Hot Stove 2009-2010

[duan]

em, I don't really care, you're suggesting that that 1983 team was in great shape because it had a coke addled 1st baseman who hadn't had a bad season. I'm saying a coke addled first baseman isn't the guy I'd like to be depending on.

[stevejrogers]

Em, it goes towards the whole what the Cranepool of 1983 (probably just talk radio at that point) would be saying about feeling positive or negative towards the prospects of the 1984 Mets.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Hey, Steve, when was the last time you were in the Mets' clubhouse?

[duan]

seriously steve, you manage to mangle your own point SOOOOO badly that it just makes you seem silly.
1983 mets did badly
1984 mets did well

off season - not a huge amount happened,

*
it's simple, yet you seem to be trying to claim that 1 very good player (kh), one young breakthrough position player (ds) and a young pitcher were all that they needed to win.

Actually as it happens the 84 squad were probably lucky to win as many games as they did as they were outscored over the year.
Next years mets may/may not be a threat to the Phillies, but if they finish 12 games ahead of their expected w -l it'll be a good start.

[DocTee]

You know, at what point do the Wilpons wake up and realize there is a difference between a smart big market team and making dumb big splashes

Another reason why he should have been jettisoned is that it would have been a sign that the Mets are committed to once again changing the culture of the clubhouse

So the Mets should jettison Castillo not in the name of improving the club's performance but to make a statement? When will they learn!

[Guest Kong76]

Just read the last five pages ... wow.
I also would have like to seen the addition of solid starting pitcher.
I will be very disappointed if they march out Figgy every fifth start.

Edited February 4, 2010 by Guest

[stevejrogers]

DocTee wrote: You know, at what point do the Wilpons wake up and realize there is a difference between a smart big market team and making dumb big splashes Another reason why he should have been jettisoned is that it would have been a sign that the Mets are committed to once again changing the culture of the clubhouse So the Mets should jettison Castillo not in the name of improving the club's performance but to make a statement? When will they learn!

Ray Knight and Kevin Mitchell were jettisoned in the same fashion, for the same reasons. Both those moves ended up helping the team in the short term, despite them being early signs of the Wilpon's desire to have a boring and uncaring ballclub.

[Benjamin Grimm]

SteveRogers wrote: Ray Knight and Kevin Mitchell were jettisoned in the same fashion, for the same reasons.

What???

Ray Knight was a free agent, who the Mets chose not to resign because they rightly suspected that he had had his last good season.

He wasn't a bad clubhouse guy. He provided a lot of the spark that made the 86ers what they were.

[G-Fafif]

SteveJRogers wrote: Ray Knight and Kevin Mitchell were jettisoned in the same fashion, for the same reasons. Both those moves ended up helping the team in the short term, despite them being early signs of the Wilpon's desire to have a boring and uncaring ballclub.

With Knight and Mitchell, the Mets won a World Series. Without Knight and Mitchell, the Mets didn't win a World Series, not even in the short term. Their respective dismissals may have cleared space as starters for players packing what appeared to be greater upsides in HoJo/Magadan and McReynolds -- both of whom had some fine seasons as Mets -- but, literally speaking, those moves helped the Mets go from world champions in 1986 to not world champions thereafter...and, come to think of it, not since.

[stevejrogers]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: SteveRogers wrote: Ray Knight and Kevin Mitchell were jettisoned in the same fashion, for the same reasons. What??? Ray Knight was a free agent, who the Mets chose not to resign because they rightly suspected that he had had his last good season. He wasn't a bad clubhouse guy. He provided a lot of the spark that made the 86ers what they were.

Which is exactly why Freddie didn't want him around anymore and towards more safer players. You really think the Mets chose not to resign the reigning WS MVP because they figured that he was coming off his last good year in the bigs? They COULD have kept him, hell, even as a Rusty Staub role if it was clear that he was in decline.

They didn't want him around to influence the clubhouse. Why they are letting the players influence the clubhouse today, I don't know, perhaps to prove that Omar has full control perhaps. Or maybe the clubhouse doesn't make as much noise as those 1986ers do.

[Guest Edgy DC]

It's probably silly but this thread makes me more confident about the coming season.

I swear, Met fans can be like a neurotic wife. Spend big money, but only because you want to, not just to please me!

Steve, you really need to go out for a walk.

[Valadius]

Steve, by your logic, the Mets should jettison everybody with an ounce of personality or leadership. Last I checked, the human race had not yet invented baseball-playing robots.

