Shortstop 2015

[batmagadanleadoff]

The point isn't so much whether Moncada will pan out or not, but that the Mets play in fucking New York City and couldn't get this guy even if they wanted to. And that the Mets can't get this guy even if they wanted to says about a zillion other bad things about this franchise. The Red Sox aren't a dumb organization; they're one of the best run orgs in all of baseball.

[nymr83]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: The point isn't so much whether Moncada will pan out or not, but that the Mets play in fucking New York City and couldn't get this guy even if they wanted to. And that the Mets can't get this guy even if they wanted to says about a zillion other bad things about this franchise. The Red Sox aren't a dumb organization; they're one of the best run orgs in all of baseball.

The Mets couldn't get this guy if they wanted to? says who? they spent more than this on Michael Cuddyer. I didn't want Cuddyer, but paying so much money for him kinda shows their finances arent as bad as you like to think. And, get this, THE PLAN IS WORKING. the Mets farm system has gotten better each of the last 4 years or so and has gotten to the point where building a homegrown winner is very close to being a reality. Once some combination of Harvey/Wheeler/Syndergaard/DeGrom/Matz/Montero etc and the young bats at almost every position get to the 85 win level, which i think happens this year or next at the latest, the Mets can spend the money to add the missing pieces. this is a better plan than trying to be a late 80's Steinbrenner buying a championship.

[Edgy MD]

I'd consider your points if the Mets were players, but they're not, so it's all moot.

If you're not interested in considering my points, I'd ask you not solicit them.

Whatever "players" means, the Mets certainly were not too long ago. And they made a horrible mess of it, and are still paying.

I doubt that there was any meaningful cost-benefit study undertaken over Moncada.

Or maybe they did and they just didn't come to the conclusion you wanted.

Wake me up when the Mets are ready to join the big market teams in more than name only.

You don't strike me as particularly asleep. Heck, it's after 1:00.

The point isn't so much whether Moncada will pan out or not, but that the Mets play in fucking New York City and couldn't get this guy even if they wanted to.

That may be your point. Mine is that it certainly should matter whether he pans out or not. And spending money with a foolish ill-regard to whether it would pan out is what got them in this mess. Think about it. And I beg you to think hard and not answer me sarcastically. On one hand, you are deriding the organization for not undertaking "any meaningful cost-benefit study undertaken over Moncada." On the other, you insist that any meaningful analysis shouldn't matter. They should just spend money and spend it on THIS guy but they won't or can't and this is New York. Which is it?

The Red Sox aren't a dumb organization; they're one of the best run orgs in all of baseball.

I prefer the Mets. I think we're darn lucky to have the front office our team has. And I'd hate to see it blown up in the next populist revolt.

[batmagadanleadoff]

I root for the Mets and I've defended Alderson every chance I ever had on this board. Sandy's a savior. But that doesn't change anything or get the Wilpons off the hook. The team from New York team should be smart and rich.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Yeah, and see, this is an investment that actually appears to make a LOT of sense, for this or any organization with the stuff to pony up. Even if the kid is a middling major leaguer for five years after two years in the minors, that's a plus-column ROI. If he's anything beyond, then, well, PHWOAR.

How do we know that they weren't in on it? Come now.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Edgy MD wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: I'd consider your points if the Mets were players, but they're not, so it's all moot. If you're not interested in considering my points, I'd ask you not solicit them..

I had to ask you what your point was in order to decide for myself that it's a moot one.

[Edgy MD]

So much reason has died this night.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Edgy MD wrote: So much reason has died this night.

I don't believe there was ever room for Moncada in the Mets skimpy budget, and so therefore, the Mets were never in the market. It appears that you disagree on this point, which neither of us could prove one way or the other. So here we are.

[batmagadanleadoff]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Edgy MD wrote: So much reason has died this night. I don't believe there was ever room for Moncada in the Mets skimpy budget, and so therefore, the Mets were never in the market. It appears that you disagree on this point, which neither of us could prove one way or the other. So here we are.

But that no team should pay the Moncada price for a player like Moncada because he might flop ? That makes no sense to me.

[Edgy MD]

And... we're at the point where you're more interested in talking to yourself again.

Good night.

[batmagadanleadoff]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Edgy MD wrote: So much reason has died this night. I don't believe there was ever room for Moncada in the Mets skimpy budget, and so therefore, the Mets were never in the market. It appears that you disagree on this point, which neither of us could prove one way or the other. So here we are. But that no team should pay the Moncada price for a player like Moncada because he might flop ? That makes no sense to me.

