Centerfield

More on the Hot Stove Report and rumors that there is meddling from up top on medical decisions: https://nypost.com/2018/01/27/a-much-needed-culture-change-can-help-a-long-standing-mets-nightmare/ Conversations with 10 people possessing first-hand knowledge of the Mets’ baseball operations produced the picture of an ultra-intense environment, created by Mets ownership, in which the daily pressure to win, not only the games but the daily media coverage, has compromised the decision-making process and, hence, led to poor moves on multiple fronts. On the medical front, that has made the Mets the butt of many an industry joke. You don't like unnamed sources? How about ten of them? More: Several sources attribute the Mets’ faulty decision-making behavior to various factors. One is the organization feeling the heat of competing with the major leagues’ titans, the Yankees, for attention in the market with a payroll a fraction of the size and consequently less roster depth. Another is an environment where CEO Fred Wilpon and COO Jeff Wilpon both are prone to micromanagement, with Fred Wilpon more likely to assert himself in on-the-field decisions and Jeff Wilpon more involved in medical matters — such as working on media releases about injuries — clouding the chain of command. More and more, as these reports come out, a pretty clear picture emerges. Both Wilpons care quite bit about winning. Not just games, but back pages and praise from the fans and media. They especially care about competing with the Yankees. Seemingly at an unhealthy level. The problem is that they are not in a position to adequately fund a winner. They have limited funds (and in my opinion, acumen). And so this environment emerges. The stress from having to compete at a level where they are not equipped to compete is unbearable, and so you get micro-management, short-sighted decisions, clumsy Q&A sessions with select media where you end up confirming all the fans' fears.

I had no idea then that the people didn’t like him. I lived upstate during that time and if people there felt that way, I don’t remember noticing it. Plus I didn’t have the CPF back then. I would guess that it didn’t help that the guy we traded to get him was: 1. A world champion 2. Fiery and well liked 3. An eventual MVP who hit 50 HRs

Frayed Knot wrote: - - There was a sense that he was too cool for school, aka: not fiery enough [see Edgy's post] I do believe there is some truth to this. Basically he made everything look so easy some didn't really appreciate how tough these plays were. I've said it before, Torii Hunter got more credit for missing the ball and falling into the Boston bullpen than Beltran did for catching it, bouncing off, and then throwing it back in. He did it with such grace it was impossible to know that he hurt his ribs on that play.

I don't know if I agree with that, Edgy. I just think people had unrealistic expectations. They probably thought they were getting the otherworldly guy they saw in the playoffs and were let down that they got a guy who was merely excellent. Met fans embraced Gooden and Strawberry and other African American players. BREAKING NEWS: WHITE MALE REPUBLICAN SKEPTICAL OF RACISM Details at 11

That's probably true. I don't understand that segment of fans. We finally got a star player to sign with us and for some reason some fans didn't take to him. Seriously. Sometimes I wonder if some Met fans just like being miserable. Understood that he got off to a slow start, but the minute he breaks his face and comes back to the lineup, I think you have to throw any disappointment out the window. I imagine anyone's numbers would dip if he suffers a broken face and a concussion. You'd think, by the treatment he got, that he was the one that never made it back that season. And once he lit the world on fire in 2006, all sins, real or perceived, should have been forgiven. Makes me so mad. The treatment of Beltran is an embarrassment for Mets fans.

Also important to note, a Carlos Beltran double, followed by a Wright RBI single had accounted for the only Mets run of the game. Adding on, the Mets had only 4 hits that game. Beltran's was the only extra-base hit. He also walked, making him and Delgado the only Mets to reach twice. Even in that game, you can hardly call him a goat. For the series only Delgado was more productive. LoDuca was terrible. Wright had an OPS of .596. Endy, great catch aside, was stupid bad. (.444 OPS). If anyone should have been a goat, it would be Valentin. .667 OPS including whiffing during our best scoring opportunity.

