Allow Us to Exchange Remarks on... Jhonny Peralta

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Ken Davidoff sez:

I hear the Mets like him a lot. He�s a good bat, which they of course desperately need; he plays shortstop adequately; he�s durable; he has a good clubhouse reputation, despite his Biogenesis involvement; and he won�t cost a draft pick as compensation because the Tigers didn�t make him a qualifying offer on Monday.

[Lefty Specialist]

Mets don't have a problem with substance abusers, as Marlon Byrd and Guillermo Mota can attest. But I'm betting someone else snatches him up. Tigers are set at short for a while and didn't need him.

[metirish]

Kudos Jhonny

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

I don't wan't a douchy PED guy on our team but he might be the best option at SS for us.

Anyone think they might turn things over to Tovar?

[Frayed Knot]

I'm not sure how many SS days Peralta has ahead of him at this stage. His range was never the greatest to begin with and no one gets quicker as they get older and thicker (turns 32 early next season).
IOW, I wouldn't mind a signing, just wouldn't make it all that long.

[Fman99]

I'm getting thicker just thinking about these potential lineup improvements.

[Edgy MD]

Frayed Knot wrote: I'm not sure how many SS days Peralta has ahead of him at this stage. His range was never the greatest to begin with and no one gets quicker as they get older and thicker (turns 32 early next season).

Sometimes PED guys do. Just saying.

[Guest themetfairy]

I'm opposed to signing him until he learns how to spell Johnny correctly.

[Mex17]

Trying here to gauge the market on Peralta. Looking at it team by team, this is what I came up with:

Orioles: JJ Hardy = NO
Red Sox: Xander Boegarts = NO
Yankees: injured old Jeter = MAYBE (stick Peralta in LF or 3B if no AROD and when Jeter can't go plug him in at SS)
Rays: won't spend = NO
Blue Jays: Reyes = NO
White Sox: Alexei Ramirez = NO
Indians: Asdrubal Cabrera= NO
Royals: Alcides Escobar = YES
Twins: Pedro Floriman, but are they in a position to splurge? = NO
Astros: won't spend = NO
Angles: Erick Aybar = NO
Athletics: Jed Lowrie = NO
Mariners: Brad Miller. . . decent enough year at the plate and is cheap and under team control = NO
Rangers: Andrus and Profar = NO
Braves: Andrelton Simmons. . .I think they like him = NO
Marlins: won't spend (and they have the SS that they got from Toronto in the Reyes trade)= NO
Phillies: Rollins = NO
Nats: Desmond = NO
Cubs: Castro = NO
Reds: Zack Cozart. . .I think they like him. Decent year/former top prospect I think/cheap and under control = NO
Brewers: Jean Segura. . .good year/cheap/under control = NO
Pirates: Jordy Mercer. . .see above = NO
Cardinals: Pete Kozma = YES (but might be the landing place for Drew instead)
DBacks: Didi Gregorous. . .I think they like him and they have Cliff Pennington too = NO
Rockies: Tulowitski = NO
Dodgers: Dee Gordon (but they have a kid coming up named Corey Seager who might be their longer term answer) = MAYBE
Giants: Brandon Crawford. . .respectable year, cheap and under control = NO
Padres: Everth Cabrera, but are they in a position to splurge? = NO

So, in my view, the main competitors are the Yanks, Royals, Cardinals, and Dodgers.

[Ceetar]

are the Tigers definitely out?

I wouldn't rule out the Phillies, since Rollins kinda sucks.. Plus he has a vesting option with 434 PA next year that gets him a 2015 contract at 11M. And hell, signing a guy that's only a bit younger while you still have a SS seems right up the Phillies alley.

Dunno what it's estimated Peralta is going to get, but the teams you have left up there seem to suggest that maybe no one's looking to blow him out of the water. 2/18 plus an option?

[Mex17]

Oops, forgot the Tigers. They traded for Jose Iglesias, so yes, I would think they are out.

[Mex17]

He wants MORE than 3/$45, which I think is ridiculous. I see him as a three for $24-$27-$30 or at the most four for $32-$36-$40, but I am afraid that the low supply of shortstops (basically him and Drew) will drive the market higher than his "worth" based on on field performance.

