smg58

G-Fafif wrote: But we don't do this in a vacuum. Brand names mean something to us. The Phillies brand is anathema to the Mets consumer at this point in time. Grudging admiration for the rival does not trump the rivalry. Couldn't have said it better myself. I have enormous respect for the Phillies, but I can't root for them. And the Rays are as easy a team to root for as you can have.

I'll be surprised if Peavy gets dealt before a few of the high-profile free agent pitchers sign. He's not the best pitcher on the market as long as C. C. is out there. And the durability issues that would apply to Sheets or A. J. Burnett apply to him as well. He's worth looking into, but I'd get a read on the free agent market before raiding the farm system again.

Centerfield wrote: Passing on Texiera this year means hoping, I would say unrealistically, that Delgado/Evans/Carp give you middle of the order production. Or having to find that production somewhere else, say leftfield. None of the leftfield options are as good as Texiera. That's absolutely true, but you won't need a superstar to upgrade the outfield from last year. I'd like a good righthanded bat or two in the outfield for security, but it's also possible that a healthy Ryan Church and a full year of Daniel Murphy will suffice. Nor will you need an elite hitter to upgrade second base; the difference in OPS+ this year between Orlando Hudson and Luis Castillo, for example, was bigger than the difference between Teixeira and Delgado. And the defensive upgrade would be bigger as well. Also keep in mind that the Mets tied for second in the NL in runs. They scored as many runs as the Phillies, despite the much less generous home park. Offense didn't beat them. You could upgrade the offense a little bit by adding Teixeira, but you could upgrade the pitching a lot with the same money.

AG/DC wrote: ="smg58"]The A's aren't in a position where trading for one year of a player in his late thirties would be prudent. Dont they go for short-term vet sluggger types often enough to suggest otherwise --- Piazza, Thomas (twice), Sweeney, even Shannon Stewart. Daric Barton gave them nothing at first last year. Delgado costs $12 mills. How much of that do the Mets have to assume before the Oaks are willing to bite? Thomas was signed twice on the very cheap. Piazza was a free agent. Sweeney got a minor league deal. Stewart cost them a million. They were all free agents, and outside of Piazza, very highly discounted.

The A's aren't in a position where trading for one year of a player in his late thirties would be prudent. The Indians might be moving V-Mart to first, so I wouldn't assume they're looking at first base just yet. (Ironically, Ryan Garko was moved off of catcher because Martinez was in his way, and now he's likely to lose first base to him as well. Given how he finished the season, I think Garko's a good buy low candidate -- provided he's willing/able to catch again.) You would need to find a genuine contender who has Delgado's equivalent major league worth at a position or positions where they can spare it, along with a need for a 1B or DH. That might not be so easy. I suppose you could deal him for prospects, but that would mean taking on a significant payroll increase at a position you already had covered without addressing a need. And while we're on the subject of prospects, we have two first basemen in our system coming off solid years at AA, one of whom also spent a significant amount of time at the big-league level. I don't think it's unreasonable to think that one of them could replace Delgado in 2010.

As frustrated as I am with Minaya, his miscues pale compared to the deals made (and in Vlad's case, not made) in the Duquette era. But at least we didn't trade Joe Nathan, Francisco Liriano, and Boof Bonser for one year of A. J. Pierzynski. Or Chris Young and Adrian Gonzalez for Akinori Otsuka and Adam Eaton.

You have to offer to Perez. I'd offer to Tatis and Easley, but I would intend to re-sign at least Tatis. Ayala's a tougher call. He might have gotten enough saves to justify a Type B designation, in which case there might be some benefit to offering arbitration. On the other hand, if he takes our offer he could probably get $2M, and I don't think he's worth that. I'm not sure Moises is worth more than a minor-league deal at this point.