[seawolf17]

Plus, Mitchell was traded for a guy coming off a season in which he was FOURTH in the NL in SLG, and heading into his prime. I know the Mets would have loved those 49 home runs in 1989, but I'd make that trade over and over.

And on tonight's episode of "The Contradictor":

I don't expect Omar to do any game changing moves anyway, he hasn't proven that he can do that so far in his Met tenure.

a sign that the Mets are committed to once again changing the culture of the clubhouse ... [a la] what happened in heading into 2005 when Martinez and Beltran were brought in.

Oh, and also... Jose Reyes' most similar players, according to B-R, through age 26: Jimmy Rollins, Alan Trammell, Garry Templeton, Ryne Sandberg, and Harvey Kuenn. David Wright's most similar players, according to B-R, through age 26: Scott Rolen, Duke Snider, and George Brett.

Leave Reyes and Wright out of this.

The only way this team doesn't hit .500 this year is if everyone gets hits by a bus AGAIN.

Valadius wrote: Steve, by your logic, the Mets should jettison everybody with an ounce of personality or leadership. Last I checked, the human race had not yet invented baseball-playing robots.

Oops.

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/32123100/ns/sports-baseball/

[stevejrogers]

Valadius wrote: Steve, by your logic, the Mets should jettison everybody with an ounce of personality or leadership. Last I checked, the human race had not yet invented baseball-playing robots.

No, I was giving an example of a time when Fred Wilpon DID make a statement by changing up the clubhouse dynamic with the removal of a couple of guys perceived to be "bad seeds."

Then it was totally unnecessary because they were coming off a Worlds Championship.

Now it'd be necessary because in looking at how the Mets have played since 2007 and various comments they've said in the press there is something not right about the makeup of that clubhouse. Oh sure you can say that it's nothing winning won't fix, but they haven't won since the 2006 NLDS!

[metirish]

Best thread ever......

[stevejrogers]

seawolf17 wrote: Plus, Mitchell was traded for a guy coming off a season in which he was FOURTH in the NL in SLG, and heading into his prime. I know the Mets would have loved those 49 home runs in 1989, but I'd make that trade over and over.

I understand Big Mac Apologist, and I'd take what HoJo did over the course of the next 6 years or so (eh, except for the outfield experiment) over the entire career of Ray Knight, but the point was that Knight and Mitchell were personality guys that raised hell in the clubhouse while Mac made John Olerud seem like Rickey Henderson in the personality department!

And on tonight's episode of "The Contradictor": I don't expect Omar to do any game changing moves anyway, he hasn't proven that he can do that so far in his Met tenure. ="SteveJRogers at 7]a sign that the Mets are committed to once again changing the culture of the clubhouse ... [a la] what happened in heading into 2005 when Martinez and Beltran were brought in.

[Guest Edgy DC]

But what about the reality that everything about your report is wrong? Everything!

• Fact: The Mets did, in fact, try and sign him, but he wanted more money and more years than they thought prudent.
  
  
  
• Fact: The Mets thought that because he had, in fact, put up two poor seasons prior to 1983. Poor and injury-impaired.
  
  
  
• Fact: The success of his 1986 season was disportionately enhanced by the first part of the year.
  
  
  
• Fact: The organizational depth chart at third included Howard Johnson, Kevin Mitchell, Dave Magadan, and Gregg Jefferies, all clearly with futures far more bright.
  
  
  
• Fact: His performance quickly verified that he was, in fact, done.
  
  
  
• Fact: Ray Knight's clubhouse presence was lauded at the time, and lamented for two years after he was gone. Players openly suggested to the media during slumps that the team might want to go get Ray Knight back to help spark them up.
  
  
  
• Fact: Nobody ever publickly accused Fred Wilpon of making personnel decisions over Frank Cashen.
  
  
  
• Opinion: It's stupid as hell that we are here discussing this, but...
  
  
  
• Fact: this is your MO, constantly shifting an argument as your position becomes unstable, to the point where you are still in unstable territory, but the argument resembles nothing close to the initial subject.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

I leave work early, and suddenly we're talking "Keith was a cokehead/Keith was a savior/Rogers may have a drug problem."

Rogers, you been watching old pro-wrestling videos or something? I'm half-expecting a "David Wright... Ptui" out of you.

It's a HOT STOVE thread, y'all.

