Centerfield

Edgy MD wrote: That NBC story is just piggybacking on Megdal. Sure. But he's taking Megdal's work, crediting him, and then opening him up to a bigger, national audience.

I like this deal a lot. I won't go as far as to say "love" because Walker is not a star player, but everything else is great. The one year commitment, the net effect on salary. Niese was a good pitcher, and the rotation is thinner now, but this trade fits perfectly. Walker can play 2nd. He can fill in at 3rd. He hits left-handed, so he can even platoon with Herrera. And if he's good you can bring him back. If not, get a draft pick and clear the way for Herrera. Much better option than Zobrist. Should have been option 1 from the beginning.

One nice aspect of this deal is that the media isfinally giving it to the Wilpons. John Harper called them out on their own station. https://www.sny.tv/mets/news/baseball-night-in-ny-de-aza/160283260 Craig Calcaterra called them out on NBC. http://mlb.nbcsports.com/2015/12/22/the-mets-are-blowing-a-golden-opportunity/ The Mets baseball operations side and Mets fans are paying for Wilpon and Katz’s greed, stupidity and recklessness. Nice. Mike Vaccarro at the Post: http://nypost.com/2015/12/22/world-series-berth-doesnt-give-mets-a-penny-pinching-pass/ Because once you were there — stuffing their coffers with ticket sales, parking fees and merchandise riches — then they’d repay the favor. Then they’d start acting the part again. Just wait. On Tuesday afternoon, this is what the men who own the Mets gave you, not only for grinding through those unwatchable years from 2009-14, but for responding in force in 2015 when the skies brightened at Citi Field and the Mets gave you a summer and autumn out of your craziest fantasies, when you sold out seven home playoff games, and bought enough stuff that when you walk around the city these days, Mets gear is practically a parochial school uniform now. They gave you Alejandro De Aza. Poor De Aza. I hope he doesn't become the symbol of the Wilpons' failures this winter. The way Cuddyer became the poster boy for last winter. But maybe this move is what it took for everyone to realize how awful the Wilpons are.

For all Coked-up CPA's. Asdrubal Cabrera: $9.25 million Bartolo Colon: $7.25 million Alejandro De Aza: $5.75 million Total: $22.25 million If you want to throw in: Jerry Blevins: $4 million (I actually like this deal) Total comes to $26.25 million. This is a ton of money to spend on marginal talent.

More expensive than originally reported. $5.75. Incentives can take it up to $ 7 million.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: He's better than Venable, except at running and catching the ball at the position for which he's been signed. Similarly, he's a step up from Kirk... with the bat. Probably. You know, I never took into account Venable's defense. We're bringing up Kirk. You'd have to think Nimmo's name gets thrown into the mix before the year is out.

All kidding aside, I'm trying to see positives here. Ok numbers against lefties last year. Certainly beats going 3 years, 27 million for Gerardo Parra. And looks to be better than Will Venable. He's cheap. Not much commitment. Maybe it's such a small monetary commitment it allows another OF move? Or maybe more money for the bullpen? I don't know. This move makes me sad.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Would this mean they'd no longer be interested in Span? Or might they sign both of these guys? I would guess this effectively ends our pursuit of Span, Cespedes, Parra etc. I think we are just looking at a Ryan Raburn type to round out our post-season. Jesus. I remember being worried in November that the Mets would skimp out and sign someone like Colby Rasmus in lieu of Cespedes.

Who's left? Well there's De Aza. Is he a good hitter? Not really. Is he a good fielder? Not really. Does he play centerfield? Not really. I mean, he can in a pinch. Ok. Sounds good. Everyone good? Ok. Let's get him.

Ceetar wrote: I don't understand the teeth gnashing over Heyward. Half his value is run-prevention and it's very clear that run-creation is the Mets need. I wanted Heyward because he would have represented nearly a 150 point improvement in OPS over the incumbent, Juan Lagares. This improvement would have offset the approximately 300 points we lost from Beast-Mode Cespedes to Lagares. No other improvement comes close to that.

