about it: At the same time that Minaya and Manuel are being evaluated, the Wilpons will be judged by an increasingly impatient fan base. The good news yesterday was that Wilpon did not put a definitive cap on the Mets' spending over the winter. The bad news was that he didn't quite make any promises. "It's what Omar needs," Wilpon said. "It's no firm number. If a major free agent is available and we can do that it would be great. But Omar can do that with a number of other moves that add up to the same kind of splash. If it fits what Omar needs, we will be involved."

Going by their track record of spending I see no reason that Minaya won't again this off-season have money to blow.....is it me or has it become near fanatical to try and get a budget number for the Mets

[Guest Edgy DC]

It's not a very healthy move to be overly specific about what your budget looks like.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Everyone seems to have been assuming that the Mets would go cheap this winter because of Bernie Madoff and the economy. But it still remains to be seen if that's true or not. I don't know one way or the other; we'll soon find out though.

[G-Fafif]

Hunsicker was never GM, so his 2 seasons needed to be dispersed. Cashen held the title through '91 (12 years) though he was giving way to Harazin by season's end. Either Phillips should have 7 years, ranging from '97 to '03 (replaced Joe Mac mid-'97; replaced by Jim Duq mid-'03) or Duquette should have 2, accounting for '03 and 04. But one of them needs 1 more season, and Cashen needs one more season. Subtract out Hunsicker's 2 seasons and you come away with 48 thrilling seasons of Mets baseball.

[Frayed Knot]

There's no reason for the Mets to publicly pre-announce a specific budget number, particularly so early in the going.
They have suggested that payroll next year should be right around where it was this season - something that's been in almost complete opposition to published reports, some of which speculated about $40 million cuts.

As far as the future goes it's as ridiculous to talk about future years being cast in stone now as it was to look at the '06 season as merely the first stepping stone to an unbroken string of success.
It's easy now to dismiss 2009 as a disaster from day one although SI's pre-season prediction of a NYM WS championship or BP's projection of 93 wins suggests it wasn't always so obvious.

[G-Fafif]

If they do walk the walk (and I am skeptical about that) then, hopefully, history will see 2009 as an anomaly.[/quote:16hxfq7j]

The Mets have experienced only one anomalous year in terms of winning and losing in their history, and that was 1974. It was the only season in which its essential nature (losing) was surrounded by two different kinds of seasons (winning). Usually the Mets hit on a pattern and stay with it.

Prior to 2009.

LLLLLLL
WWWWW
L
WW
LLLLLLL
WWWWWWW
LLLLLL
WWWWW
LLL
WWWW

I'd be happy to make 2009's L stand alone.

FYI, 2009's win reduction of 19 versus 2008 is the second-biggest downward swing in team history. Only 1977's dropoff of 22 wins from 1976 was worse.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Hunsicker was never GM, so his 2 seasons needed to be dispersed.[/quote:3uyhkhxz]

I didn't remember his tenure either, but wikipedia said otherwise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_New_York_Mets_managers

I'll defer to you (and me) however.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

I'd be surprised if the Mets didn't leave that L alone for the same reason that I wasn't nearly as panicky as the market over Luis Castillo. He was either going to be better or be out of a job, why worry. The 2010 Mets will be better.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I think they'll be better too. Whether they're better enough is another story. I don't think many of us will be satisfied with an 82-win season. They need to get A LOT better. (And 82 wins would be a pretty big gain.)

[G-Fafif]

Hunsicker was never GM, so his 2 seasons needed to be dispersed.[/quote:3nh96q6c]

I didn't remember his tenure either, but wikipedia said otherwise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_New_York_Mets_managers

I'll defer to you (and me) however.[/quote:3nh96q6c]

Confirmed with Mets media guide.

[Guest Edgy DC]

I'm a-busy. Somebody fix that wikipedia entry.

[G-Fafif]

I'd be surprised if the Mets didn't leave that L alone for the same reason that I wasn't nearly as panicky as the market over Luis Castillo. He was either going to be better or be out of a job, why worry. The 2010 Mets will be better.[/quote:2mvv2cpy]

Or out of a job.

[Guest Edgy DC]

OK, this should represent the standings with the deletion of the mythical reign of Gerry Hunsicker, plus adjustments for the miseason firings of Joe McIlvaine and Steve Phillips. I haven't been able to find out a date for the canning of Al Harazin, but I hope to make a further adjustment for that, as well as for the brief restoration of Frank Cashen.

The update makes a lie out of my thread title, as the extra season of Cashen (and not Hunsicker) puts Omar Minaya back into sole possession of second place in the Historical Mets GM Standings. Other adjustments have led to further jockeying, which you can see for yourself. (And, who knows, maybe Cashen's brief fill-in work can help him catch up again.)

GM	Seasons	G	W	L	T	W%
Murphy	2	325	173	151	1	.534
Minaya	5	810	427	383	0	.527
Cashen	12	1884	984	898	2	.523
Phillips	5 (+132 G)	1,103	567	536	0	.514
Scheffing	5	803	402	401	0	.501
McIlvaine	3 (+94 G)	675	335	340	0	.496
McDonald	5	810	361	448	1	.446
Duquette	1 (+95 g)	257	108	151	0	.420
Harazin	2	324	131	193	0	.404
Devine	1	162	61	101	0	.377
Weiss	5	811	260	547	4	.322

[G-Fafif]

1993 breakdown:

Harazin 25-57 (through July 7)
McIlvaine 34-46 (starting July 8)

Source: 1994 Mets Media Guide, Baseball Reference