Bring Back Ces

[Centerfield]

Like super quiet here. I think it's clear this won't get done by the end of the World Series. I fear he's gone. Buster Onley's Insider* headline this morning: Mets have the luxury to slow-play winter market with Cespedes *I didn't link to the article because of its Insider-iness.

I can't read the article itself, but here is this little blurb from MLB Trade Rumors:

“There is no urgency” for the Mets to chase Yoenis Cespedes, a source tells ESPN’s Buster Olney (subscription required) since the team already has some outfield depth on hand and can pursue more on the open market for a lower price than Cespedes will command. That said, the Mets would like to have Cespedes back and they’re willing to wait him out this offseason, perhaps if Cespedes is open to accepting another front-loaded contract with an opt-out clause from the team.

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2016/10/nl-east-links-cespedes-drew-phillies-marlins.html

I don't know who this source it, but I hope that this is just gamesmanship rather than their actual line of thinking.

the team already has some outfield depth on hand Agreed. And by depth, we mean "lots of outfielders who are not nearly as good as Yoenis Cespedes".

and can pursue more on the open market for a lower price than Cespedes will command. Also correct. If we are looking for players who are not as good as Yoenis Cespedes, I have no doubt that we can find more on the open market who will be cheaper than Cespedes.

perhaps if Cespedes is open to accepting another front-loaded contract with an opt-out clause from the team. Obviously we have to see how this situation plays out, but if the Mets are banking on this, I would think Cespedes would be gone. The whole idea behind last year's deal was so that he could cash in on this year's weak free agent market. The knock against him last year was that he had performed beyond career norms, and he was competing against a strong FA class. This year, he is possibly he strongest FA target, and has added a year of production to his performance from last year. Unless they float a 5 year deal, I don't see him coming back. Someone is going to offer that deal.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to see someone float 6-7 years.

[Benjamin Grimm]

And it would be a hell of a thing if that team was in the National League East.

[Edgy MD]

I'm not sure I'd say they have lots of outfielders who are not nearly as good as Yoenis Céspedes. At least, it's not as clear as all that.

Right now, there is no room for Michael Conforto to start regularly. Conforto may ultimately be a washout, but there's certainly an argument that he has more to give a team over the next five years than Céspedes.

I don't feel the same gun-to-my head urgency. Céspedes produced a 133 OPS over 132 games at age 30, while being an enigmatic presence on the base paths and on defense, mixing occasional excellence alternatively with maddening aloofness.* That's certainly a guy I want back, but not at all costs. They did well to play it out last year. I root for them to do it again this year, and hopefully get him back on terms that are desirable, or alternatively, use the money toward a wiser alternative.

* Virtually the same profile turned Bobby Bonilla into a pariah.

[Centerfield]

Edgy MD wrote: I'm not sure I'd say they have lots of outfielders who are not nearly as good as Yoenis Céspedes. At least, it's not as clear as all that.

Well let's see. In 2016, he was 85 points higher in OPS than his closest competitor. 159 points over the second runner up, and 199 points over the guy who would be your third starting outfielder.

He has better career numbers than anyone in the outfield. In fact, only Granderson, entering his age 36 season, is even in the neighborhood.

So yeah, I'm putting out there that it is, in fact, clear as all that.

Do you not see that the depth argument doesn't apply? Having lots of crappy options doesn't give you depth. Especially when you are talking about three positions. Thanks to the emergence of Lugo and Gsellman, the Mets have depth in the rotation. They have depth at closer. They have depth at shortstop. They do not have depth in the outfield.

Edgy MD wrote: Right now, there is no room for Michael Conforto to start regularly. Conforto may ultimately be a washout, but there's certainly an argument that he has more to give a team over the next five years than Céspedes.

This is a straw man argument. I'm a big believer in Conforto as well, and I hope (and believe) that he will straighten himself out. But there are three outfield positions, including two corners. It's not an either/or situation.

Just because we hope that Conforto might possibly be better than Cespedes someday does not mean we should not bring back Cespedes.

