Centerfield

As far as I can tell, the basis for this whole "rumor" stems from some off-hand remarks given to the Pioneer Press by Twins hurler Ervin Santana. HE mentioned Colon and the Mets but it's not apparent that either Colon or the Mets have yet to mention each other. * and the Mets now claim to be surprised by the mentioned and deny even thinking about it The value here is that it was sourced, rather than the typical "according to a person close to the Mets" nonsense that we normally get from sportswriters. Sourcing allowed us to see where the information was coming from and make our own judgement as to its accuracy. Yes it was 'sourced', but that source was nothing more than Colon's buddy saying that he thought Bartolo might like to go back to the Mets. No Mets sources were involved (or even ones 'close to their thinking') nor was Colon himself. That doesn't make the article false, it just means that any conclusions drawn from it -- **THE METS ARE MAKING LIKE TIMBERLAKE AND TRYING TO BRING SEXY BACK** -- are like third generation speculation. And while the Minnesota paper didn't appear to check with the Mets for comment, when Ackert (NYDN) did their response was basically: "Huh, we're doing what now?" That's not what the article said. Santana did talk last week with former Twins pitcher Bartolo Colon, who turns 45 in May but wants to supplant Dennis Martinez as the winningest pitcher from Latin America. Santana mentioned Colon, whose 240 career victories are five behind Martinez, has drawn interest from the New York Mets about a potential reunion. According to the Pioneer Press, Santana said that he spoke with Colon, and that Colon has drawn interest from the Mets. Santana could be wrong, or Colon could be lying, but the article suggests that it was more than just Santana speculating that Bartolo would like to return.

Jeff Wilpon apparently had a conference call with beat writers and went extensively into the payroll. Says there is a plan. Where is Ambler when we need him?

Poor Norichika. Even in a sea of non-Asians, the criticism "You'll never be mistaken for Ichiro" still applies.

Michael Conforto had surgery in early September. By season's end, he was "recovering". So were Matz and Wheeler, who were shut down. Syndergaard was "active", in that he was good for one inning a week, and Harvey was throwing but terrible. Lugo's UCL tear is not behind us. And Gsellman's hamstring is presumably healed but he's still suffering from hesucksitis.

Ceetar wrote: Everyone finished the season active or at least recovering right?. That is literally everyone in baseball except Jennry Mejia. Even David Wright is "recovering".

Let's look at the rotation. 1. deGrom: Was healthy last year. But had elbow surgery in 2016. We need him to be a horse, because in this group, he is considered "reliable". 2. Syndergaard: Coming off of major injury where he missed the majority of the season. He is also in our "reliable" group. 3. Matz: Was hurt all last year. Coming off elbow surgery. History of injuries. 4. Harvey: Complete unknown. Still recovering from TOS surgery with no idea what his end result will be. 5. Wheeler: Has not been healthy since 2014. And wasn't good when healthy. 6. Lugo: Partially torn UCL that will not heal itself. 7. Gsellman: sucked. But yes, let's pretend that all of our injury issues are behind us. I would love to see the basis on why you think we will be relatively healthy this year.

I know I have the burden of proof here when I say that certain members of the media are compromised, but (for me at least) it's hard not to read that article without getting this impression. But this is a Mets team that needs a resurrection of its own pitchers more than a good human interest story this season. The Mets need the starters they already have on the roster to stay healthy and productive. Could they use a veteran starter, considering they have no idea what they will be getting from Steven Matz (coming back from elbow surgery) and Matt Harvey (who struggled last season coming back from 2016 Thoracic Outlet Syndrome surgery)? In an ideal offseason, sure. But considering their limited budget, a veteran starter is way down on the priority list. The use of that wording makes her intent unmistakable. People only use that when they are implying that something is a bonus, not a necessity. How are you feeling Frank? Great! Could I stand to lose a few pounds? In an ideal world, sure! But I got no complaints! How are things are work Billy? All good. Could I use a raise? Ideally, sure! But it ain't happening with my company. What are you gonna do? Judging from that conversation, Frank is in pretty good shape, and Billy's job is pretty decent. But the Mets, who were ranked 27th in starter ERA, are in the bottom 10% of their field. That means Frank is grossly out of shape, and Billy is badly underpaid. See, the reason that I ask Frank, is that I'm looking at your chart. Your BMI is in the 90th percentile. It's more than just a few pounds, you have to start an aggressive program of diet and exercise. I'll tell you what you're going to do Billy, you're going to fire up that resume and get your name out there because your company is not paying you to industry standard. It doesn't help that planted within the quoted text, there is a link to another Ackert column: Tim Tebow adds needed entertainment value to Mets big-league camp

Kristie Ackert says no Colon. http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/mets/mets-not-talking-colon-shouldn-bring-sexy-back-article-1.3772046 Source reiterates the party line that the starting pitching is just fine. Mets starters ranked 27th out of 30 teams. This is supposed to be the strength of the rotation.