There's a feeling around the Mets that somehow they are the uncrowned champions of the National League, the best team with the worst luck, or some such nonsense. And your evidence for this is what? They tell themselves they should have been in the 2006 World Series, and that they were by far the best team in the NL East in 2007, and that everybody knows they should be in the playoffs right now. They do? Does anybody else get that vibe? They think they're a lot closer than they really are to where they want to be. They rely on subject-changing cliches such as "we spent more days in first place than any other team" and "we competed right to the end," but rather than obscuring the truth, they make it more obvious. Agrred, those were lame attempts at rationalizing the situation, but that doesn't imply the sense of entitlement that Matthews is suggesting. If the Mets think what has happened to them in their recent history is mere coincidence, then they are doomed to repeat it, again and again, or until Fred Wilpon gets tired of wasting his money on another failed regime and cleans house once again. And your evidence that that's what the Mets are thinking is... But truly, there are no quick fixes and no easy answers for this team. Or for any other team who's not still playing. Their mouths and attitude have elevated them into a stratosphere that requires immediate results and precludes the patience to wait for the likes of Fernando Martinez and Nick Evans and Bobby Parnell and Jon Niese to become everyday performers. I would agree that the Mets rush their prospects along too quickly, but Murphy at least has turned out well. And is there a New York sports franchise that's less insistent on immediate results? Certainly not in baseball. First of all, the Mets finished behind the Phillies for a very good reason. They weren't as good as Philadelphia. Period. Three games ahead after the final regular-season game doesn't even begin to tell the story of how superior the Phillies are to the Mets. They weren't as good. They did (and do) have a superior offense, but the Phillies have a great bullpen and the Mets a terrible one, and that affects a lot of close games. I'd say three games tells the story pretty well, though. Secondly, even if the Mets had lucked up and nipped the Brewers for the wild-card spot on the last day of the season, by now they would be out of the playoffs, vowing revenge for next year and making excuses for how, once again, the Best Team in the National League made an early exit. Because the Cubs, who would have been their opponent, left little doubt in their opening round performance of their superior ability and character. Watching the Phillies beat the Brewers in the Division Series, and take a 2-0 lead on the Dodgers in the NLCS only confirms the suspicion the Mets are more than just a minor tweak or two from what they believe to be their entitlement. Who's said anything about entitlement? Yes, it will take more than a minor tweak to make their bullpen good again. What's your point? The first step toward conquering a problem, of course, is admitting you have one. The Mets failed to see a problem after losing in the NLCS to the 83-win Cardinals in 2006. They went into 2007 assuming they were the better team and put it all down to bad luck. And your evidence for this is what? That they didn't sign Barry Zito? If anything, you could argue that the Mets would have been much better off if they'd done absolutely nothing than make the deals that they made in the 06-07 offseason. They went into 2008 assuming that once again, they were the best team in the league. The addition of Johan Santana in the offseason would only cement their rightful place atop the NL. If he wants to say that it takes more than bringing in a star player to cover multiple flaws in a team, he's right. But he seems to be getting at something else, and it's not clear what. And somewhere, you know there are players and team executives thinking, "That ought to be us." I doubt that. The unvarnished truth about this incarnation of the Mets, the $140-million All-Star Revue that disappears along with the warm weather, is this: They now have played a total of three absolutely, positively must-win games. The first was Game 7 of the 2006 NLCS. The second was the 2007 season finale against the Florida Marlins. The third was this season's curtain-dropper against the same underfinanced Triple-A outfit. Weren't the Marlins above .500? They lost all three. And three games is such a representative sample that it guarantees a continuation of the trend for the indefinite future. That is not by accident, any more than it is by accident that for the past two seasons, the Mets have finished behind the Phillies, a team they arrogantly dismissed in not one, but two preseasons. They did? Once again, they simply aren't good enough. So are any of you aware of a Met, or a Met supporter, who actually disputes this?

If Cano is that good, then why do Yankee fans always bring him up in trade rumors? Kennedy interests me as a buy-low candidate. Offering Beltran would not be buying low, however. Bruney's a tough read. Anybody can look good over 34 innings, and he did get hurt. He might be another one of those guys that winds up in every Yankee trade rumor.

I'm with JCL on this. We had an obviously flawed team, and we all knew it. The Cubs had a great rotation, a great pen, and a lineup with no weak spots. For me 2006 hurt worse than the last two years, because I thought the World Series was a foregone conclusion with that team. But at least we were in that series with the Cardinals, right up till the last pitch. The Cubs got railroaded. They didn't hit, pitch, or field particularly well. They did nothing right. Did they even have a lead at any point?

The fact that Heilman was our consensus most valuable reliever, with the year that he had, says everything about our pen that you really need to know. Subjectively speaking, I don't think there was any doubt that Johan was the most valuable Met, so I'm not surprised that the voting ultimately reflected that.

Bradford, Oliver, Bell, and Lindstrom would have been the four best relievers on this year's club once Wagner went down.

The first question to ask, as has been discussed in another thread, is how much money are the Mets free to spend. Sure we'd all love Hudson, Dunn, C. C., and K-Rod to all come here, but the Mets might not have that kind of money to spend, and other teams just might want those guys too. Mark Ellis played hurt all year, and if he gets past the shoulder surgery OK he could be an excellent bargain. (Keep in mind that Hudson is recovering from a significant injury as well.) I'm comfortable with Murphy in left field, unless he turns out to be a solid defender at second base. I have my doubts, but Murph has already proved me wrong more than once. I'd like Tatis back. I'd also like another righthanded bench bat, like maybe Juan Rivera if he comes cheap. I also wouldn't mind seeing Aguila or Val Pascucci get a chance, as I thought they both deserved one this year. I like Lowe. His age notwithstanding, I think he'll be the best value of the starting pitchers (assuming the price for C. C. goes through the roof). I wouldn't mind a one-year deal for a decent starter, so as not to rush Niese. Mlb.com suggested Paul Byrd might only get a one-year deal, for example, and I think he'd be a good fit for that price. But there's a good chance that there will be a number of guys still on the board in late January, so the key is to sit and wait (think Kyle Lohse from last year). I think you have to get either K-Rod or Fuentes. I think Affeldt, a lefty set-up guy who can actually get righthanded batters out, would be a very good fit for this team as well. I don't expect Dempster or Wood to leave Chicago, but I'd be open to getting them if they did become available.