Edgy MD wrote: I don't feel the same gun-to-my head urgency. Céspedes produced a 133 OPS over 132 games at age 30, while being an enigmatic presence on the base paths and on defense, mixing occasional excellence alternatively with maddening aloofness.* That's certainly a guy I want back, but not at all costs. They did well to play it out last year. I root for them to do it again this year, and hopefully get him back on terms that are desirable, or alternatively, use the money toward a wiser alternative.

I don't think anyone is conveying gun-to-head urgency. And there isn't a player in history that is worth "all costs". And who in the world wouldn't want money to be put toward a "wiser alternative" should he walk. I just think that everyone should understand the degree of difficulty we would be facing if he were to walk away.

Olney seems to be suggesting that there are many options. Encarnacion, Bautista, Mark Trumbo. I think none of these make any where as much sense as Cespedes.

And if you are thinking to go the "incremental increase over several positions" route, I think it's important to be realistic about how difficult it is to upgrade the 26th ranked offense in MLB through such a philosophy.

[Edgy MD]

Centerfield wrote: Do you not see that the depth argument doesn't apply? Having lots of crappy options doesn't give you depth. Especially when you are talking about three positions. Thanks to the emergence of Lugo and Gsellman, the Mets have depth in the rotation. They have depth at closer. They have depth at shortstop. They do not have depth in the outfield.

I don't think they have lots of crappy options. I think they have good options, some of whom have their best years ahead of them, last year's numbers notwithstanding.

I don't believe bringing up Conforto is a straw man argument at all. He has no position right now, and he may be a better bet over the next five years than Conforto.

[Ceetar]

If I had to wager, I'd probably wager on Cespedes being worth more in 2020 than Conforto. Though I don't think the Mets are going to sign Cespedes, nor should they, for 4-5 years. The probability that Cespedes is better than Conforto, and Nimmo, and Bucerra in 2019 is even better.

I'd really like Yoenis back but I do think there are other + guys they can get, and I'm a little concerned about defense and not really having anyone that plays CF well. I'd be okay with faking it with Cespedes if the LF/RF guys were good defenders, but they're unlikely to be. The Mets defense is so bad all around.

[Centerfield]

Do you not see that the depth argument doesn't apply? Having lots of crappy options doesn't give you depth. Especially when you are talking about three positions. Thanks to the emergence of Lugo and Gsellman, the Mets have depth in the rotation. They have depth at closer. They have depth at shortstop. They do not have depth in the outfield. I don't think they have lots of crappy options. I think they have good options, some of whom have their best years ahead of them, last year's numbers notwithstanding. I don't believe bringing up Conforto is a straw man argument at all. He has no position right now, and he may be a better bet over the next five years than Conforto.

Perhaps you and I have different definitions of "depth". To me, "depth" means: "We would like this guy, but we don't necessarily need him next year, because we have other guys who can do what he does."

"We would love to re-sign Bartolo Colon. But we don't necessarily need him next year, because we Syndergaard, Matz, deGrom and Harvey. Plus the emergence of Gsellman and Lugo make him a luxury. Our rotation, even with injuries posted the third best ERA in baseball. We want to focus on our 26th ranked offense."

Valid argument that you have depth.

We would love to re-sign Yoenis Cespedes. But we don't necessarily need him next year, because we have Michael Conforto, Curtis Granderson and Jay Bruce. Sure, none of them can do what he does, and to be honest, none of them even really come close. But we think Conforto might be able to someday. And sure, Granderson is 36 and declining, and Bruce was never as good as Cespedes to begin with, even while playing in a pitcher's park, but we think it will be ok. After all, we made the playoffs with the 26th ranked offense. How much worse can it possibly get?

Not a valid depth argument.

[Edgy MD]

I'm not really making that argument.

[Centerfield]

Edgy MD wrote: I'm not really making that argument.

Then make your argument Edgy. Don't just pick at mine. I've told you what I consider "depth" and demonstrated why I don't think they have it.

You obviously felt otherwise, causing you to cast doubt. Then explain.

I get what you are saying about Conforto. And I am right there with you on him. Despite this past year, I really believe he's going to be a star. But let's face it, at best, this is one guy that we are hoping might someday, possibly be better than Cespedes. I would bet every organization has one guy that they hope will be better than 2016 Cespedes. (and most of those guys will fail).

That's not depth.

