Now let's resume our discussion of Ben Zobrist

[Guest Rockin' Doc]

Ceetar wrote: d'Kong76 wrote: Just for posterity, put me down for a NO on Zobrist. He ain't that special. Mock me in September if he's the golden child. if the Mets had Zobrist instead of Murphy they'd be world champs.

Not likely. If the Mets had Zobrist (rather than Murphy) they likely wouldn't have gotten past the Dodgers.

[Edgy MD]

There's that, as long as we're going for the small sample size argument.

And, of course, any measuring of the two against one another shouldn't be based on how they each looked for a single week in November, but how they project to perform over the next three-to-four years.

I'd certainly call that an open question.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Several news stories today are reiterating that Zobrist is the number one Mets target this offseason.

Here are two tweets from Ken Rosenthal:

Zobrist #Mets� No. 1 target, sources say. #Nationals also in, along with #Braves, #SFGiants, others. #Royals not expected to offer same $$$.

Sources: Zobrist market likely to become more defined in next few days. Willingness to guarantee fourth year likely will be deciding factor.

[nymr83]

Zobrist is a hell of a lot better than Murphy and I'm just trying to understand why everyone is underrating him. Not under-rating him, just rating him in the light of a contract that will (most likely) run for multiple years starting the month he turns 35. He's a lower average hitter than Murphy though with better OBP skills and somewhat more power: reached 20 HRs 3 times but two of those years were exactly 20 and hasn't topped 13 since 2012. The one season where he hit 27 is now seven years in the rearview mirror. And, yes, he's a better fielder/runner than Muff but is also a full four years older.

I would suspect that the percentage of hitters who (1) hit 20 homers three times before age 32 (2) didn't hit 20 homers in their age 32, 33 or 34 seasons, and (3) ever hit 20 homers again is likely <10%.

Zobrist would be amazing as a 1-year rental like the Moises Alou contract we once gave out, 2 years would be ok. but he isnt going to get that deal and isnt going to be someone's super-sub or Kelly Johnson replacement. he's going to get paid to be someone starter for at least 3 years, likely 4. The question needs to be: are you willing to invest in that? i'm probably not.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

I'm curious as to why the Mets are so hot for this guy. I mean, he brings a lot to the table -- versatility, switch-hittability etc. But what do they envision for deploying him? At 2B with Flores? As a platoon corner guy? Shortstop?!?

[Edgy MD]

I'm all there too.

The Mets were so cool to the marketplace for middle infielders the last two years, so why is the oldest option in the third year suddenly a must-have, now that they may have Flores established and Herrera on the verge? Do they think Tejada's injury is debilitating? And even if they do, they're targeting a bad shortstop option. So it's Flores back to short and Z at second with Herrera standing by. I find that somewhat less-than-ideal, but it does allow them to pivot as injuries develop.

[nymr83]

also allowing you to pivot: not committing large sums of money over multiple years to an aging 2B who can't play SS and spending the money as the needs actually develop in-season (such as by eating a contract for a decent player that a non-contender doesn't want anymore)

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Mr. Bad Shortstop Option has served nearly 2000 career innings there-- averaging 30-plus games a year from 2008-2014-- for the defensively-minded Fighting Maddons. He's also played a more-than-credible corner OF, faked 200 innings of CENTER, and inspired the Fielding Bible's creation of a multi-position player award with his all-around defensive solidity.

Injury cover, Wright Rules flexibility, double-switchitude... assuming he doesn't fall off a cliff, production-wise, he allows you QUITE a bit of pivot. (Including-- depending on new contract AAV-- in-season trade value should plans change.)

[Edgy MD]

Nymr83 wrote: also allowing you to pivot: not committing large sums of money over multiple years to an aging 2B who can't play SS and spending the money as the needs actually develop in-season (such as by eating a contract for a decent player that a non-contender doesn't want anymore)

This is true.

It's worth noting that it took the Mets two months to start adding players last season though, even though their needs appeared earlier, as the trade market hadn't yet developed.