Frayed Knot wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: But we also know that that's not realistic at this time Well, that's really the key here. I guess a bunch of you guys knew. And you've had time to come to grips with this reality. Well I don't claim to KNOW anything; it's why I tend to stay away from the threads where folks construct their dream team based on a specific budget number that's nothing more than a figure they pull out of the air, and why I said that you're free to choose whether you think it's a case of the team being unable to spend a particular amount or unwilling to because no one here, least of all me, knows what the "correct" amount is. But I think it's safe to say that based on the payrolls over the last few years combined with what we know about Madoff, about the loans to cover those losses, about the lawsuit to recover even some of the gains they made with Madoff, about the debt taken on to finance the stadium just as the recession was blowing in and shooting the hell out of the windfall they were expecting, and maybe even going back to the money they spent buying out Doubleday & Cablevision (while thinking they had a bigger cushion to fall back on), that they're not currently able to spend at or anywhere near the top of the league. Add all that up and I think it's pretty clear that they weren't going to go after top FA stars this winter AND plug other holes at the same time with the smaller six & eight & 10 million dollar moves. You obviously wanted them to go with choice A over B but they went the other way. Would I prefer them to do both? Sure Are they going to be able to in the future? Maybe Are they able right now to spend at least some more but are holding back for what they think is the right opportunity? I have no idea. I get all that. I thought that with revenue increasing around baseball in general and the post-season revenue, there would definitely be an increase in spending. Plus, I thought that the payroll was artificially low during the rebuild, but once the pitchers and Conforto arrived, they had the ability/willingness to open up and spend. So from your post, am I correct in concluding that you are in the "Using Mets money to finance their personal debt" camp?

Frayed Knot wrote: But we also know that that's not realistic at this time Well, that's really the key here. I guess a bunch of you guys knew. And you've had time to come to grips with this reality. I didn't know. I believed them when they said they were going to spend money. I believed in their plan to rebuild and open up the books. I thought it was a dick move for Wilpon to demand fans show up before he increased payroll, but now that it happened, I thought he had no choice. And it's basically just this last month where I've come to realize that the Mets are not going to go for it. They'll probably never go for it. "Just good enough" is basically all they are interested in being. So call me stupid, or naive, whatever. I guess I've learned my lesson.* *Just to be clear, I'm not implying that you are calling me stupid or naive. Sorry if it came across that way. I should clarify that my tone is such in these posts because I'm aggravated at the Mets, not anyone here.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Gary Cohen has his dream job. They'll have to pry that microphone out of his cold dead hands. As for Keith, I think he enjoys his job and I also think he enjoys complaining about his job. I expect he'll be back, but part of the deal might include an obligation to do fewer games. I agree completely with this. I think Keith will be back too. Both sides have very few options here. And if he walks, GO GET CAL RIPKEN. DO YOU HEAR ME FRED?