Edgy MD wrote: Yeah, that's what the team has to bank on. If at the time Conforto is activated, we find ourselves asking "Man, what do we do with all of these totally healthy and productive players?" I'll sign up for that right now.

smg58 wrote: It's human nature. Some games are more important than others, some plays are more important than others. Bill Buckner had an extremely enviable career. Ron Swoboda was considered a defensive liability. Al Weis didn't hit home runs. Every time I hear somebody mention how great Beltran was in the postseason -- and to be fair, he WAS -- it's like a knife twisting in my heart. You know what pitch is coming, get ready to swing at it! Fully understand that there are big moments etc. But I have never seen a batter receive so much blame for one at-bat. Buckner made an error. Closers give up game-winning HR's. Batters who make outs, just make outs. Hitting is hard. Especially against closers. Mike Piazza made the last out of the 2000 World Series. People hardly remember that. When he was inducted into the Hall of Fame, no Met fan said, "Yeah, but that last out against Mariano..." So much is made of the manner of out. A called strike three. Like this is indicative of a character flaw or that it demonstrates a lack of desire. I will never understand this. Being selective is a huge part of what made him great. That year he had a .388 OBP against a .275 BA. He didn't chase bad pitches. Over the long run I'd much rather a selective hitter than someone who chases. What's the downside to that? If someone drops a filthy buckle the knees curveball, Beltran was vulnerable to that. He was beat. It happens. I don't believe for a second that his take is indicative of a lack of effort. "At least swing." I hear that all the time. Anyone going up against Wainright with the philosophy that he has to swing is toast. He'd take advantage of that. And for Beltran, who had put together a legendary year and was crushing it in October, why would you change anything with the season on the line. His line in that series? 1.054 OPS, with 3 HR's. Anytime anyone mentions Carlos Beltran in 2006, this is what I think of. And by the way, if everyone knew what Wainright was bringing, it didn't help them much. That October Wainright was 1-0, with a 0.00 ERA in 9.2 innings pitched. 15 strikeouts in those outings. So I'm guessing that the "They should have put me in, I'd at least swing" critics wouldn't have fared much better.

G-Fafif wrote: Barwis is a dead vocal ringer for Scott Ferrall, a syndicated voice on the FAN in the mid-to-late '90s and more recently with CBS Sports Radio. He pops up as a raspy talking head on NFL Network "Top 10" shows. Good call. I haven't thought of him in years, but yes, I can see that. I'm trying to digest what I just watched. Really strange overall. A few random thoughts: *I am still trying to wrap around the idea that the Mets trotted out their new trainer on TV. I mean, I know they own the network and so they can do what they want, and the new guy has a fancy science title, but seriously, are we really watching 22 minutes on the new trainer? *Kinda awkward moment when the SNY guys referred to the new guy as an "army" guy. Alderson, an actual veteran, was quick to point out that performance guy (forgot his name) was never actually in the army. He only worked with soldiers. He did it diplomatically, but it feels like there was something more there. *So he's supposed to be high performance guy right? Super boring. I can't even remember his name. I know the point of tonight was for us to leave thinking "Wow, this guy is smart. We are are not going to break ourselves this year." But really, nothing. I came away not one bit more confident. So I guess this guy is not a doctor either. I mean, if we're going fake doctors, just sign Neil Patrick Harris. *I wonder who felt it was important for Barwis to come out and clarify that it was Cespedes who chose not to follow the program, and not that the program was flawed. Was it Barwis who had been bugging for a chance to defend himself? Or did the Wilpons buy him a suit, slap some makeup on him and give him a script? *Encouraging words, I thought, from Sandy. Reyes doesn't mean they stop looking for a starting infielder. Also, he continues to monitor the pitching. *You just wonder what these guys are thinking. "Wow, our fans are all outraged. We gotta calm them down. Lucy? Get me the SNY program director. Let's put Barwis on TV..."

Daily News Headline Tomorrow: BREWERS LOSE OUT ON JOSE REYES Rebound by trading for Yelich and signing Cain. Will it be enough?

In other news, Barwis sounds like he chain smokes. Could definitely be Marge’s sister.