If you told me that a team with a very limited budget should avoid Moncada because it can't afford to make too many mistakes or can't afford to make any costly mistakes, well that's another thing. But that a team from New York should always avoid these kind of signings -- that's absurd.

[Ceetar]

Why does it have to be the Mets are broke or the Mets can spend like money doesn't matter?

It's always going to be somewhere inbetween, and yes it's probably closer to the broke (of course, it's hard to call 100 million broke) side of things.

So whether or not they can/could have/should have splurged to add a prospect to their system, even a highly touted one, there WERE a lot of ancillary considerations like potential prospects they already have to play positions, plus the hard cap on international signings the next two signing periods.

And then, you know, the actual evaluation of the guy. Just because some/many/most see him as likely impact major leaguer doesn't mean the Mets feel he is, or that he fits into their team philosophy and approach.

[batmagadanleadoff]

This is just more delusional rationalization speak as far as I'm concerned. It's like telling me that the homeless person didn't buy the mansion because he didn't like the quality of the kitchen cabinets.

[Ceetar]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: This is just more delusional rationalization speak as far as I'm concerned. It's like telling me that the homeless person didn't buy the mansion because he didn't like the quality of the kitchen cabinets.

But what you're saying is because the guy didn't buy the mansion, he must be homeless.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Ceetar wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: This is just more delusional rationalization speak as far as I'm concerned. It's like telling me that the homeless person didn't buy the mansion because he didn't like the quality of the kitchen cabinets. But what you're saying is because the guy didn't buy the mansion, he must be homeless.

Not really. See, I already know that the Mets are that homeless guy even before Moncada went on the market.

Mets fans are justified in thinking that way based on years of the team's financially embarrassing behavior --- including, among other things, taking out a bridge loan to essentially pay their electric bill. I'm still waiting for that Santana and Bay money to be re-invested in the team. You wanna give the Mets the benefit of the doubt -- which you always do? Go ahead. It's your right. You wanna express total disbelief over opinions like mine? That, I don't get.

Edited February 24, 2015 by Guest

[Vic Sage]

Obviously the evaluation of the player is paramount. Spending doesn't mean spending for the sake of spending, at least not to me. But we finally have a GM i trust to make these judgments, so if he determined that this guy is either more hype than substance, or simply not what the scouts say he is, then i'm totally fine with that. But if he really liked this guy and simply wasn't given the resources to pursue him, then i would be pissed. And whatever other prospects we have in our system is irrelevant. If you think a guy can be great, you get him if you can. And I don't think the presence of Herrera on our 40-man roster, or Uhrena or any other 2b/3b prospects in our system would be any reason not to pursue a 5-tool IFer. And a "hard cap" is bullshit. Its not a hard cap. Its a threshhold amount over which you pay a tax. So its just more money that they could choose to spend, just as Boston did in this situation where they were facing the exact same circumstance.

Of course a 19-year old from Cuba is a risk. I'd even say a high risk. But that is EXACTLY the kind of edge a big revenue team should have over other teams, the ability to take financial risks and, if they don't pan out, still be able to move on to the next plan. Budgets aren't infinite and costs matter, but they should be less of a constraint here than many other places because of a NY franchise's potential revenue streams. Yet the recent consistency of our annual payrolls in the $80-$100m range (in the lower half, and sometimes the lower third of team payrolls in all of MLB), while other top teams are in the $150m range (with 2 over $200m), along with the documented financial woes arising out of their Madoff dealings, cannot help but make reasonable people suspicious of their decision-making process.

Oh, and as far as risks go, the price of 30-year old FAs are a hell of a lot more, and are alot more short-term and alot riskier (with an established track record of failure) than pursuing a 19-year old with long term potential. so a preference for spending the money on Bonillas and Colemans of the world strikes me as the kind of thing we used to do and shouldn't do any more.

Do we know if the Mets were actively in on the bidding? No we don't, though other teams were reported to be actively in pursuit and the Mets were reported to be "not interested" from the jump. And if the Mets lack of interest was purely Sandy's player evaluation, then fine, move along, nothing more to see. But my suspicion is this more a financial constraint imposed by the corrupt WontPons than a baseball decision. I can't know, and neither can anyone else, but the circumstantial evidence supports that conclusion. To which i say, at the risk of repeating myself, Fuck you Freddie... sell the team and let me breathe again.

[Ceetar]

it is in fact a hard cap on international signings for the next two periods.