The problem here is that Alderson really backed himself into a corner on this. We HAD a shortstop who was one of the best in the sport that he essentially wanted nothing to do with. Part of the reason for that, as far as I understood at the time, is that we had a kid (Tejada) was was ready to "step in". Then that didn't happen, and Alderson has been very vocal and public about the fact that he now does not like Tejada (who he was at one point counting on) and feels that there is a need at shortstop (a need that was created by his own inaction). He basically HAS to come up with Peralta now!!

[Mex17]

After thinking about it, maybe I would go as high as 4 for $48-$50. That is technically higher than the 3 for $45 threshhold that I read about but keeps him from being a $15 per year player, which he is not.

[Frayed Knot]

He basically HAS to come up with Peralta now!!

No he doesn't.

The concept of believing that certain guys, even ones who might be the best available at a particular position at the moment, are indispensable is what leads to contracts of four years starting at age 32 for someone who may already be nearing their last days as a SS.
If the competition for him is a slim as you suspect then there's no reason why he needs to be a $50 million player. And if the bidding from one team does start to get to such "ridiculous" levels then it's better to walk away on the theory that it's easier to recover from the player you fail to sign than it is to recover from the one you sign at the wrong price, a theory that's particularly true when you're talking about multiple years.

The future of the franchise does not depend on Jhonny Peralta being in a Met uniform next year. I'll take him if I can get him but, if not, you live with an alternative and try to improve the team by spending your allowance elsewhere.

[ashie62]

Being that the SS alternatives are underwhelming for 2014 I would make a serious run at Peralta. It is quite an upgrade to Tejada and Qball. Wilfredo Tovar could work out just fine; experienced and taking over in 3-4 years...

As far as money and contract stuff...Everyone would like to pay less but to fill this need I would be willing to move with the market.

I agree that there is no one signing that is indispensable but I do believe you need to step up ocassionally to get the deed done.

In other words I am not buying in to Alderson's we are just going to fill holes mantra.

I do not believe that approach will work in this city. Isn't there some need to a go little above and beyond to placate fans in the biggest market in the world??? Going beyond does not guarantee more wins but probably allows fans to feel better about their brand..

having blabbed all this J.J. Hardy is out there and surely less expensive the Jhonny...

You can sign Peralta and be financially prudent in filling other spots...

[Zvon]

Frayed Knot wrote: The future of the franchise does not depend on Jhonny Peralta being in a Met uniform next year. I'll take him if I can get him but, if not, you live with an alternative and try to improve the team by spending your allowance elsewhere.

Well put. I'm with FK on this.

[ashie62]

Zvon wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: The future of the franchise does not depend on Jhonny Peralta being in a Met uniform next year. I'll take him if I can get him but, if not, you live with an alternative and try to improve the team by spending your allowance elsewhere. Well put. I'm with FK on this.

Do you have a place where you might start?

[Edgy MD]

I don't think Alderson has a "We're just going to fill holes" mantra.

[Frayed Knot]

The future of the franchise does not depend on Jhonny Peralta being in a Met uniform next year. I'll take him if I can get him but, if not, you live with an alternative and try to improve the team by spending your allowance elsewhere. Well put. I'm with FK on this. Do you have a place where you might start?

In short: Elsewhere.
- You try other, maybe lesser, FAs: Drew, minor league FAs, roster cuts, DFIs, DNRs, whoever.
- You try trade possibilities (will Baltimore move Hardy to make way for Machado?) at either the major or minor league levels
- Or you return with Tejada and hope he either bounces back or that a different alternative comes up at a later date. At this time last year no one here (or anywhere else that I know of) was thinking of Eric Young, Marlon Byrd and Juan Lagares as the Mets everyday OFers, or that that trio would be 3rd, 4th & 5th on the entire team in ABs. Things change, and the 2014 rosters aren't required to be set in cement prior to Turkey Day.

The point here isn't to say that Peralta won't be an upgrade--of course he would be--only that he's not a 'do whatever it takes' kind of guy or the final piece of the puzzle that we "have to get" now because he'll make such a difference in the 2014 season anymore than Michael Bourn* would have been that guy for the 2013 team. You don't want to get into a deal that he becomes a detriment to the budget in the short term or to the roster three or four years down the road, and if that means you don't improve the roster at SS this winter then so be it. In the meantime, you husband the resources (both financial and human) that would have gone to that spot and use them to improve the roster somewhere else.





