The Mets are Fucking Dumb

[batmagadanleadoff]

Which Mets? I know at least one Met is a dumb motherfucker.

[youtube:62gu6l7q]6tqXaz5bD4Q[/youtube:62gu6l7q]

[batmagadanleadoff]

How dumb are they?

[batmagadanleadoff]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: How dumb are they?

The Mets are so dumb that ___________ _____________ _____________ _____________.

[bmfc1]

Edgy MD wrote: You may not want to interrupt Conforto's season, but there's also Kelly, Reynolds, Herrera, and Campbell as options. Plawecki too.

Oddly enough, it would have given those guys an extra day of playing or at least warming up, rather than an interruption, as the 51s were off on Sunday.

[Frayed Knot]

They'll DL Syndergaard if they have to, but they've already decided to sort him to the back of the order, in effect missing one start already. DL'ing him unnecessarily (or at least prior to it being known to be necessary) would have him miss an additional start. Sending down Verrett, who is a permanent member of the rotation until further notice and is currently slated to start one of the first four games after the break, would make him ineligible to return for 15 days except as an injury replacement which would cause them to dig even deeper into the 7th-9th starter territory for at least two of his starts, all during this span where we're already short Harvey and are weeks away at best from subbing in Wheeler.
Either or both of these moves all so we can have Ty Kelly or an extra back of the line reliever on board for a weekend strikes me as a really bad bargain.

Instead, try looking to the fact that they totaled 13 hits in three games -- one of which was started by a guy who hadn't gotten anyone out recently -- and basically scored on nothing but solo HRs.
I know De Aza is the scapegoat du jour these days and would quite likely be gone already if the rest of the OF could stay healthy at the same time and the anointed #3 hitter hadn't hit so shitty over two months that he lost not just his position in the order but his job as well, but, as JCL points out, making this all about having to play ADA for two days (esp. when he had two of the hits) is missing the larger point.

[TransMonk]

Yeah, I think this goes beyond a roster move or three. If it would have come down to a play here or there, then maybe, but to my eyes, the Nats are clearly a better team than the Metsies this season.

Other than the two of three the Mets took in DC back in May, the Mets have not been able to muster much against Washington. Period.

[Centerfield]

Frayed Knot wrote: They'll DL Syndergaard if they have to, but they've already decided to sort him to the back of the order, in effect missing one start already. DL'ing him unnecessarily (or at least prior to it being known to be necessary) would have him miss an additional start. Sending down Verrett, who is a permanent member of the rotation until further notice and is currently slated to start one of the first four games after the break, would make him ineligible to return for 15 days except as an injury replacement which would cause them to dig even deeper into the 7th-9th starter territory for at least two of his starts, all during this span where we're already short Harvey and are weeks away at best from subbing in Wheeler. Either or both of these moves all so we can have Ty Kelly or an extra back of the line reliever on board for a weekend strikes me as a really bad bargain.

Our mileage clearly varies. Conforto is hitting .340 since he's been sent down. On Saturday he went 3 for 5 with a HR and 3 RBI. I would have loved to have gotten him AB's this weekend over De Aza.

We lose Logan Verrett for 15 days? I can deal with that. Even more so if the loss is Seth Lugo. Recall Gilmartin. Or Ynoa. What was that acronym Edgy created for interchangeable pitchers? I'm down with that.

Frayed Knot wrote: Instead, try looking to the fact that they totaled 13 hits in three games -- one of which was started by a guy who hadn't gotten anyone out recently -- and basically scored on nothing but solo HRs. I know De Aza is the scapegoat du jour these days and would quite likely be gone already if the rest of the OF could stay healthy at the same time and the anointed #3 hitter hadn't hit so shitty over two months that he lost not just his position in the order but his job as well, but, as JCL points out, making this all about having to play ADA for two days (esp. when he had two of the hits) is missing the larger point.

I am fully aware of the futility of the offense. That's why I'm saying take every advantage you can get. Does it increase our odds of winning those games by .001%? Then yes. Do it.

Is the downside not having Logan Verrett/Lugo for 15 days? Yeah. I'm ok with that.

[Centerfield]

TransMonk wrote: Yeah, I think this goes beyond a roster move or three. If it would have come down to a play here or there, then maybe, but to my eyes, the Nats are clearly a better team than the Metsies this season. Other than the two of three the Mets took in DC back in May, the Mets have not been able to muster much against Washington. Period.

I don't get this. So because Washington is much better than the Mets, we don't even try to make up the difference?

Whether or not they are the better team, a team in a pennant race should be taking every advantage they can get. If the Mets fall short, so be it. But man, don't leave bullets in the chamber just to save on airfare.

Would Conforto have gone 3 for 5 against Washington? Maybe not. But maybe he would have. I don't see why you wouldn't try.

If the fate of the world rested on the outcome of the last two games, no sane person would have let Seth Lugo take a roster spot over Michael Conforto.

[Frayed Knot]

See, it's this thought that, despite already being without Harvey, willingly giving up as many as three starts from Syndergaard and/or Verrett to start the 2nd half and go two turns through the rotation without half of our top 6 starters will all be worth it if it saves us the indignity of eight ABs from Alejandro De Aza (in which he delivered two hits) is where I think the over-reaction and misplaced blame are going here.

Look, I understand that ADA has no history or future here and therefore he's the designated boogyman these days. But Nimmo takes and oh-fer on Saturday (while K'ing three times) and then K's again in the 9th inning on Sunday on no one says a word. De Aza gets two hits and a walk on Saturday but then when he K's in the 9th on Sunday everyone knows it was a foregone conclusion and acts as if even allowing him in the stadium is akin to the team offering up a forfeit.
Personally, I'm going to do everything I can to avoid giving starts to anyone from the Vegas staff and their near 6.00 collective ERA, and also might want to see a bit more than 50 ABs from Conforto before I decide he's not the same guy who clogged up the middle of the order with his .145 BA and 33% K-rate for the better part of two months.

