Benjamin Grimm

The next decade or two may prove me wrong, of course, but right now he looks to be a Barry Zito-sized dodged bullet.

For many years now I've had a hunch that Pat Burrell would one day be a Met, most likely after he had passed his prime. I may have even documented it here in the forum; I'll have to poke around a bit. I'm not sure of what I'd think of such a move. If he's going to be handed the keys to left field, I'll be disappointed. But if he's a fourth outfielder/backup first base man then maybe it won't be so bad, depending, of course, on what it takes to get him.

I suspect you will get a call back, but it will be from somebody offering you some kind of a deal to renew for a lower reintroductory price.

I noticed that the article doesn't mention Willingham's age. He'll be 31 in February.

Nationals' Willingham on Mets' radar According to source, New York interested in acquiring slugger By Bill Ladson / MLB.com Add the Mets as one of the teams who have interest in Nationals left fielder Josh Willingham, according to a baseball source. The Giants, Mariners and Braves are the other teams who are reportedly interested in acquiring his services. The Mets had problems finding a regular left fielder this past season. They used nine players at the position who hit a combined .276 with 12 home runs and 76 RBIs. Willingham started the 2009 season on the bench, but became the everyday left fielder starting in June and hit .260 with 24 home runs and 61 RBIs. Willingham is not only an outfielder. He can play first base and go behind the plate in emergency situations. "Willingham is the only player on the Nationals [the Mets] are interested in," the source said. Don't look for the Nats to give Willingham away. Washington would most likely want pitching in return. Who it wants from New York is not known, though. If Willingham were to leave, the Nationals most likely will give Roger Bernadina or Justin Maxwell a chance to play left field. Don't rule out the two players platooning at the position.

I saw that too. Are they referring to that tab that sticks up in front of the apple?

The "online editors" left it in, too. The fact that it was removed later, we can assume, is the result of one or many complaints. They can't very well go back and edit everyone's print edition.

I agree with the jerk/obnoxious sentiment as well. This seems even beyond what he normally writes. Is he hitting a new height (or depth) here?

Pelfrey is my hunch too. I fear that Perez is in a permanent tailspin. This will be a very important season for him, much like 2006 was for Beltran. (Hopefully Oliver will rise to the challenge as well as Beltran did.)

Which of these three pitchers do you think will have the best season in 2010?

That's what I'm thinking too. I predict that the Mets will go north with two catchers: Bengie Molina and whoever wins a spring competition between Coste and Blanco. The loser goes to Buffalo and mentors Thole. And Santos gets dealt. Unless the rules have changed, a signed free agent can't be traded until June 1, so the Mets would be prohibited from trading Coste or Blanco before that date. Is that rule still in effect?

This probably takes the Phillies out of the running for Chone Figgins, no? I'm starting to have doubts that the Mets will replace Castillo with a free agent. (It looked like they were leaning that way a few weeks ago, but things have appeared quiet on that front.) If the Mets do turn their attention back to 2B, this eliminates a major competitor for Figgins' services.

And what could be more unwholesome than bringing your wife and children to ride with you in a parade?

Games finished is an interesting concept to build a contract clause around. In theory, anyway, Wagner can insure a "game finished" by throwing a gopher ball any time he pitches in a tie game in the ninth inning of a road game. Of course, if he does this too many times, he'll stop getting such opportunities. But if he's at 49 GF in late September, and such an opportunity arises, he can essentially get $6 million or so by intentionally losing a game.

Wagner may have strongly hinted that he wouldn't accept arbitration, but during that initial period when players can start talking to other clubs, he might have found that the market for his services was less than the expected arbitration award. So despite his original intent, he may have ended up accepting anyway. We can see now that it wouldn't have worked out that way (given the deal he's signing with Atlanta) but we couldn't have been sure of that then. In fact, we still can't be sure of it, because the Braves may not have made the same offer if signing Wagner would have cost them the draft picks.

Here's what Wikipedia (I know, I know...) says: He was signed by the Cleveland Indians in 1934, but was ruled a free agent in April 1937 after he and his father wrote to Commissioner Kenesaw Mountain Landis, who decided that the Indians had illegally concealed him in their farm system. No source was given. The "illegal" part suggests that something differentiated Henrich's situation from that of other players who were stuck in the minor leagues, but it's still a mystery what it rule the Indians might have broken.

I assure you that I don't subscribe to Jon Heyman's "tweets" (or anyone else's for that matter) but I found the following while clicking around Google News results:

Count me among those who were unhappy about Escobar's inclusion in that trade. Now, though, with hindsight, maybe Larkin would have been the guy to tip the balance the other way in the 2000 World Series. (Unlikely, since the Series wasn't all that close, but maybe.) Escobar never amounted to anything, and with him out of the organization, the Alomar trade may not have happened. Not that that matters a whole lot; the Alomar trade in retrospect didn't help the Mets, but I don't see how it did much harm either.

I just read the obituary in the Daily News, and it mentioned that he was baseball's first free agent. According to the story, Henrich, well, I'll just quote Bill Madden:

Vince Coleman Firecracker wrote: Mets lose out on 2 good draft picks. Not happy about how this move turned out at all. Kinda angry, actually. Did they really? I'm not so sure the Mets would have offered arbitration to Wagner. And the Mets did get two players for Wagner; we'll have to wait and see how they turn out.

Yes, and you mean Mickey Owen, not Mickey Cochrane.