Valadius wrote: Orlando Hudson is only two years younger than Luis Castillo. He's 32. Not only that, but he's only marginally better than Castillo offensively. I'm of the opinion that there are more pressing priorities (namely catcher, first base, and pitching) than second base right now. Lest you forget, Luis Castillo finished fourth this year in Schaefer points. Now why would we give him so many Schaefer points if we all thought he was terrible?

Val, the reason hoping for an upgrade at the keystone specifically makes sense is that:

A) Castillo's offensive value in 2009 is probably his vertical limit; Castillo's defensive value is probably about as good as it would be were he faster... and handless. There's room for improvement.
With a slow market for veteran 2B, there are perceived bargains-- and a few of 'em-- to be found there. Even Adam Kennedy would be a net improvement (though Felipe Lopez and older Orlando Hudson would probably be bigger pluses).
C) There aren't the same bargains available without much greater risk-- Bedard or Branyan, e.g.-- at other need positions.

And I'll agree with SJR on the Schaefer point point (in a year where Danny Murphy is in Schaefer-medal position for merely showing up, all bets are off there). On everything else... yeesh. I'll put up a hundy on .500-plus if somebody will take the other side.

Edited February 4, 2010 by Guest

[batmagadanleadoff]

In the final analysis, the Mets made the right move by not re-signing Ray Knight after their championship season. Knight sucked the rest of the way and retired two years later, after the 1988 season. Nineteen eighty-six turned out to be Knight's last effective season. Hojo's first season as an everyday player and Knight's replacement was an excellent one: 1987 was Hojo's first of three 30-30's. That Davey Johnson's Mets never returned to the WS had nothing to do with the team's unwillingness to retain Knight or to replace him with Hojo.

[metirish]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: In the final analysis

This thread is far from final , it has at least five pages to go with Steve toeing the rubber.

[nymr83]

too much to respond to in this thread alone today so i'll make a few scattered points...

Another reason why he [Castillo] should have been jettisoned is that it would have been a sign that the Mets are committed to once again changing the culture of the clubhouse, which lets be honest really does need a good shake up. Ala what happened in heading into 2005 when Martinez and Beltran were brought in.

2004: 71-91, 2005: 83-79
2009: 70-92, 2010:??
"clubhouse culture" is code for "wins on the field" and the only "shaking up" it needs is winning more ball games, which takes baseball talent not charisma.

-to whoever said the Mets have a "small market mentality", find me a small market team that signed Pedro Martinez, Tom Glavine, Carlos Beltran, Johan Santana, Jason Bay etc.

-Steve lets have a reality check here about winning only 70 games again. even if the mets had brought back the same exact roster, they shouldnt be expected to suffer the same freakish avalanche of injuries again. the top 10 Mets in plate appearences last year: Wright, Castillo, Muprhy, Tatis, Pagan, Beltran, Sheffield, Francoeur, Cora, Santos. the top 3 had 500+ and the next guy had 379. to use the phillies for quick comparison they had 7 guys top 500. so give 500+ this year to Wright, Bay, Beltran (barely), Castillo, Reyes, and whichever two you think will be the best out of Pagan/Francoeur/Murphy and see who wins the division.
the phillies had 6 guys get to the plate more often than David Wright, our "leader" at 618.

[seawolf17]

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Orlando Hudson is only two years younger than Luis Castillo. He's 32. Not only that, but he's only marginally better than Castillo offensively. I'm of the opinion that there are more pressing priorities (namely catcher, first base, and pitching) than second base right now. Lest you forget, Luis Castillo finished fourth this year in Schaefer points. Now why would we give him so many Schaefer points if we all thought he was terrible? Val, the reason hoping for an upgrade at the keystone specifically makes sense is that: A) Castillo's offensive value in 2009 is probably his vertical limit; Castillo's defensive value is probably about as good as it would be were he faster... and handless. There's room for improvement. With a slow market for veteran 2B, there are perceived bargains-- and a few of 'em-- to be found there. Even Adam Kennedy would be a net improvement (though Felipe Lopez and older Orlando Hudson would probably be bigger pluses). C) There aren't the same bargains available without much greater risk-- Bedard or Branyan, e.g.-- at other need positions. And I'll agree with SJR on the Schaefer point point (in a year where Danny Murphy is in Schaefer-medal position for merely showing up, all bets are off there). On everything else... yeesh. I'll put up a hundy on .500-plus if somebody will take the other side.

I'm down with an upgrade, but Luis Castillo is making SIX MILLION DOLLARS this year. I know it's play money to us, but it's not. We can't realistically expect Fred to just eat that money. I'd bet they took a look to see what they could get, and couldn't find anything reasonable. So Luis it is; sure, there are better second basemen out there, but I think we're stuck with him.