[Centerfield]

Frayed Knot wrote: See, it's this thought that, despite already being without Harvey, willingly giving up as many as three starts from Syndergaard and/or Verrett to start the 2nd half and go two turns through the rotation without half of our top 6 starters will all be worth it if it saves us the indignity of eight ABs from Alejandro De Aza (in which he delivered two hits) is where I think the over-reaction and misplaced blame are going here.

If you want to save Verrett, then demote Lugo. You didn't need him last weekend and you don't need him going forward. You were much more likely to need Michael Conforto.

I don't understand why advocating for a move that would have helped the team win the last two games qualifies as "over-reaction" or "misplaced blame". Conforto is and was a better bet to help us during those games than De Aza. I don't see how anyone can reasonably dispute this.

He is clearly the better hitter. He was better last year, and he has been better this year, even taking into account his slump. He has certainly been better than the De Aza the last 13 games.

And I get that Conforto sucked in May and June (.591 and .419 OPS). Just terrible. The worst he's ever done in his career. But you know who he was still better than? ALEJANDRO FUCKING DE AZA. (.417 and .345 OPS).

So why would I want Conforto over De Aza? Because at his absolute shittiest, Conforto is still better than De Aza. This is not over-reaction. This is just reaction.

And I'm not taking the blame off of everyone else. They all sucked too. But I can't just push a button and make them better. Sandy could have just picked up the phone and instantly upgraded the offense these past two games. Not doing so was foolish.

[Edgy MD]

I certainly see the futility of the offense as the main factor in the Mets losing. But here they were, down by a run despite all that.

One thing about a manager who works to find an edge, it sets a standard for players who work to find an edge. Because I don't see that.

[Frayed Knot]

Centerfield wrote: I don't understand why advocating for a move that would have helped the team win the last two games qualifies as "over-reaction" or "misplaced blame".

Well for starters you're so tied up in your declaration of De Aza as the problem and about mgmt compounding that problem by not jumping through hoops to make player movements to make sure he not infect the lineup in either game regardless of whatever downside it might cause now or after the break, that the fact that he turned out to not be the problem (getting on base 4 times in 8 PA - more than any other player on the team) seems to have totally flown over your head.

[Centerfield]

Well for starters you're so tied up in your declaration of De Aza as the problem

I think you're well aware that I've never declared that De Aza was the problem. In fact, I think I've said exactly the opposite.

I am fully aware of the futility of the offense. That's why I'm saying take every advantage you can get.

And I'm not taking the blame off of everyone else. They all sucked too.

My point was that management was not doing their part by putting the best team on the field. But I can see how you might have missed my point though, seeing as I only made it:

One

The Mets are Fucking Dumb

Two

Forget the injuries and everything else, the boneheaded moves by Alderson and this front office are fucking inexcusable.

Three

Wasn't meaning to second guess the offseason moves. I was speaking more to the intra-organization moves this season.

Four

Countless times this season the Mets front office has inexplicably failed to field the best team possible. How this can be done during a series as important as this one is mind-boggling to me.

Five

Whether or not they are the better team, a team in a pennant race should be taking every advantage they can get. If the Mets fall short, so be it. But man, don't leave bullets in the chamber just to save on airfare.

Six Times.

Sandy could have just picked up the phone and instantly upgraded the offense these past two games. Not doing so was foolish.

You know, come to think of it. Six times is kind of a lot. If I didn't know better, I'd say you were distorting my point and trying to couch it as something else. Trying to make it seem like knee-jerk scapegoating so as to make its validity more easily assailable.

You know, if I didn't know better.

and about mgmt compounding that problem by not jumping through hoops to make player movements

See, that's the thing. Management making player movements involves very little hoop-jumping at all. Almost none actually. Some would go as far as to say player movement is part of management's job.

to make sure he not infect the lineup in either game

Back to De Aza I see. Maybe I should have said it seven times.

regardless of whatever downside it might cause now or after the break,

I think I've been explicit that I am totally down with the downside. Specifically, I think I said:

We lose Logan Verrett for 15 days? I can deal with that. Even more so if the loss is Seth Lugo. Recall Gilmartin. Or Ynoa. What was that acronym Edgy created for interchangeable pitchers? I'm down with that.

I'd be willing to bet good money that there will be no instance during the next 15 days where I'm saying "Man, if only we had Seth Lugo."

that the fact that he turned out to not be the problem (getting on base 4 times in 8 PA - more than any other player on the team) seems to have totally flown over your head.

The fact that he reached base four times over those games is, unfortunately, irrelevant to my point. If I put my grandmother on the roster for the last two games, this would be a bad move, even if she somehow slugged the game-winning hit. Management's role is to give the team the best chance to win. Individual moves might work out or not in the short run, but an organization that makes a habit of making foolish moves will ultimately play themselves into a disadvantage in the end. I want a team that maximizes my chances. This management team has not done that.

Besides, it's impossible to know what Conforto might have done. He might have gone 8 for 8 with 4 HR's. We'll never know. What we do know is that Conforto (even at his worst) gives you a better chance to win than De Aza.

Edgy MD wrote: One thing about a manager who works to find an edge, it sets a standard for players who work to find an edge.

This. Management should set the example. Use every angle you possibly can to your advantage. Maybe the players will learn something.

"Wow. Management is fucking smart. Maybe I should play smart. Like maybe even hitting the ball to that side of the field over there where no one is standing. Hmmm."