Is airing now. Tough to watch. Basically just a propaganda piece. Giving Barwis an opportunity to defend himself. Introduced the performance guy. Sold the company line about how they are hoping for better health. Barwis basically threw Yo under the bus. Says his program stresses running and flexibility but Ces wasn’t into it.

Wow.

I think we will see David on the field at some point this year. I think it will be largely unsuccessful and this will be his final year. Last game of the season, long having clinched the NL East crown, Reyes and Wright will line up at 3B and SS and get huge cheers from the Citi faithful. Maybe we can get Johan to close the game.

If he's considered super utility, he can play OF too. Didn't he play a few innings last year? I wonder if this move is designed to make our actual 2B target (or trade partner) blink. "Look guys, we now have Reyes, and TJ Rivera coming back mid-season. We are totally fine without (target name)."

Zvon wrote: Nymr83 wrote: Even in a tight pennant race there will be a blowout game one way or the other he can come into! That's true. I'll root for whatever he wants to do with the rest of his life, until the end of time itself. Sign me up for this too. Imagine the reception he'd get from the fans the minute he comes into the game. I've always thought it was interesting how different Santana and Beltran are perceived by Mets fans. Both were superstars hampered by injury. Both gave us some of the best performances we have seen. But Santana is royalty, largely because of one game. Beltran draws mixed reactions, with many viewing him in a negative light, because of one at bat.

Ceetar wrote: YOu know what would've shut up the fans? if they'd won last year. Even if they'd won 84 games. Maybe dumb fans. Smart ones can separate out results and preparation. Good results can happen to anyone. Good luck can strike at any time. Simply because someone or something had a good result does not mean that the person was well prepared. On the other hand, well-prepared folks are not guaranteed success. Just as there is good luck, there is bad luck. Individual results should not affect anyone's judgment in determining how to best prepare for the next event. Whether you fail or succeed, going forward, all participants should take actions to best maximize their chance of success at the next opportunity. Over time, the well-prepared folks, the ones who maximize their chances of success, will see sustained results over the one-off, random success of the lucky ones. This is why mothers do not implore their children to buy lottery tickets. Even if the Mets had won the World Series in 2017, I would be advocating for them to field the best possible team in 2018. And that means spending money.

Frayed Knot wrote: Vic Sage wrote: at some point, A-Rod went from reviled PEDS poster boy to media darling ... I still think he's a corrupt, cheating asshole. And we all know how much a sordid sports background serves as a detriment to a post-career media life. Oh wait. Are you referring to Pete Rose? I have not watched one minute of his segments, but I question the sanity of viewers when I see that he's popular enough to bring back.

I would too. But then I'd go home and realize that smart people aren't buying my bullshit. At the end of the day, everyone knows the Mets don't spend enough. There is no way to spin it or to cover it up, or to soften the blow. You either spend or you don't. The Wilpons will get a reprieve when, and only when, they spend like a big market team. The problem is really self-inflicted. With no leaks or rumblings coming from the Mets, the trend is very encouraging. Low payroll during the rebuilding years, steady increase as the team gets competitive, and you figure, high-priced free agents will be added during the window of contention. Even during this offseason, the Mets could plausibly be waiting out the market for Darvish and JD Martinez, with money to spend at their disposal. It's the reports that the 2017 payroll was over budget, and the rumblings that payroll is getting slashed in 2018 that have fans in an uproar. You wonder why that information leaked. Did the Wilpons think that doing so would soften the blow when we ultimately ended up not spending? Or was it to test the waters, and now they're saying "Holy shit, we better spend". I have no idea. Jeff Wilpon could have put this whole thing to rest. "Look, we've heard the reports about cutting the payroll and we have no idea where these guys are getting their info. The payroll is fluid. If we see a deal, we'll take it, but we are not going to bid against ourselves. We know our payroll has been low for NY. But it's on the rise, and we do not expect payroll to restrict our ability to improve this team and field a championship contender. I'm also here to put to bed the rumors that we are cash strapped or in debt because of Madoff. We have the ability to fund a big market payroll. Once we see the right fits, we see no reason we can't get back there." Now the fans are confident. Instead, his words basically confirmed what we have long suspected. That the Mets would like to fund a top tier payroll, but are unable to do so. Did he really pull the WFAN caller logic of "Payroll doesn't guarantee championships"? Come on. He must think we are idiots.