* Would Bourn have been even a two-win** addition to last year's team? ... and, if so, would that have been worth the multi-year deal ($48 mil through 2016 plus a vesting option for '17), the loss of the draft pick, and maybe the overlooking (or trading?) of Lagares simply because he was the best guy out there and the call to "do something" from the fans and the press needing scratching, even if it were partly just for pr purposes?

** Not according to BB-Ref, who list Bourn's offensive WAR at less than 2 wins better than Lagares, a gap which is then wiped out and more by Juan's advantage in defensive WAR

[Edgy MD]

Do calls need scratching? This isn't one of them nufangled smartphones I've been reading about, is it?

[Frayed Knot]

Scratch 'n Sniff phones baby, they're the wave of the future!!

[Edgy MD]

Frayed Knot wrote: * Would Bourn have been even a two-win** addition to last year's team? ... and, if so, would that have been worth the multi-year deal ($48 mil through 2016 plus a vesting option for '17), the loss of the draft pick, and maybe the overlooking (or trading?) of Lagares simply because he was the best guy out there and the call to "do something" from the fans and the press needing scratching, even if it were partly just for pr purposes? ** Not according to BB-Ref, who list Bourn's offensive WAR at less than 2 wins better than Lagares, a gap which is then wiped out and more by Juan's advantage in defensive WAR

For what it's worth, that draft pick turned out to be Dominic Smith, who you may never hear from again, but 50 games into his career, is already tagged by Baseball America as the Mets fourth-best prospect and behind only D'Arnaud among non-pitchers.

[Zvon]

If we get a shortstop, great. It's sad to say almost anyone would be an upgrade. But if we don't I am all in favor of giving Tejeda another shot. He's so young at 24. He can do a decent job, we've seen him do it. In limited play he batted over .280 in both 2011 and '12. It's keeping him on the field and a slightly immature attitude (that's my opinion) that's been a problem. But he's only 24. He really should mature and develop into a solid starting shortstop. There's only one thing stopping him. Himself. I'd be fine with giving him a few months to show if he can get there with us or not. Short leash though.

[ashie62]

The future of the franchise does not depend on Jhonny Peralta being in a Met uniform next year. I'll take him if I can get him but, if not, you live with an alternative and try to improve the team by spending your allowance elsewhere. Well put. I'm with FK on this. Do you have a place where you might start? In short: Elsewhere. - You try other, maybe lesser, FAs: Drew, minor league FAs, roster cuts, DFIs, DNRs, whoever. - You try trade possibilities (will Baltimore move Hardy to make way for Machado?) at either the major or minor league levels - Or you return with Tejada and hope he either bounces back or that a different alternative comes up at a later date. At this time last year no one here (or anywhere else that I know of) was thinking of Eric Young, Marlon Byrd and Juan Lagares as the Mets everyday OFers, or that that trio would be 3rd, 4th & 5th on the entire team in ABs. Things change, and the 2014 rosters aren't required to be set in cement prior to Turkey Day. The point here isn't to say that Peralta won't be an upgrade--of course he would be--only that he's not a 'do whatever it takes' kind of guy or the final piece of the puzzle that we "have to get" now because he'll make such a difference in the 2014 season anymore than Michael Bourn* would have been that guy for the 2013 team. You don't want to get into a deal that he becomes a detriment to the budget in the short term or to the roster three or four years down the road, and if that means you don't improve the roster at SS this winter then so be it. In the meantime, you husband the resources (both financial and human) that would have gone to that spot and use them to improve the roster somewhere else. * Would Bourn have been even a two-win** addition to last year's team? ... and, if so, would that have been worth the multi-year deal ($48 mil through 2016 plus a vesting option for '17), the loss of the draft pick, and maybe the overlooking (or trading?) of Lagares simply because he was the best guy out there and the call to "do something" from the fans and the press needing scratching, even if it were partly just for pr purposes? ** Not according to BB-Ref, who list Bourn's offensive WAR at less than 2 wins better than Lagares, a gap which is then wiped out and more by Juan's advantage in defensive WAR

FK...I just don't believe the approach you are endorsing is aggressive enough...