So strictly from that sense, you're already gambling on there being no 'big time' prospects in the next two periods. So, everything else aside it's already a calculated risk. Do you want this guy, or do you have info or hope that they'll be something else you'd rather take your shot on? All the evaluation stuff plays in to that, in particular the idea that this guy isn't ready now. Everything is a risk/reward balance and that ratio is not the same for every team.

chalking up every decision as "oh, they're broke" is a knee-jerk reaction, especially when the other ones are "oh, that's just to pretend they're not broke".

But again, money or not it's not hard to see how throwing a lot of money to add a single minor leaguer is not a good way towards building the sustained revenue>expenditures balance that Sandy's working towards.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Ceets, we're just talking in circles. I know what the issues are. The real estate market might go flat. They're gonna have to change all the furniture because they don't like the style of the decor. It's too far away from everything. A better deal might come along if they wait a little longer. Blah blah blah. But what does all of that matter when they're penniless?

[Ceetar]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Ceets, we're just talking in circles. I know what the issues are. The real estate market might go flat. They're gonna have to change all the furniture because they don't like the style and taste of what's in there. It's too far away from everything. A better deal may come along if they wait a little longer. Blah blah blah. But what does all of that matter when they're penniless?

What if they're not penniless? And what's the point in commenting on every single thing every other team does as "The Mets could've done that if they weren't broke"? I'm more interested in if these moves make sense or not. They're not exactly slam dunks, everyone has a different opinion on how the team should be run, clearly. So if you're going to say "This is undoubtedly a thing the Mets should've done" I'm simply pointing out that that is not true. It doesn't matter if the ultimate reason they didn't do it was money, it's still true that it's not a 100% slam dunk decision or that Sandy might have felt this particular move's risks outweighted the rewards. If you simply want to say "The Mets are broke" to everything, keep posting the Megdal post-generator stuff to the finance thread.

[batmagadanleadoff]

I'm not even arriving at that point of deciding whether the thing is worth doing because I think that the Mets can't do it even if they wanted to. To me, it's pointless. It's like the homeless guy shopping for mansions if I may talk in circles against my best wishes. If, for example, the Mets were asked about Moncada, do you think their spokesperson would admit that they would've loved to sign Moncada if only they had the funds in their budget? You always base your opinions on the team's politically correct comments. When they finally get a prospect or two for Gee, do you think they'll admit that they dumped salary? No. They'll say that they made the best deal possible, even if they were constrained from trading Gee for someone with a comparable or, shudder, even higher salary.

[Edgy MD]

Vic Sage wrote: Do we know if the Mets were actively in on the bidding? No we don't, though other teams were reported to be actively in pursuit and the Mets were reported to be "not interested" from the jump.

Well, they were reported to have actively scouted him.

[Ceetar]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: I'm not even arriving at that point of deciding whether the thing is worth doing because I think that the Mets can't do it even if they wanted to. To me, it's pointless. It's like the homeless guy shopping for mansions if I may talk in circles against my best wishes. If, for example, the Mets were asked about Moncada, do you think their spokesperson would admit that they would've loved to sign Moncada if only they had the funds in their budget? You always base your opinions on the team's politically correct comments. When they finally get a prospect or two for Gee, do you think they'll admit that they dumped salary? No. They'll say that they made the best deal possible, even if they were constrained from trading Gee for someone with a comparable or, shudder, even higher salary.

Gee is NOT a salary dump, it's a value dump. They don't have room for him and if he only pitches as mostly a reliever his value drops. But it's not really a dump at all or they would've done it already. They know he's probably more valuable to another team than to the Mets, therefore they want to leverage that difference into something that helps the Mets more. That's just smart baseball.

I base none of my opinions on what the Mets say, because nothing the Mets say publicly, or 'privately but really publicly because I know you're going to publish this quote' really means much of anything.

I'm just looking at the hard facts around Moncada and certainly see ways that any team could feel like he wasn't worth it.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Ceetar wrote: Gee is NOT a salary dump, it's a value dump.

That's what the Mets'll say after it happens. That's for sure.

[nymr83]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Ceetar wrote: Gee is NOT a salary dump, it's a value dump. That's what the Mets'll say after it happens. That's for sure.

if they just wanted to dump the salary why isnt he gone already?
if the Mets are so cheap why wasn't Murphy dumped for nothing? the Mets could easily have "justified" it by saying Herrera is ready.