here are some actual facts: opening day payrolls 2011 (pre-Madoff): 120m (7th) 2012: 93.3m (14th) 2013: 73.4m (23rd) 2014: 89m (22nd) 2015: 101.4m (21st) 2016: 99.6m (19th) 2017: 155m (12th) During these years, we were often outspent by the Twins and Padres, while the Yankees and Dodgers led the league with payrolls in the 200-270m range. What's true is that the Mets were damaged by Madoff and the debt that now hangs over this franchise like a sword of Damocles prevents us from spending in proportion to our revenue and market size, keeping us in the Minny/SD budget range. So we're competing with 1 hand tied behind our backs, unable to take advantage of our market size to give us a competitive edge. Now every move has to be the right one, every guy we bring up has to be a stud, or we can't win. no margin for error. But technically, Sandy was correct when he said that "we've already spent more than most teams this season," if he means by that the Mets payroll last year was 12th (better than 18 other teams!). Of course that was the first time that was true over the past 5 years, while the other NY team (and the LA team) were spending more than double the Mets payroll in the same size media markets. But if he is referring to the upcoming season, we have no idea what he'll have spent by the time the season begins; so far, its Bruce and Swarzak, while almost none of the major free agents have been signed. so again, his accuracy is hanging on a technicality of timing. We'll see where we end up by opening day. If we've signed Darvish, Cain and Moustakas, i'll be impressed. If we sign Lynn and Frazier, at least we'll have some leeway. If its Colon and Nunez, the rotation will have to come back awfully strong, along with Conforto, and Rosario will have to take a big step forward. If its Reyes and a bucket of balls, we're fucked. Yup. And though every statement that Alderson makes is fact, the overall inference, (Hey, we are spending) is false.

Sandy Alderson says we should be looking at alternative facts. https://www.mlb.com/news/mets-owner-jeff-wilpon-discusses-2018-payroll/c-265182534 "You've just got to take another look at the facts from a slightly different perspective," Alderson said. "We've already spent more money than most teams this season. We've had one of the rare big, big contracts in the last couple of seasons. No, we're not running out and signing everybody. But at the same time, in instances, we've stepped up and signed players and made moves in some cases where others haven't. We'll continue to consider those types of things in the future." You have to figure that Sandy is bright enough to know he is talking bullshit here.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Where are you seeing the Newsday cover? They've changed their page where I used to go for the covers, in an apparent attempt to self-sabotage their chances in future competitions. I was able to grab today's from the Newsday Sports Twitter feed, but I'd like to think that there's a more reliable source. I saw it on someone's twitter.

I can't seem to be able to post the covers here, but Jeff Wilpon clearly wants to win TCD 2018. Both Newsday and the Post feature him this morning. Fueling my conspiracy theory that the Daily News is compromised, today they decide to run a cover featuring Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens. Can't seem to find a link to the covers that allows them to be posted here. I guess you can only access those from Sweden.

It makes me sick. Mets fans have to separate the team they love from the crooks that own it.

Ceetar wrote: so either way a completely unsourced second or third hand rumor of 'interest' generated mounds of #content for a lot of people. This is about as valid as if someone heard Sandy Alderson say "Thanks Neal" on the phone as he hung up on line at Starbucks and when he tells his friend back at the office he reports the Mets talking about Harrison again. No, it is sourced. It is a second hand, sourced account. The public can decide to give it whatever weight it wishes, but the source of the information is there for all to see. Ackert's on the other hand, is unsourced. And unlike the Bartolo to Santana account, we have no way of knowing whether it's accurate or if the source has motivations to be untruthful. Your "Thanks Neal" comment is not anything like what happened here.