Now let's resume our discussion of Ben Zobrist

[Centerfield]

I think, Born-Again Turner aside, Ben Zobrist is head and shoulders better than the other guys you mention in your post. But your point is well-taken.

I think our version of Zobrist is Murphy. And he's younger and less expensive.

I think the question we have to ask is who will be better over these next few years. Early 30's Murphy or late 30's Zobrist.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Centerfield wrote: I think the question we have to ask is who will be better over these next few years. Early 30's Murphy or late 30's Zobrist.

I'm starting to hope Murph wants to stay a Met and something
gets worked out that isn't too nutty in years and financially. I
feel this way so much I'm gonna go post this in his thread too!

What would next year's Mets be without some Muffy? Moiph?
The Muffster? Watching him rake in the rarefied air of Coor's
Field would really suck.

[Edgy MD]

Centerfield wrote: I think, Born-Again Turner aside, Ben Zobrist is head and shoulders better than the other guys you mention in your post. But your point is well-taken.

Certainly, I just don't have $40 million worth of confidence that he will be over the next four years. Some other Zobrist will sprout up and get trampled under foot without a chance to shine. To SHINE!

Murphy vs. Zobrist? I'm surprised to hear myself say this, but I'm leaning toward Murphy. Maybe that's a devil-you-know issue. Maybe that's a holdover from my last post.

If it's a choice, I'd prefer they went for neither and threw all the allotted money into the Cespedes chest.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

[Dupe]

Edited November 20, 2015 by Guest

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

I get the Maybe Murph argument; after all, Murph made some (apparently sustainable) significant offensive-approach adjustments last year, and we have a very good idea of the floor of what he'll give us over the life of the next deal... it's just that it'll be a more expensive version of Same Old Murph. If you've got significant doubts about Zobrist's aging curve, I get that, and I get Murph as a devil-you-know alternative.

But if you're worried about aging, and bang for buck, holy SHIT is Cespedes the wrong basket in which to store your $100M+ eggs. Deficient on-base skills, highly BABIP-and-athleticism-dependent value... the floor on a large-scale contract with this sort of skill set, well, it's hard to see the bottom. This is the kind of guy that falls off a fucking cliff once age hits, and the kind of guy who will likely provide below-AAV value in off- or normal years, health-and-aging issues aside.

[Vic Sage]

i'm always dubious at throwing big money at 35+ utility guys, even very good ones. Yes, he's been a better player than Murphy, but not HUGELY better, and Murphy is likely to maintain his production over the next few years, while Zobrist is past his expiration date. That being said, i'd prefer they threw the money, not at Murphy OR Cespedes (whose pitch-chasing hackitude became quite clear after his 6-week Aug-Sept burst), but at Heyward or Upton.

[Centerfield]

Especially since Dilson Herrera can possibly be that guy that Edgy is talking about. And if he's not yet ready, we can sign a cheap veteran like Kelly Johnson as insurance (doubles as Wright insurance too).

Definitely go Heyward and Upton.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

I think I agree. Unfortunately, I'm not sure the guys with Mets business cards do.

Edited November 20, 2015 by Guest

[Centerfield]

This is why we should be raising hell!

You know, getting up from our chair abruptly, knocking over pen holders!

We should also cross our arms and tap our foot like we really mean it.

[Edgy MD]

I think I agree too.

I mean, they have two capable established infielders in Tejada and Flores. Neither is blowing your mind, but they serve as starters and have possible room to improve. They have two coming, possibly-exciting league-ready middle infielders pushing them in Reynolds and Herrera. And they have some meaningful prospects (Checchini, Rosario...) behind that. Heyward for the outfield and let Johnson or his like try and be our Zobrist. Secondary selections? Maybe, but market-savviness is nothing to be ashamed of.

[Centerfield]

Edgy MD wrote: I think I agree too. I mean, they have two capable established infielders in Tejada and Flores. Neither is blowing your mind, but they serve as starters and have possible room to improve. They have two coming, possibly-exciting league-ready middle infielders pushing them in Reynolds and Herrera. And they have some meaningful prospects (Checchini, Rosario...) behind that. Heyward for the outfield and let Johnson or his like try and be our Zobrist. Secondary selections? Maybe, but market-savviness is nothing to be ashamed of.

[Guest d'Kong76]

I waffle hourly, like Bill Clinton on crack.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

CLINTON: So, that's Sub-Saharan leadership taken care of. What else, Jim?