Maybe its because the Mets are actually holding onto their assets to use wisely? nah, that wouldn't fit your conspiracy theories.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Nymr83 wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Ceetar wrote: Gee is NOT a salary dump, it's a value dump. That's what the Mets'll say after it happens. That's for sure. if they just wanted to dump the salary why isnt he gone already? if the Mets are so cheap why wasn't Murphy dumped for nothing? the Mets could easily have "justified" it by saying Herrera is ready. Maybe its because the Mets are actually holding onto their assets to use wisely? nah, that wouldn't fit your conspiracy theories.

Maybe the Mets are waiting for the best deal possible that would still qualify as a salary dump. They're not gonna simply release those players into the wind. Why is my view a conspiracy theory? Have you been conditioned to lower your expectations? Are you justifying and accepting the status quo? Don't you think that the team from New York City should have one of the top two or three or four or five or six payrolls in baseball? Every. Single. Season. Do you really believe that there are no significant financial restraints on the Mets ability to spend? Sandy Alderson's a magician but if he could spend what a big market team ought to spend, the Mets would likely be even farther along in their progress. They might've already had that season under Sandy where they won more than half their games.

[Guest d'Kong76]

February 27, 2015
Jose Reyes on Mets' Ruben Tejada: 'Something is wrong'
by Igor Mello | CBSSports.com
When asked about former Mets teammate Ruben Tejada, Blue Jays shortstop Jose Reyes shook his head and said "something is wrong," per Newsday.

Reyes revealed that during his final season with the Mets he tried to pass the torch to Tejada to become his replacement. Reyes landed in Miami in the offseason, and Tejada was destined to be his permanent replacement. Now entering spring training, Wilmer Flores is viewed as the favorite to win the starting job at shortstop for the Mets.

"Every time I talk to him I try to give him some advice," Reyes said. "What can I do? I try to push him to do stuff. I don't know if he gets it or not...He had the opportunity to be the everyday shortstop for a long time there in New York. You have to work, man. When you're younger, you think you have everything there for you. But if you do something wrong, it's going to go away. Quick.

"When I was there, I always give a lot of advice to him. We were always together. My last year there, every time I talk to him: 'This is going to be your position for a long time. Don't let it go away.' See what happened now? It's 2015 and he doesn't have a position to play. When they talk about who is going to play every day, they don't talk about Tejada. They talk about Flores."

[Edgy MD]

The original story, from Newsday, suggests a more indicting tone from Reyes, that the "something wrong" clearly is (or was ) Tejada's attitude.

Reyes has trimmed his chin fray and let his mustache come in, and looks less rabbinical.



The subtextual thesis that's crying out there is that Reyes apparently knew his whole last season that he was going to bail.

[Centerfield]

Makes it seem like Jose didn't have any intention on re-signing well before he hit free agency. Interesting.

[Edgy MD]

Jimmy Rollins apparently wasn't quite as Mets-averse as all that.

"This was my No. 1 landing spot," Rollins said from Los Angeles' spring training camp, "and I considered the Mets to be No. 2. They have some arms over there -- oh my gosh. "I'm not saying I would have gone there. It would have taken a lot. But when I was asked, 'Write down the places you would go if you don't have any (no-trade protection),' I had one team on my list and another where I would go if it didn't work out. Fortunately it worked out here (in Los Angeles). I'm very delighted with that."

Doesn't quite say which "lot" it would have taken.

[Frayed Knot]

Ken Davidoff at the NYPost pries the lid off the SS discussion once again. Nuthin like a few errors plus an off day to wake up slumbering spirits. (it's partly why this thread is 20 pages long!!)
Specifically he mentions:

- Alexi Ramirez (ChiSox): His team is off to a crappy start despite their off-season spending spree ... but so it Alexi [.205/.247/.295].
Only on a one-year deal and would certainly help the defense

- Asdrubal Cabrera (TBR): Off to an even crappier start [.194/.250/.269] after signing a one year deal as a FA in the off season. Notable in that the Mets weren't interested at the time.
Also like Ramirez, he's coming off a decent 2014 so maybe the slow start is just that.

- Troy Tulowitzki (Rox): You know that no article can be written about potential NYM SS without including this guy. Still going to be expensive both in terms of money and live bodies. And, look, the 30 y/o coming off hip surgery who will be your through the 2020 season is somewhat off from his elite so far this season.

- Starlin Castro (CHC): Again it's in the writers handbook that he needs to be mentioned; Mets have lots of pitching, Cubs have lots of SSs, etc.

- Jimmy Rollins (LAD): I know, he just signed there. But this is based on the idea that the Dodgers' up-and-coming SS (Corey Seager) could be ready soon and that Rollins too is off to a slow start [.176/.269/.308].
Player can veto any trade.