I understand what you are saying, and I understand the Mets' aims here. And I agree that this is the justification you would get from the Mets. You have absolutely nailed what the Mets are doing. But that being said, let's be honest about what the Mets are looking to do here. The second half Mets had pretty good second options. They had Johnson, Uribe, Cuddyer, Lagares and Plawecki. They had a 2 headed shortstop, one could hit, one could field. They had 6 starting pitchers, and a good bullpen (at least from the right side). And on top of all these great second options, they also had Yoenis Cespedes. A legitimate cleanup hitter. The second half Mets were a great team. Why? Because they had all those good second options and a monster in the middle of their lineup. And that great team won the division and went to the World Series with a legitimate shot to win. So when the Mets say we are going to arm the 2016 team with better second options, but no cleanup hitter, they are making their goals clear. They are trying to be better than the disastrous first half Mets. They are not looking to improve upon the NL Champion second-half Mets. In fact, they're more or less resigned to the fact that they won't be as good. They're trying to build a "pretty good" team. "Great" is not realistically on their radar. "Great" is only possible by accident. They've traded in their chance at "great" in exchange for "financial flexibility". The Cubs took their great team, and set their goals even higher. They improved the team that left the field in October. They were like, you know what? We need another pitcher to add to Arrieta/Lester. And got him. And then they looked at their already loaded lineup and said, you know what, let's get Zobrist anyway. He's a really good hitter. And then they sat back and said, hey you know what is even better than adding one good hitter? Two good hitters! Let's get the best position player available on the market EVEN THOUGH WE ALREADY HAVE A MONSTROUS LINEUP. They watched the Mets celebrate on their field and have taken every measure to prevent that from happening again. The Mets? They looked at that great team that left everything on the field in October and said "Wow, what a great team. Maybe we can get away with less." They looked at that roster and said "Let's choose one out of the two things that made us great. What was more important? The great hitter? Or the better second options? Let's go with better second options." Status quo would be to bring back great second options and a great hitter. But that's not on the menu. Improvement? Improvement would mean great second options and two great hitters. But we've been so conditioned to think improvement is far-fetched, that when I type that, the idea seems downright laughable. Think about this for a second. When I talk about improving the team, the idea is laughable. So they're getting us better second options. Fine. Whatever. We'll be better than the first half Mets. Probably not as good as the second half Mets. YOUR 2016 METS! BETTER THAN WE WERE WHEN WE SUCKED! FK says: "Disagree with that direction if you want". I do disagree. Because the direction is down. We could have gone up, we could have stayed the same, but we are instead, choosing to go down. But you know what? It's ok. Because our division sucks. And so even if we take a step back, we should still be favorites to win depending on what else Washington does this winter. And if we can make the post-season, who knows, maybe we beat the Cubs anyway. Or maybe the Cubs don't even make it. It's baseball. Anything can happen. No way that '88 team should have lost to the Dodgers. We have always suspected that ownership's goal was to field a team just good enough to compete for the playoffs. Never has that been more apparent than it is now.

and, again, I'm putting aside for purposes of this discussion whether you're in the camp that thinks the team can't spend or simply won't spend as the result is the same no matter what the cause For clarification: 1. I don't know if it's "can't" or "won't" spend more. Either way the Wilpons suck. They're either cheap and won't spend, or they're incompetent and can't figure out how to fund a large payroll despite playing in NY. 2. They definitely can (or at least, could have) reallocated assets in order to afford a star outfielder this year even with the current payroll. (They spent $20 million plus on Cabrera/Colon/Blevins already. If they had gone Herrera over Walker, that would be another $10 million. And it's rumored that they have another $10 million to spend) Now, there may well be a restriction on long-term contracts imposed by a lender. Have no way of knowing this. 3. I do not buy even for a second that keeping payroll down this year will have any effect on the ability to sign the four aces to long term deals years down the road.

Frayed Knot wrote: I don't think anyone really goes into the season with that 'model' in mind....In this case it worked flawlessly when Cespedes going ape on ML pitchers synched-up with the return/call-up/rebirth of Wright/d'Arnaud/Conforto/Granderson & co. and, in a blink, the worst became best. But we've also seen times where those kinds of moves have been ill-timed and backfired (cough ... Kazmir ... cough) and, even this past year, had Sandy gone through with his first choice of the Carlos Gomez deal I think it's safe to say that things wouldn't have worked out nearly as well. Exactly. Build your team in the winter, when you have more options and it doesn't necessarily cost you prospects.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Bland, but filled a hole capably, despite having sat around for a while. Like rice! I'm just going to say it. LWFS is just funny.

Frayed Knot wrote: * Lots of players -- major, minor, and in-between -- are moved every single July; this coming season should be no different. There are just too many variables to make blanket statements about the state of the market 8 months in advance. I agree that there will be many trades. I am explaining why I think that it will be more difficult this year. I think there is a good chance there will be a tighter market, and I cited to the weak free agent class as a reason why. Is it determinative? No, but I think it will be a factor. But agreed that there will be a ton of variables, including injuries and the first-half success of several teams. Frayed Knot wrote: * My comment about doing a mid-season trade not being harder this coming summer was merely in response to the assertion that it will be because now "other teams have seen that trick". There was nothing unique or ground-breaking about the Cespedes deal that's going to change the way teams think in the future about deadline deals in general or about deals with the Mets in particular. Which isn't to say that coming up with a Cespedes-type at the deadline will be easy, or that it will work out as well next time (it almost surely will NOT), or that you should go into your season planning to do that. Agreed on all points here.