And nymr's last point is my point as well.

[Frayed Knot]

I have to stop reading this ... I'm losing brain cells by the minute.

[batmagadanleadoff]

seawolf17 wrote: I'm down with an upgrade, but Luis Castillo is making SIX MILLION DOLLARS this year. I know it's play money to us, but it's not. We can't realistically expect Fred to just eat that money.

I'd love to see Fred literally eat six million dollars. One penny at a time.

[Guest Edgy DC]

And also, there's some unstated issue with Orlando Hudson. He was an All Star at mid year, but absolutely buried by Joe Torre behind a fat guy when the post season came around. He was given four at-bats over the course of two playoff series. Then he decares free agency and nobody wants him? What gives?

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

I'm down with an upgrade, but Luis Castillo is making SIX MILLION DOLLARS this year. I know it's play money to us, but it's not. We can't realistically expect Fred to just eat that money. I'd bet they took a look to see what they could get, and couldn't find anything reasonable. So Luis it is; sure, there are better second basemen out there, but I think we're stuck with him.

Two words: sunk cost. To a team with the revenue streams and current budget situation* that the Mets have, 6 million should be chump change. A team that was willing to offer 5 million to Molina or 15-16 million (over 2 years!) to Pineiro but isn't willing to do 3-5 million for a virtual sure-shot upgrade... FOR A ONE YEAR COMMITMENT, no less... well, that team is either kinda FOS, or its player-evaluation system is brokedown.

That said, I think the Mets FO is with you... if they weren't, they probably would have signed Hudson by now.

And also, there's some unstated issue with Orlando Hudson. He was an All Star at mid year, but absolutely buried by Joe Torre behind a fat guy when the post season came around. He was given four at-bats over the course of two playoff series. Then he decares free agency and nobody wants him? What gives?

PSST! I think I have the answer. Said fat guy hit absurdly, unsustainably well (.351/.398/.636) for the month he was with the Doyers. Torre thought his lottery ticket would keep paying out into the playoffs. (As a people-manager, Torre's admirable. As a field-manager, Torre's a great people-manager.)

* As it stands, significantly under last year's budget. I think I walked through this earlier. (Maybe in this** thread?)
**OE: Nope. Top 10 Remaining Free Agents.

[batmagadanleadoff]

I'm down with an upgrade, but Luis Castillo is making SIX MILLION DOLLARS this year. I know it's play money to us, but it's not. We can't realistically expect Fred to just eat that money. I'd bet they took a look to see what they could get, and couldn't find anything reasonable. So Luis it is; sure, there are better second basemen out there, but I think we're stuck with him. Two words: sunk cost. To a team with the revenue streams and current budget situation* that the Mets have, 6 million should be chump change. A team that was willing to offer 5 million to Molina or 15-16 million (over 2 years!) to Pineiro but isn't willing to do 3-5 million for a virtual sure-shot upgrade... FOR A ONE YEAR COMMITMENT, no less... well, that team is either kinda FOS, or its player-evaluation system is brokedown.

I. Totally. Agree. If the Mets keep Castillo, it should only be because management believes that he'll be effective, and to hell with his his guaranteed money.

[Guest Rockin' Doc]

After reading through today's mayhem in this thread, I need to go lie down now. I admire Steve's persistence and spunk, but man can he talk in circles until my head feels like a drunk on a never ending Tilt-a-Whirl.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Hudson to the Twins, 1 year/5 million.

Adam Kennedy to the Nats, terms unannounced.

So that's that, then.

[nymr83]

yes, castillo is a sunk cost, but so is every other contract you've signed (except to the extent that you can trade a guy and not eat the contract, but i'd think if the mets could have done that at any point over the last two years it would be done already.) Hudson represents an additional cost, one the Mets may not feel worth taking on considering he is only marginally better offensively than the guy who got on base 39% of the time last year. maybe the Mets dont buy that there is a large, gaping defensive difference between them. maybe they know something we dont (like why Hudson settled for peanuts last year and is likely to again this year relative to his numbers)

edit- lwfs with news of the signing as i'm posting. 5 million? thats alot to pay a guy to fill a position that you've already got filled. i'd have liked to sign him but i am not angry the mets passed. if castillo sucks this year maybe the twins will suck too and hudson will be available in july for a garbage "prospect" and the promise to eat his remaining 2.5 million

Edited February 4, 2010 by Guest