Wait, let me clarify. We are not relying on him for rotation insurance. That would be silly. Bartolo will be our primary right-handed pinch hitter. His athleticism allows him to field a variety of positions and I think we can agree that the power swing speaks for itself...

https://www.sporcle.com/games/nymetsjets17/metsopeningdaystarters 50 out of 56. In other words, all of the easy ones.

CES BOOM BAH really was a terrific cover.

Minor league deal means not giving up a roster spot right? I guess it's a "no downside" move, and one that I'd like in a vacuum. Everyone loves Bartolo. But if the Mets spin this as "rotation insurance" or "bolstering the starting pitching" it's a big problem. I can see the spin now. "We started by saying we needed a Bartolo Colon-type. What better way to meet that need than to sign Bartolo himself." More than anything else, the starting pitching demonstrates the payroll constraints. A team serious about contending for a championship would be talking to Arrieta or Darvish if they just had the pitching performance the Mets had. Because of the return of Jake and Noah, I guess Lance Lynn or Cobb would be ok. But to add Colon or nothing falls way short.

Buck Showalter makes that argument all the time, except that he says no one cares about game times except the writers and umpires - and I think part of the reason the players haven't gotten on board with this (aside from pitchers and hitters coming at things from an opposite viewpoint) is that they don't perceive a problem either; they're getting paid so things must be great! But the players, and Buck, are wrong; it matters. It matters to those who have to get up early in the morning and so have trouble staying awake for the end of east coast games, and then totally punt on ones in the C/M/P time zones It matters to parents who have kids with 2-1/2 hours worth of patience but not 3-1/2 It matters in those cities (many of them) where public transportation doesn't run 24/7 - ask Nats fans about that whenever a game runs long or just about every post-season game in their short history And it matters to the casual fan who's not going to attend or tune into a game if he doesn't have a vested rooting interest because he doesn't want to invest three to four hours. We're all geeks here. But just because we (some of us anyway) stay up until 2 in the morning doesn't mean everyone does and you can't run a business that increasingly caters just to the geeks. In 2007, when I believe the same between inning break times as now were in place, 1/3 of all MLB game were done in under 2:40 -- this past season it was less than one game in eight (11.9%) Less than 9% (8.9%) of 2007 games ran over 3:20; in 2017 nearly 1/4 of them did (22.7%) Name any cut-off you want and the difference is huge and that's just in the last decade, I'm not going back to when the games were played only in black and white (except there was no black) and the home gate accounted for most of a team's income. I'd like to back things up to maybe where the games were in the late 80's -- the '86 Mets for instance played Six games that year which ran over 3:20, this past year we witnessed 30 -- but at the moment I'd settle for 2007 And these numbers, btw, only include 9 inning games as are the 'averages' that MLB releases. Throw in extra inning games plus post-season and things really blow up. Yup. I'm one of those that don't care about game time at all. If there were measures in place to shorten the work day, I'd be out picketing in support of it. But baseball games? Let's play forever. But that doesn't mean I don't realize that game times matter. Big difference between 2:40 and 3:20.

Why no Szapucki?

Challenges should be done by the naked eye. If you want to challenge the judgement of the umpire you should have the same set of tools he has. This would limit challenges greatly.

Interesting development today in that it was announced that Marc Carig is leaving Newsday to join the Yankees beat for the Athletic. The Athletic is the subscription online site that Ken Rosenthal writes for. Rumblings are that this offer was extended during the Winter Meetings. Carig's article came afterwards. So basically, after years of being silent on the topic, he blew the lid off the doors when he knew he was on his way out. It really makes you think that there is something in play suppressing this NY media.

Never would have guessed Big Inning would be a semi finalist. Have to think it's the runner up cover this year, no matter who wins the other poll.

Can Blunder hang on?!?!?!?

I went with Walker. He is the best hitter of that group, he costs nothing but money, and he's a known entity. I'm guessing Walker signs for 2 year, about $20 million. That would get the Mets to about $145 million in payroll. Plenty of room for more help if they were so inclined.

Nymr83 wrote: I would take a hard pass on Nunez. 1. Speed doesnt age well, he will be 31 this year 2. His career beat OBP last year (.341) was the only time in his career he had an acceptable year in that area, and it was largely driven by an unsustainable high BABIP (.334) well above his career norm. As he slows down, expect it to get lower than even his past norm. 3. Defense is mediocre 4. Yankee taint I dont think he is better than Cabrera and id rather see what Rosario has. Rosario's defense likely makes him a bettet player already. Tend to agree with this.

Edgy MD wrote: Nymr83 wrote: I would take a hard pass on Nunez. HARD PASS! Lololol.

Not asking who you want, asking what you think is going to happen.

He passed his physical. That means he's totally healthy right?

Alderson said today that the Mets have the ability to sign an infielder to a significant contract. That's encouraging.

Likely to be reinstated, according to this analysis: https://www.forbes.com/sites/marcedelman/2018/01/17/jenrry-mejia-is-likely-to-pitch-for-mets-despite-lifetime-ban/#5e3356d02af7 So, this raises a few questions: 1. Are they on the hook for his salary if he is reinstated but doesn't make the team? 2. What happens if he gets caught again? Is it another 2 years, or is it "permanent, and this time I really mean it".