[Benjamin Grimm]

My guess is that if Cespedes leaves, his replacement is going to be somebody named "Jay Bruce." And then maybe they'll sign a Dexter Fowler (my fingers insist on typing "Flower" instead) to put in center. And that would be our outfield: Bruce-Fowler-Granderson.

Would that be good enough? Maybe, but I'm far from convinced that it would.

[Centerfield]

This guy at Rising Apple seems to agree with me.

https://risingapple.com/2016/10/24/mets-yoenis-cespedes-rush/

Before we get to that, let’s dispel this myth perpetuated by Olney that the market is “flush with sluggers.” The “sluggers” Olney is referring to are Edwin Encarnacion (34 years old), Jose Bautista (36), and perhaps Josh Reddick (30). Beyond that, there are players like 31-year-old Mark Trumbo , who alternates horrific years with great ones and Ian Desmond, who does the same. So no, the market is not “flush” with sluggers. Cespedes is the cream of the crop offensively, and the Mets and every other team in baseball knows it. And let’s also dispel the myth that the rest of the Mets’ team is so strong that they can afford to wait this out. Their pitching staff is that strong. Their offense is not.

Yup.

[metirish]

Opting out after the WS according to various reports ( Hetman etc)

[MFS62]

Centerfield wrote: But we don't necessarily need him next year, because we have Michael Conforto, Curtis Granderson and Jay Bruce. Sure, none of them can do what he does,

And what he does is hit right handed with power. IMO the team needs a righty hitter to balance the middle of the lineup, and any other player they get to replace him would have to provide that.

Later

[Centerfield]

Agreed. And any other player that they can sign would be older and more flawed.

Adam Rubin speculates that Cespedes is looking for a 5 year deal. Such a deal would only take him to age 35. If a 5 year deal would get it done I'd offer it to him now.

And to be honest, the Mets needed another right-handed threat even with Cespedes. If he leaves, they'll need two.

Good luck with that Mets.

[metirish]

Christ , I am not yet ready to contemplate Cespedes being gone , it's an awful sized hole to fill( notwithstanding some stuff)

[Ceetar]

he didn't get a 5 year deal last year and he's a year older and dealt with injuries. He put up an arguably worse, if slightly, year than 2015. Still a nice year, but still.

[Benjamin Grimm]

I can see him getting four years, $100 million. And I'd like to see him get that from the Mets. Sure, it's risky at the back end, but there are some risks that you have to be willing to take.

[Centerfield]

And I think a deal like that to Cespedes would be less risky than the other options I see thus far. Namely:

1. Another slugging FA (Encarnacion/Bautista etc). They are older, and not as good all around, and we don't know how they'd perform here. Riskier than Ces.
2. Trade. I have no idea who might be available. But they would cost talent. And anyone nearly as good as Ces will cost some combination of Lugo/Gsellman/Rosario/DomSmith. We've already lost Michael Fullmer. It would be a shame to give up more.
3. Don't replace him with a star and make several smaller upgrades instead. To me, this is the riskiest of all. Well, at least if the objective is to win anyway. Cespedes was our only top 40 guy in OPS. Teams without such a guy basically don't make the playoffs. I know that a 35 year old, complacent Cespedes sounds scary, but to me, thinking of this lineup without him is much scarier.

[Edgy MD]

A deal like that would be pretty beneficial for the Mets. I think he's looking for a higher salary rate and/or more guaranteed years. And if the Mets hope to get him to agree to that package, it'd likely be another waiting game before he does.

[Guest Mets Guy in Michigan]

Ashie62 wrote: I know KC. Sometimes I wonder what the millions paid to marginal players could do for the world. But, thats true of showbiz and other stuff also. Lisa's final days are coming near and I am more neurotic than usual. I love Cespedes and believe he will remain a Met after some hand wringing. I need to listen to LAMF.

Ashie, I just saw this. I'm not sure who Lisa is, but I can tell this is a painful time. Thinking about you, my friend.

I get what you mean about the salaries. I'm not sure about the exact quote, but Bill Veeck said something along the lines of that it's not the salaries of the superstars that hurt you, it's the price of the mediocre players all going up. (And, I'm sure, the prices Veeck was complaining about then were far below what the minimum salary is today. Owners have probably been complaining about salaries for as long as there have been owners.)