[ashie62]

Getting Peralta is not going to make or break the 2014 Mets but I don't believe a strategy primarily of "getting lucky" with guys like lesser looked at players Byrd and Young is going to lead to championship baseball.

Why not try to target some known quantities and blend in some speculative picks... Bourn was a bust, but that is one convenient example..

OK Sandy...start with Jacoby Ellsbury..

While you are at it please move Ike and Duda and change the air freshener in the bathroom....

[Mex17]

FK...I just don't believe the approach you are endorsing is aggressive enough...

Agreed. Even though I also agree in theory with a lot of what FK is saying, I also recognize that there is risk in that approach just as there is risk in signing the wrong guy to the wrong contract. You can conceivably look at everyone, point out the flaws in each one, take pass after pass, and end up with no one at the end of the day.

I think the problem with trying to trade for a shortstop (like, for example Ike for JJ Hardy or Yuniel Escobar. . .two possibilities that I have seen floated) is that you would use pieces in that trade that could be used to net a 2nd corner outfielder (after and assuming that we sign one as a free agent).

I am an Alderson supporter (I like the fact that a centered, patient, intellectual is making the calls), but allow me to rephrase the point that I attempted to make earlier. When he came here, there were a lot of problems. Shortstop was not one of them. That became a problem on his watch. Although it was not totally his fault (the financial issues of The Three Stooges had something to do with it as well), part of the reasoning that led to letting the previous shortstop go was that it was believed (and we were told) that there was an in-house solution in place. That in-house solution failed and has now been emasculated publically more than once by the General Manager. In short, we had a shortstop, we got rid of that one because we thought we had another one, we didn't, and now we need a shortstop. . .desperately. That is on Alderson to solve.

[Edgy MD]

Ashie62 wrote: Why not try to target some known quantities and blend in some speculative picks...

They are. The point is to dial the back the success-or-bust talk.

Ashie wrote: Bourn was a bust, but that is one convenient example..

I don't think it's convenient at all. He's the last guy folks demanded the Mets land to prove they are serious. The team backed off when the bidding became too steep, and they probably ended up helping the team for several years.

The Mets should land the right players at the right price and hopefully not to prove anything to anybody.

There are many ways to spend the money they have --- short, pitching, outfield. But there is limited amount to spend, and I've got no problem with walking away when the bidding gets too steep.

[Mex17]

Zvon wrote: If we get a shortstop, great. It's sad to say almost anyone would be an upgrade. But if we don't I am all in favor of giving Tejeda another shot. He's so young at 24. He can do a decent job, we've seen him do it. In limited play he batted over .280 in both 2011 and '12. It's keeping him on the field and a slightly immature attitude (that's my opinion) that's been a problem. But he's only 24. He really should mature and develop into a solid starting shortstop. There's only one thing stopping him. Himself. I'd be fine with giving him a few months to show if he can get there with us or not. Short leash though.

If Murphy goes in a trade, I have no problem throwing Tejada in a competition along with Young and Flores for the second base job. I just don't think that you can unconditionally hand him a starting position on a silver platter again (at either of the two positions). He has already displayed that he cannot self motivate himself in those circumstances.

[Frayed Knot]

* Not aggressive enough --- I'm not saying to back away from Peralta, I'm saying that there's a point (that there's ALWAYS a point) where you have to be willing to say no; that he's not a "have to have" guy simply because he's the flavor of the month best option. What could very well be worse than NOT having him at age 32 is STILL having him at age 36. Aggressive doesn't have to mean reckless.

* Reyes --- That he once was here has nothing to do with the situation going forward and shouldn't color future decisions.

* Tejada --- Jose wasn't not re-signed because they thought Ruben was an equal replacement, nor is the fact that Tejada cratered last year proof that he, at age 24, is forever a bust. Returning to him is merely one option if others don't work out, one which may have the advantage that it would allow them to save resources and improve the team elsewhere and be easier to escape from down the road if/when he doesn't show the promise of a couple years back and a better opportunity comes around.

[Mex17]

Well, this is certainly not encouraging.

http://nypost.com/2013/11/18/tejada-mulling-grievance-vs-mets/