should we be talking about Denard Span?

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

I think we should.

I think if the docs check him out and all looks good, he'd make a nice addition in CF. Can platoon with Lagares, might not break the bank, gets on base and steals.

Former teammate of Cuddyer. Uses Twitter to quote bible passages. Knows the enemy pretty well. Non QO'ed.

[Benjamin Grimm]

He'll turn 32 in spring training. Made $9 million last year with the Nationals. Played a full season in 2014 at age 30, with 184 hits, 39 doubles, 50 walks, and 39 steals.

What exactly were his health-related issues?

[Guest d'Kong76]

He's rehabbing from hip surgery... yikes. He started jogging a
week or so ago, sounds kinda risky to me. (and aarp-ee too)

[Benjamin Grimm]

Hip surgery sounds a little scary. I wonder how well a doctor can evaluate how he's recovering, and how that would translate to his on-the-field abilities.

[Guest d'Kong76]

I misread, he was expected to start jogging in two weeks on
Nov 6 according to a blurb on rotoworlddotcom...

[Benjamin Grimm]

Washington Post, August 28 wrote: The optimism surrounding Denard Span�s return from back trouble earlier this week morphed quickly to disappointment Friday. The Nationals placed Span on the disabled list with left hip inflammation, and a person familiar with the situation said he will have season-ending hip surgery on Tuesday. Nationals Manager Matt Williams reports the surgery involves the labrum in his hip.

Washington Post, September 1 wrote: Denard Span underwent successful surgery on his left hip in New York on Tuesday morning. According to Nationals Manager Matt Williams, a labrum tear in Span�s hip was fixed and some bone was shaved down to clear space. �He�ll recover for a few days and then get to the therapy part of it which starts almost immediately,� Williams said. �He went through it well. Procedure went well. He�s on the road to recovery now.� Before surgery, Span said he expected a 4-6 month recovery. Span, who has been with the Nationals since 2013, is a free agent at season�s end and his Aug. 26 game is likely his last in a Washington uniform.

He sounds quite risky. I wonder if he'd go for a one-year contract so he can go to market again next year with a healthy season behind him?

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: He'll turn 32 in spring training.

d'Kong76 wrote: He's rehabbing from hip surgery... yikes.

[metsmarathon]

i think span is a risk worth taking, provided the price is right.

[Guest d'Kong76]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote:

Me neither!

[Benjamin Grimm]

I guess a tweet is just about as good as a medical report from a physician!

[Guest d'Kong76]

I'd prefer a tweet from his surgeon!

[HahnSolo]

FWIW in my lurking on Nats boards in August/September, fans loved this guy and pointed to his absence as one of the big reasons they fell short.

Otherwise I got nothing.

[Benjamin Grimm]

metsmarathon wrote: i think span is a risk worth taking, provided the price is right.

I agree. It looks like he has a pretty high upside. I don't know what the right price would be. The same is true of the length of the contract. One or two years with options that kick in automatically if he's healthy? Would he go for that? I guess it depends on how much competition there is for his services.

[Centerfield]

He didn't get a QO right? That might tell you something.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Yeah that he's not worth a $15-million 1-year contract but we knew that already.

[ashie62]

We already have Span and his name is Juan Lagares.

[Edgy MD]

Well, this one bats left-handed and gets on base more prodigiously. So he has the potential to be a nice complementary figure whose redundancy would allow the team to link his playing time to his performance.

[Frayed Knot]

Had a whole slew of injury problems the past year, one just seemed to lead into another. And, yes, I do think his absence was one of several factors that kept the Nats from being what most expected them to be this past season.
Would be the leadoff type of guy we've been missing (especially attractive to those on the 'Get Grandy to the middle of the order' campaign). Would want him short-term though just one year probably isn't possible.

[Fman99]

Ashie62 wrote: We already have Span and his name is Juan Lagares.

That's kind of what I was thinking. We need a power bat. Span ain't that. Theoretically losing 30+ HR worth from last year's lineup (Murphy + 1/2 year of Cespedes) and replacing it with a leadoff type?

[Edgy MD]

Theoretically, but if Moneyball taught us anything, it's to not try and fill in number stats like that.

Work on rates, out rates and safety rates and stuff like that. Else we just get ourselves caught up in a Heyward-or-Cespedes-or-bust situation. But neither of them, while they may cost the moon, are ideal fits either.

[Frayed Knot]

Yeah, there's always more than one way to skin el gato.

Runs Created/Game (per BB-Ref)
Span (2014 + 2015): 5.8, 6.1
Cespedes: 4.6, 6.1

What you give up in power you get back in OBP plus a bushel full of doubles and triples.
Now 2015 was only a partial year for Span and 2014 one of his best ones, but the RC numbers between the two are fairly similar given the small-ish sample size of Cespedes's US-based career. And that's all before you bring fielding/running into the equation.

[Lefty Specialist]

Go get Parra and you're done. Span may not be old, but he's got an old body.

[Edgy MD]

I'm kind of unable to escape the alternative, more literal meaning of the sentence "Go get Parra and you're done." Parra has had one goodish year, back in 2010.

And there he was last year, seemingly in the midst of an excellent one, in his walk season, and he got traded to a contender and absolutely sank. And the Orioles best aspirations sank with him. We could be done, indeed.