FOUNDATION OFFICER: So, the next order of business is something pretty pressing; we've been putting off the discussion of the aid escrow account for a VERY long time, and things have rea--

[iPhone buzzing]

CLINTON: Excuse me, ladies and gents. [sprints to waffle cubby]

[Ceetar]

the "try to be our Zobrist" thing is faulty. No one's going to be our Zobrist because Zobrist is special.

We can try to find/use/keep a utility guy that's a decent option, but that's a different discussion. A guy like Kelly Johnson that you don't really have to play, and don't really want as a regular starter, but is a perfectly acceptable replacement/fill-in/etc. But he's not.._good_. Zobrist is a legitimate hitter that improves the lineup. Zobrist doesn't just improve the lineup, he improves it with the added flexibility of being able to be maneuvered defensively to pick the best other player to put in the lineup too.

You could even just think of Zobrist as a 2B and it's a reasonable move.

[Edgy MD]

Ceetar wrote: Zobrist doesn't just improve the lineup, he improves it with the added flexibility of being able to be maneuvered defensively to pick the best other player to put in the lineup too.

I understand.

I love versatility and I think managers under-utilize it when they have it.

[Guest d'Kong76]

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.

[Ceetar]

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.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Fantasize what you like, he's old in 2016 and even older in 2020.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Just for more posterity, Ceets... Zobrist would have made the Mets not
lose the WS 4 games to 1? Tell me in my right ear, that's my good one.

[Ceetar]

d'Kong76 wrote: Just for more posterity, Ceets... Zobrist would have made the Mets not lose the WS 4 games to 1? Tell me in my right ear, that's my good one.

I mean, the games were close and Daniel Murphy sucked and made critical errors and Zobrist was good. It's not really a stretch to see it going differently if you swapped them.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Please be reasonable, no player is solely responsible for losing four
games out of five... nor would BZ change that so dramatically.

[A Boy Named Seo]

Ceetar wrote: d'Kong76 wrote: Just for more posterity, Ceets... Zobrist would have made the Mets not lose the WS 4 games to 1? Tell me in my right ear, that's my good one. I mean, the games were close and Daniel Murphy sucked and made critical errors and Zobrist was good. It's not really a stretch to see it going differently if you swapped them.

I'm no rules expert, but I don't think MLB allows trades turning the World Series and I seem to recall Murph being kind of important to us in the getting-to-the-World-Series part.

[Ceetar]

d'Kong76 wrote: Please be reasonable, no player is solely responsible for losing four games out of five... nor would BZ change that so dramatically.

I'm clearly exaggerating but having another player be good rather than bad would definitely have made things a hell of a lot closer.

Zobrist is a hell of a lot better than Murphy and I'm just trying to understand why everyone is underrating him. Hell, his career OPS+ is better than Heyward too.

The only real drawback positionally is third where you'd obviously like to have someone to backup Wright that doesn't suck. but the biggest question marks in terms of offensive production is MI and LF and Zobrist can play all of those. And he's going to provide more oWAR than Flores and Tejada. There's a fair chance that's true even in Zobrist's age 37 2019.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Exaggerating, backpedaling, waffling... gonna be a long winter.

[Ceetar]

d'Kong76 wrote: Exaggerating, backpedaling, waffling... gonna be a long winter.

Oh, cause that's different from the regular season or anybody else here?

Zobrist is awesome. He's one of the best free agent hitters the Mets can get, plays good defense, and fits in positions they don't have locked down. And it's not like he's likely to get 6/150. The risk, inherent in any player really, of him not being good at the end of the contract isn't the end of the world to eat, even for the Mets.

[Guest d'Kong76]

Special and now awesome!
Don't get sore, I'm busting some plums here a little. Please admit
you have him on 4 of your 5 fantasy teams.

[Ceetar]

d'Kong76 wrote: Special and now awesome! Don't get sore, I'm busting some plums here a little. Please admit you have him on 4 of your 5 fantasy teams.

didn't get him this year. But yes, I've been drafting him for years. Was a great SS option for a long time.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

I don't mind Zobrist -- he'd be a valuable guy to have: Much better than Johnson, every bit as good as Muffy, plus a better glove. I do wonder though if he'd go for a reserve-type role where we have Flores and Hererra as 2B options already and a need for a new everyday SS. Him & Cuddy is a dangerous bench with good veteranism.

[Guest d'Kong76]

I don't think the people who are loudly banging the BZ drum are
looking at him as a role player. The him and Cuddster thing are a
different kind of dangerous to me... and not of the good variety.

[Frayed Knot]

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.