[Centerfield]

Edgy MD wrote: A deal like that would be pretty beneficial for the Mets. I think he's looking for a higher salary rate and/or more guaranteed years. And if the Mets hope to get him to agree to that package, it'd likely be another waiting game before he does.

The irony here is that it's likely that a five year deal last season would have locked in Cespedes last winter. But such a deal was looked upon as "risky". The deal that ensued, the three year, high annual salary deal, with the opt-out, was regarded as much safer.

Now a year later, I think many of us would prefer we had given him a five year deal, and that we have just four years left, rather than looking at having to extend him now for 5 or more years.

Just goes to show you that being risk averse can be risky.

[ashie62]

I don't see anything wrong with offering Ces 5/125. He is a fan favorite and a player that can carry a team on his back.

Please sign him Sandy.

[Guest d'Kong76]

I really don't see why some think things this off-season are so much
different than last off-season with regards to Yo. I'd be shocked, and
I'd laugh, if someone gives him a long-term mega deal.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Centerfield wrote: Edgy MD wrote: A deal like that would be pretty beneficial for the Mets. I think he's looking for a higher salary rate and/or more guaranteed years. And if the Mets hope to get him to agree to that package, it'd likely be another waiting game before he does. The irony here is that it's likely that a five year deal last season would have locked in Cespedes last winter. But such a deal was looked upon as "risky". The deal that ensued, the three year, high annual salary deal, with the opt-out, was regarded as much safer. Now a year later, I think many of us would prefer we had given him a five year deal, and that we have just four years left, rather than looking at having to extend him now for 5 or more years. Just goes to show you that being risk averse can be risky.

I kinda like the idea of incentivizing a guy to sing for his supper, and the Mets' success with it last year suggests to me that's its a route you might expect to see more clubs try. I have no idea what will happen but my gut feeling is if the Mets get Cespedes back it'll be with a similar-type offer. More generally, I suspect clubs are just coming to grips with the notion that 6-year deals are just not great investments most of the time, and probably want to give out less of them.

[Centerfield]

Don't get me wrong, I think that the 3 year opt out deal was better for the Mets. Especially given his six week performance over career norms. I'm just saying that there are downsides to that type of deal. And we are seeing the downside now. Basically, there is no such thing as a safe deal.

I think it would be nice to get him on the same type of structure this year. But there are a number of factors working against him:

1. Much weaker free agent class.
2. Now instead of half a season of MVP type numbers, he has a season and a half
3. I bet a part of him feels like he's "earned" a commitment from the Mets. If the Mets don't offer it, I can see him taking it as a slight and leaving.

And most importantly, although I think more teams will try the short-term/opt-out style deal, it only takes one team to offer five years or more. And if they do, that team wins.

The Mets are in a position where:

1. The top free agent seems to want to play here. So just a competitive offer probably gets it done.
2. They desperately need the production of that top free agent. In fact, they need more than him, but they absolutely can't afford to take a step back.
3. The other free agents are much worse choices.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Centerfield wrote: ...it only takes one team to offer five years or more. And if they do, that team wins.

Maybe. How much do we know about what the Nationals offered him last year? I seem to remember hearing that they offered him more guaranteed years than the Mets did.

[Edgy MD]

It's important to remember he didn't really put up MVP-type numbers, and he wasn't particularly close. He was 53rd in fWar, for instance. Guys ahead of him included Odubel Herrera and Charlie Blackmon, Cesar Hernandez and D.J. LeMahieu.

[Ceetar]

Edgy MD wrote: It's important to remember he didn't really put up MVP-type numbers, and he wasn't particularly close. He was 53rd in fWar, for instance. Guys ahead of him included Odubel Herrera and Charlie Blackmon, Cesar Hernandez and D.J. LeMahieu.

He was "in the conversation" offensively, but I definitely don't think the Mets should punt defense. especially with no defense anywhere.

[ashie62]

Analytics trumps common sense.

[ashie62]

I am going to guess some AL team offers Ces something like 7/200 knowing he can DH. I wouldn't put it past Texas or Anaheim.