I can't speak to Span's healthy, but I have more faith in a gimpy Span than a healthy Parra. The best argument I can make for him is that he won't take the sort of commitment that would interfere with a transition to a burgeoning Nimmo or a redeeming Lagares. Buy Span's the better soldier, to me, if neither of those things come to pass.

I may need to re-convene the Toaster Oven Society.

[Centerfield]

Edgy MD wrote: Else we just get ourselves caught up in a Heyward-or-Cespedes-or-bust situation. But neither of them, while they may cost the moon, are ideal fits either.

I don't understand this at all. Heyward is a 26 year old superstar outfielder who can give you great defense at every outfield position and hit anywhere in the lineup. It's hard to imagine any more of an ideal player than Heyward.

If we are applying that logic, neither then, is Span. We have a centerfielder and a leadoff man already.

I thought the argument proposed here was that anyone we sign for the OF would have to platoon with Lagares. What makes anyone think Span is willing to do this?

[Centerfield]

And my thoughts on Denard Span...

He is a terrific player when healthy and would be a great complement to any team that is in need of his specific set of skills. Leadoff centerfielder.

For the Mets, the idea is that they need to offset the lost offense of Cespedes/Murphy. And OF is the most likely arena in which this can happen. Of the outfielders available, even if you take out age and health, Span is the fourth best option. Cespedes, Heyward, and Upton are all better. They have a higher career OPS. Their WAR numbers are higher. And the top three have a higher ceiling than Span. (Each can realistically give you an MVP year. Span, realistically, will not.)

Once you factor in age (Span is the oldest and will be 32 next season) and health (speed guy who missed last season and just had hip surgery), it is not even a comparison. Sure, there are many ways to skin a cat, but Span is the worst option of the three.

If money were not an option, only a fool would prefer Span to the Big Three. But because money matters, Span is being discussed.

For the Mets, clearly money is a limiting factor. Some fans react by saying:

"Ok. Then given our budget, let's go get Denard Span."

I react with:

"WHAT THE FUCK. WHY IS THERE NOT MORE MONEY? FUCK THESE GUYS. GO GET HEYWARD."

So, back to Span. If you can get him to sign to reasonable money, reasonable length, get him to platoon with Lagares, and then trade Granderson at the peak of his value, and go get Heyward or Upton as well, then I am all in on Denard Span.

[Edgy MD]

Centerfield wrote: Edgy MD wrote: Else we just get ourselves caught up in a Heyward-or-Cespedes-or-bust situation. But neither of them, while they may cost the moon, are ideal fits either. I don't understand this at all.

At all? Neither of those two sentences?

As to the first sentence, I don't believe that if the team can't replace each homer of each player lost in the free agent market, they shouldn't shop. As noted, there are many ways to build the best team.

With regards to the second sentence, I think it speaks for itself. While both are excellent players, neither are perfect fits, and require some maneuverings in the lineup. I certainly don't mean to suggest this reality makes a deal definitively prohibitive. I only mean to provide some context to suggest that Span not being a power hitter (of the order of Cespedes) should neither be definitively prohibitive.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

I do think the reason you'd look elsewhere than Span would be if you might find *his* skills elsewhere (like, if we acquired a leadoff, stolen-base type at shortstop, or 2B or whatever).

But if we went and got Desmond and penciled in 20 dingers from him, we wouldn't necessarily need to acquire the homer-iest center fielder out there.

Also, barring the unforeseen we can probably forecast more home runs to come from C, 3B, LF, and 2B by doing nothing this offseason.

[Centerfield]

Edgy MD wrote: Edgy MD wrote: Else we just get ourselves caught up in a Heyward-or-Cespedes-or-bust situation. But neither of them, while they may cost the moon, are ideal fits either. I don't understand this at all. At all? Neither of those two sentences? As to the first sentence, I don't believe that if the team can't replace each homer of each player lost in the free agent market, they shouldn't shop. As noted, there are many ways to build the best team. With regards to the second sentence, I think it speaks for itself. While both are excellent players, neither are perfect fits, and require some maneuverings in the lineup. I certainly don't mean to suggest this reality makes a deal definitively prohibitive. I only mean to provide some context to suggest that Span not being a power hitter (of the order of Cespedes) should neither be definitively prohibitive.

Agree on the first point. If we swing and miss on the top guys absolutely keep going. Sandy did just that this July when he was relentless. Just confused on the ideal part.

Just about any player we sign will require further moves or maneuvering. Including Span. So I don't see how this is an obstacle to signing an elite guy.

[Centerfield]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I do think the reason you'd look elsewhere than Span would be if you might find *his* skills elsewhere (like, if we acquired a leadoff, stolen-base type at shortstop, or 2B or whatever). But if we went and got Desmond and penciled in 20 dingers from him, we wouldn't necessarily need to acquire the homer-iest center fielder out there. Also, barring the unforeseen we can probably forecast more home runs to come from C, 3B, LF, and 2B by doing nothing this offseason.

Yes, if you went the Desmond route, or went crazy and got Tulo, then yes, Span makes a lot of sense then. Same with second base, if you got power there then same thing. But I don't think there is anyone at 2B.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Just because we lost Big HomeRun Hitter Guy(s) doesn't mean that this is the exact skill set we need to go out and get, or try and replace in the aggregate. He's defensively great, and a consistently good on-base guy, and showed no signs of decline before the hip thing last year. No QO, either. For me, the only issue is health, and if he's willing to prove it by taking a one-year deal, or a couple of years at a steep discount, and Heyward's not an option... well, come to papa.