[nymr83]

yeah, and good things came to those who waited

[MFS62]

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Mr. Bad Shortstop Option has served nearly 2000 career innings there-- averaging 30-plus games a year from 2008-2014-- for the defensively-minded Fighting Maddons. He's also played a more-than-credible corner OF, faked 200 innings of CENTER, and inspired the Fielding Bible's creation of a multi-position player award with his all-around defensive solidity.

Speaking of more than credible, when he was playing for the MFYs we heard that Cletis Boyer was the top defensive third baseman in baseball, even better than (gasp!) Brooks Robinson. I recently looked it up. Brooks' was better (.971) Clete's career fielding pct was .965.

I know there are now better ways to measure defense, but that was all we had. So that number has stuck in my head as the number against which all others third basemen were measured.
Last time I looked, Ben Zobrist's is .966!

IMO if either have to play outfield it would not be a good situation.
I still prefer re-signing Murphy if the money is comparable, because of his age.
But I would be ok if they signed Ben, too.

Later

[Frayed Knot]

In 10 ML seasons -- 7 full-time + 3 partials -- Zobrist has logged the equivalent of one-plus year as a SS [196 games started - 167 complete games]
But more than half of his time there (109 starts) came in his first three seasons [2006-08] as a 25, 26 & 27 y/o. Since then he's logged no time at all there in some years ('10, '11, & '15) and more than 25 starts only once (47 in 2012) which gives you the idea that he was looked at more as an emergency/injury fill-in than anything else. And, just as a reminder, he turns 35 in May when he'll be in Month #2 of a deal running three years at minimum and quite likely four.

Which isn't to say that you don't talk to him or about him, just don't do so with the idea that he's going to solve our SS dilemma. Ideally he'd be your 3rd option there.

[Guest d'Kong76]

http://espn.go.com/blog/new-york/mets/post/_/id/113463/mets-remain-interested-in-ben-zobrist-but-four-years-not-foreseeable

[Guest d'Kong76]

http://www.myajc.com/news/sports/baseball/braves-interested-in-versatile-veteran-zobrist/npYL7/

[Vic Sage]

Asdrubel Cabrera? No thanks. he's not bad, but he's not very good anymore either. Middling power, limited range. I'd rather have Zobrist, even at his age. But i don't want Zobe either... at least not for more than a year or 2. Actually, come to think of it, that would be fine. Ok, sign Zobe for 4 years, and even if he sucks toward the end, we're a NY franchise and can afford to carry an expensive UT guy or dump him if necessary.

Zobe = 4/$60m
Heyward = 7/$130m

C'mon, Fred, put on your big boy pants. Sign Zobe and Heyward and we'll be good to go. It would probably put our payroll at around $120M next year (or thereabouts), which still wouldn't have been in the top 10 last year.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Vic Sage wrote: C'mon, Fred, put on your big boy pants. Sign Zobe and Heyward and we'll be good to go. It would probably put our payroll at around $120M next year (or thereabouts), which still wouldn't have been in the top 10 last year.

Boy is this sad but true, when a $120M payroll is, for the Mets, lofty and probably unobtainable. Best case scenario for payroll, I predict, is that they'll raise it by five to ten mil and crow about it like they outspent the Dodgers. Meanwhile, with all the extra unanticipated dough the Mets made this year from their WS run, and from more baseball $$ because the sport is a cash cow breaking revenue records every year, the payroll increase will be like those minimum wage increases that don't keep pace with the cost of living and inflation.

Edited November 30, 2015 by Guest

[Edgy MD]

I wouldn't expect the Mets to crow about their payroll.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Edgy MD wrote: I wouldn't expect the Mets to crow about their payroll.

I'm gonna take that as an "agree" on the rest of what I wrote.

[Centerfield]

Vic Sage wrote: Asdrubel Cabrera? No thanks. he's not bad, but he's not very good anymore either. Middling power, limited range. I'd rather have Zobrist, even at his age. But i don't want Zobe either... at least not for more than a year or 2. Actually, come to think of it, that would be fine. Ok, sign Zobe for 4 years, and even if he sucks toward the end, we're a NY franchise and can afford to carry an expensive UT guy or dump him if necessary. Zobe = 4/$60m Heyward = 7/$130m C'mon, Fred, put on your big boy pants. Sign Zobe and Heyward and we'll be good to go. It would probably put our payroll at around $120M next year (or thereabouts), which still wouldn't have been in the top 10 last year.