I went Bart too. I think it's a better cover, first off, but we won that Opening Day game, and lost that first game of the SS.

Not sure what that post means. But I still love Edgy. NTTAWWT. His underwear on the other hand...

d'Kong76 wrote: So I can come in off the ledge then for now? No dude. Stay out here with me. We got this great view of Edgy playing in traffic.

Frayed Knot wrote: But I don’t get the part about that being tougher to pull off; mid-season trades have been going on since the game began and it’s not like other teams can do something to prevent it simply because we did one last year. No guarantee that the next one will work out as well as it did in 2015 but those deals are always a gamble. I don't know what others think, but I've said stuff along these lines. Mainly as a warning to the "And if we need another big bat, we'll just get one at the trade deadline like we did this year" crowd. These trades are always tough. It's risky to just go into a season half-cocked thinking you can just go shopping at the Big Hitter Store in July. And that assumes you are even in the mix by that point, though I'd guess with this team and this division, you'd expect the Mets to at least be in the neighborhood. The reason I think a deadline deal will tougher in particular in 2016 is because the 2016 free agent class looks incredibly weak. Rentals don't make up the entire market in July, but they are the players most likely to be traded. In 2015, there was an incredible amount of activity. The following nine players all changed teams: Gerardo Parra Yoenis Cespedes Scott Kazmir Ben Zobrist Johnny Cueto David Price Troy Tulowitzki Cole Hamels Carlos Gomez Of these 9 players, the first 6 were rentals and are now free agents. 2016's rental market will not be anywhere near as talented, nor as deep. Strasburg will be the one starting pitcher, but you'd think Washington would have to have a disastrous first half to think of moving him. Of the hitters only Edwin Encarnacion and Jose Bautista seem to be difference makers, but again, you'd guess Toronto would be hanging around. And sure, players under team control will surely be available, but the market will likely not be as deep as it was in 2015. Plus, deadline deals mean giving up prospects. And we already traded away Michael Fullmer. We also gave up a lot of ancillary pieces for the other moves last July. If you continue to utilize this philosophy, your farm system will dry up pretty fast. So, in summary: Fewer targets available + thinner farm system = Harder to do a deadline deal in 2016 It's funny that the "don't overspend" crowd has a lot of overlap with the "get a hitter at the deadline crowd". Getting a hitter at the deadline means you give up young players, and works against the philosophy of focusing on scouting and development. This is why I've been pushing so hard to make a move this winter. When a talent-rich free-agent pool is available, when good young hitters who represent solid investments are all competing with each other, and when signing these guys don't mean giving up any talent in the minors.

Could there be any better example of Murph Giveth, Murph Taketh Away. I don't know. That error hurt and all, but I'll still miss Murphy.

Denard Span will work out for teams in Tampa after the new year. Boras says this will prove his client's health. I think this makes sense. I had reservations about giving a multi-year deal to a speed guy on the wrong side of 30 coming off of hip surgery. But if he can hit off a tee and shag some fly balls, then I say let's go for it!

I think they will add at least one more hitter, likely 2, and will add one more reliever. I don't think they will add any hitter that I want though. I think they are already better than they were going into last spring. Conforto is better than Cuddyer. Walker and Murphy are just about a wash. Cabrera is (though marginal) an improvement over Tejada/Flores. I think they will be a good team. And will be favorites to win the NL East. The thing is, the Mets had an opportunity this year to be great. They could have been great for the next many years. And they could have done it by raising payroll, or even just spending differently. But they punted on great. They played it safe and went for "good enough" instead. Get used to it guys. What you see now is as good as it's ever going to get.