Church is probably not as good as he looked in April, and a healthy Ryan Church is certainly not as bad as he looked in the last month. If Church gets over his concussion, I think he's capable of an .850 OPS with plus defense. I do think the Mets need a solid pair of righthanded outfielders on their bench, tough. I hope Tatis is one, but I'd really like to see Nick Evans playing first base in AAA. That also means they have to move either Chavez or Anderson.

metirish wrote: Do people here really care if the payroll is $100 million or if it's $150 million or somewhere in between , to be honest I don't care . It's not my money, so I don't really care either. But you have to look at this under the assumption that there's a number above which the ownership won't willingly go.

Vince Coleman Firecracker wrote: I want him on my team, and I don't particularly care if he costs 18 million a year or whatever he'll be asking for. Watching the bullpen piss away two consecutive seasons, I want it completely rebuilt; and there's no better place to start than by adding the best available arm. The bullpen absolutely does need to be rebuilt, but you can probably get Fuentes and Jeremy Affeldt for less total than K-Rod will cost. And you have multiple needs to fill.

Ayala, Wise, and Easley are another $4 million or so we don't have on the books for next year. We'll lose the contracts of Wagner, Delgado, and Schoeneweis next season. Assuming either Evans or Carp will be ready to take over at first base in 2010, a healthy amount of money will come off the payroll without needing to be put into replacements. So a little bit of backloading on the free agent deals we make this offseason might prove beneficial.

Pedro should do the honorable thing and retire. I'm guessing the Mets are thinking with Easley that one reserve middle infielder is enough and Argenis Reyes can cut it. Regarding reserve middle infielders, Murphy and (hopefully) Tatis could handle third and first if needed, so one might indeed be enough. But I'm really not sure Argenis hits well enough to justify not paying Easley.

I think Murph is our left fielder for some time to come. I'm not worried there. Second base is a sore spot. I have no idea what other teams think Castillo is worth, but I'd move him if I can. Hudson is an obvious person to look at, but if Mark Ellis gets through his recent shoulder surgery in good order he could have good sleeper value. Derek Lowe is not young by any stretch, but he's more consistent than Ollie and more durable than either Burnett or Sheets. He's likely to be the best value of the free agent starters. I'd make an offer to Sabathia, although he's been worked so hard the last two seasons I'd be a little nervous given the contract he's likely to get. The Blue Jays were rumored to be entertaining offers for Roy Halladay at the deadline. If that's true, and they're willing to entertain offers for him again in the offseason, you have to ask what it would take. I'd also look for a decent one-year option for fifth starter. Niese is where Pelfrey was two years ago, and I don't agree with repeating a mistake and putting him in the rotation a year early. I'd like to see Niese, F-Mart, Kunz, and Nick Evans (at first base!) get a full season of AAA, with no pressure on them to help the Mets win next year. If that leaves no room for Mike Carp, then see what kind of reliever you can get for him. Signing a closer is a must. It will take more than one acquisition to make the pen playoff-caliber, but you might as well start at the top. All the focus will be on K-Rod, but he might be a bit overrated at this point while Fuentes is underrated. Feliciano and Schoeneweis can't both come back. I'm not for non-tendering Sanchez or Heilman. I'm not necessarily for keeping both (or either), but they both have enough upside that simply dropping them would not be prudent. The only guy from this year's pen that I'd pencil in for sure for next year is Joe Smith. He needs an out pitch against lefties, but for somebody who's barely been in pro ball for two years he's doing all right.

Let's Go Mets! Let's Go Mets!

I'm on the fence with Minaya. I'm not happy with a lot of his moves (four years for Castillo?), but he gets a lot of points for getting Johan at a good price when nobody thought the Mets were seriously in the running for him. He's also done a good job of getting value from secondary players acquired in trades (John Maine, Ryan Church). On the other hand, he's demonstrated repeatedly that he does not know how to put a bullpen together. The length of the deal doesn't concern me, because the Mets have eaten plenty of money on managers and GMs in the past and will most likely continue to do so when they deem it necessary. My two questions are these: Is there's a better GM available right now? Does Minaya really deserve to be granted an extension before Jerry Manuel gets one?

I figure Murphy would play third if it came to that, but I really hope that's not necessary. Tatis turned out to be an asset, shaky outfield defense notwithstanding. I'd like to see him back with the team next year. It may cost Evans a spot, but I think Evans would benefit from steady AB's in AAA anyway.

...and after 15.2 innings, the Astros get their first hit of the series.

It's possible he's made some decisions recently that the front office felt were really bad. I know he's been juggling the lineup lately to find something that would work, but I can't see that by itself as being grounds for firing. Unless Yost did something obviously wrong and obviously costly, this looks like a big-time panic move. Or, perhaps, it's his fault that the Brewers have an even worse pen than the Mets?

Cruel, but I like it. I'll go the 23rd.