Yup.

My fear is that they will sign Zobrist as their "big acquisition" and do nothing else to improve the offense. And for some reason, lots of fans and media will let them off the hook for this.

[Centerfield]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Edgy MD wrote: I wouldn't expect the Mets to crow about their payroll. I'm gonna take that as an "agree" on the rest of what I wrote.

I can't speak for Edgy, but I don't think the Mets will crow about their payroll, and I don't think that the extra $5 million or $10 million is a best case scenario. Even this past season they took on additional salary.

I'd say best case scenario is $120 or $125 million. Maybe I'm dumb, but I still hold out hope that the Wilpons will come through for us.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Centerfield wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Edgy MD wrote: I wouldn't expect the Mets to crow about their payroll. I'm gonna take that as an "agree" on the rest of what I wrote. I can't speak for Edgy, but I don't think the Mets will crow about their payroll, and I don't think that the extra $5 million or $10 million is a best case scenario. Even this past season they took on additional salary. I'd say best case scenario is $120 or $125 million. Maybe I'm dumb, but I still hold out hope that the Wilpons will come through for us.

I was joking about the crow part. Isn't that obvious? What am I -- a madman?

Taking on salary --- I doubt it. I think they used the money saved on Mejia and received from Wright's insurance policy to pay for Cespedes and the other add-ons. I wouldn't be surprised if their end of season payroll was lower than what they started with.

[Edgy MD]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: I was joking about the crow part. Isn't that obvious? What am I -- a madman?

Mad, no. But no, the joke isn't obvious.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Oh, the payroll isn't going up substantially. I'm just done talking about it, because I'm done complaining about it. The weather is the weather, you know? One adjusts.

[Centerfield]

Payroll isn't like the weather. No matter how much you complain, it won't change. Payroll is man made. In fact, it's one man. And that man is susceptible to fan discontent, media pressure, criticisms of his character.

If the over-arching theme of this post-season was that it was time for the Wilpons to spend, I have no doubt it would have an effect on payroll. If the blogosphere, twitterverse, fan fora, and beat writers all called him out on his promise in February of 2013, I think that Wilpon could be pressured to act.

But we likely will never know, because the pressure is not there.

Acceptance? Come on man. Is that what Malcolm taught us?

[Vic Sage]

preach it, brudda.

[Vic Sage]

oh, and weather is man-made, too. Ask the polar bears.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

He was shamed publicly for a half-decade, dragged into court for that same period of time, lost a ton of profits as his customers refused to buy his watered-down product, and was forced to take out still more loans just to retain team ownership (interest service alone is a payroll's worth of cash each year, no?).

You think fan pressure is going to get him to do ANYTHING? If he feels like opening the coffers, he may. I don't think he will, and-- with the caveat that I'm not privy to any special knowledge about team inner workings-- I'm pretty certain I'm right about that.

Anyway, yeah, I'm tentatively on-board with Zobrist pursuit as a pursuit.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Yeah, I don't think shame (as an MLB owner) is in the
Wilpon's vocabulary at this point. That bar's been set
pretty damn low already.

[Vic Sage]

As Camus observed regarding the myth of Sisyphus, we define ourselves not by the success of our accomplishments or our intentions, but by our actions, even in the face of futility. Continuing to push a rock up a hill in full knowledge that it will roll down on you every time, is an existential act of courage in a godless universe; we create meaning for ourselves by our choices. In the face of a meaningless and absurd task, Sisyphus creates meaning by simply continuing to apply himself to it. So, I choose to howl at the wind that is Fred Wilpon. How the wind responds has nothing to do with me. I expect nothing from the wind. But by naming the wind as merely a gale of hot air, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing, i stand in opposition to the wind, shaking my fist at the sky, and laugh at its indifference.

For this is where i stand, this is who i am. Who are you?

This has been a message from PAW -- Philosophers Against Wilpon -- shaking our PAW at the sky since 1942.

[Edgy MD]

Camus collides with MacBeth, or something.