Centerfield

Exactly. Either there was official testing, or there wasn't. For these players, there was no testing. So it's patently unfair to blacklist some, but not others. Allowing all voters to come up with their on standards of guilt add to make this process a complete mess. The HoF needs a complete reboot. The whole process is a farce. Now that testing is in place, the Hall can make a ruling (if they want) that any player who tests positive will automatically be denied entry. Or they can elect not to. It's up to them. Once a player is eligible, the voters should vote based upon the player's performance. And only the player's performance. If you add anything else, this already subjective standard becomes too arbitrary and random. Anyone not adhering to these standards should lose their vote. So, for if instance, if you fail to vote for Rickey Henderson because you think he's a Hall of Famer, but not a "first ballot guy". Or if you think Rickey belongs but you don't want anyone to beat Seaver's %, then you are too stupid to vote and should be replaced.

The platoon is already there. Granderson and Lagares split CF. sign a premiere corner guy. If it's Heyward, you can play him in center over Granderson. Signing Lagares long term was dumb.

And now warming up on the Mounds Mound is Jeurys Familia...

Why stop at allowing sponsorship of the upper deck? Why not the entire field? 1st Base - Brought to you by Scope 2nd Base - Sponsored by Victoria Secret 3rd Base - Guess Jeans

Did anyone take up sponsorship of the Mo's Zone? I don't remember calling that anything else besides "Right Field" this season.

I love Hammer Time. Was one of my favorite games this year.

That's terrible. You'd think at 40 I'd know enough not to be disappointed when a player I like does something like this. But I guess that part of me never grew up. I hope his wife is ok. For whatever it's worth, I hope that this is just an isolated incident, and we don't later find out about a pattern of abuse (not that this makes it acceptable by any means) and I hope that Jose will learn his lesson from this.

You know, it occurs to me, if you want to open up a corner OF position, you could slide Granderson over to CF and platoon him with Lagares. Plus have Juan come in for late-inning defense. I don't know how Curtis would be in CF, but he's only 2 years from having played it regularly for the MFY's, and he still seems pretty fast. Arm aside, I thought he played very well in RF this year.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Does anyone understand the nuances of Desmond's struggles this year -- injury? personal turmoil? over the hill? Bad relationship with management? Because he at least once was a good+ player, albeit one who whiffs a little too much. You figure he's the kind of player some team will gamble on fixing with a good hitting coach or something. On the fielding side, he seems to have always made a ton of errors. On the hitting side, Nats guys say he rebounded in the second half. He still hit 19 HR's. But his OPS has declined over the last 4 years. Might just be getting old.

Good article. I don't know if he's right, but I like the size of the contracts he is predicting for the top line guys. None seem overly stupid. I don't get the buzz around Desmond. .674 OPS with 27 errors. A team with Ian Desmond should be looking to upgrade by getting a guy like Wilmer Flores.

I present to you, the MLB free agent class of 2017. http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2015/03/2016-17-mlb-free-agents.html Free free to browse through it, but if you're in a hurry, I'll save you the trouble. Basically, if you're looking for a hitter, there is a whole bunch of suck on that list. Jose Bautista is probably the only game changer there. And he will be 36. Other than that, maybe Justin Turner or Carlos Gomez. Again, also on the wrong side of 30. Anyway, I bring this up to illustrate the difference between next year's class and this year's class. This year's class offers two premiere outfielders in their 20's (Heyward and Upton). It offers another that just turned 30 (Cespedes) and a premier power hitter in Chris Davis (29). This year, if you spend the money, you can make a huge impact on your team. Next year, it might be harder. Now, I realize that a lot of things can change in a year. We may have a complete different set of needs (or have no needs) at this time next year. Still, last year, we needed an impact hitter for the middle of the lineup, and here we are again. And sure, you can always pursue trades. But trades require giving up talent. And in a weak free agent market, your leverage in trades is weakened. Bottom line, this offseason presents a very good opportunity to add talent. You have to take advantage of these opportunities when they are available. What's that you say? Not worried about 2017 yet? A line of thinking around here is that if the Mets fall short this winter, they'll just add the pieces at the deadline like they did this year. A good idea in theory, but just remember how lucky we were this year to get it done. Next year, the guys on this list make up the rentals that will be available. And again, that doesn't mean other players can't be had, but free-agents-to-be-on-bad-teams are a big chunk of the pool in July. I'm sure Sandy and his staff are aware of this. And I hope that this will push them to go get the players they need now.

The Depends Landing Pad.

The Fanta Facade. The Snapple Stratosphere It leaving the soft drink sector: The Trojans Trench

It's ok. We don't have anyone left who can reach it anyway.

Was not good at getting lefties out. Not that great against righties either.

That Cubs sweep doesn't even feel like it was from this season.

March 3, 1994 is just stupid crazy young. Soon we are going to have Mets younger than this forum.

I got it. Wheeler, Duda, Lagares and Plawecki for Adam Jones. Then go sign Chris Davis. Get it done Sandy!

Edgy MD wrote: Trades can sometimes be a preferable target in that they sometimes get you a shorter contract for a player that might otherwise expect you to extend beyond your comfort zone, and the value of the contract is a known going in. Sure. That's the upside. The downside is that you give up a prospect that you've been reading about, hoping for, and just when you see a taste of what he can offer you, he's gone. GONE! I mean, Matz for Jones. Are you ok with that? I'd much rather keep Matz and sign Heyward. Look at our rotation. How can anyone break that up? Fuck. If it came to it, I think I'd rather keep Matz and hope for Lagares to get better.

I would certainly be open to trading for Adam Jones if it didn't include Matz. Maybe Wheeler? But the O's most likely don't take that. So the point is likely moot. Also, I don't understand the preference for trades. If you trade Matz you create another hole, which, in all likelihood, will cost money. So you end up paying for Jones, and paying for Matz' replacement. Who in the end, will likely not be as good as Matz. Plus trading young players defies the organizational mantra of player development. Guys, it's not our money. And it's money that they should be spending on payroll.

Obviously I agree a lot with Megdal's overall points, but I just wish he wouldn't do himself a disservice with his sloppiness. *I don't know how one can know they were using Mets money for fund other debts. I suspect that they did as well, but I think you need a forensic accountant with access to the books to say for sure. He is a member of the media. Gotta be more careful. *I did not see the Mets notice that they would not be pursuing Murphy or Cespedes long term. Sure, some beat writers are speculating to that, but the Mets have issued no such statement. *I think the early indications are very good. Alderson has said he expects payroll to be higher. Sure, he tempered that, but only a fool would come out publicly and admit they have lots of money to spend. And Alderson has said they have needs on offense and the bullpen. Again, I agree with his larger point about the Wilpons, but if he had more credibility as a journalist, I think more would take his point seriously.

Edgy MD wrote: Yeah, I imagine he can play center. I just mean it's not obvious, because of the lack of history there. It certainly works in theory. Understood. Lack of history at the position. What that video also tells us is that if we had Heyward this year, the leprechaun would not have gotten a single hit in the NLDS.

This post suggests that Heyward playing a corner OF position has more to do with circumstance than ability. Plus it has video of that great game-saving catch he made in CF against the Mets. The guy flat out covers ground: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/why-dont-the-cardinals-make-jason-heyward-their-center-fielder/

Heyward is actually 26 years old. He has good plate discipline, and as mentioned, fits exactly into the Mets' needs. It's possible that his contract negotiations spiral into ridiculous territory like Robinson Cano. But there is no reason for the Mets to not be right in the thick of things. This is not one of those "wrong side of 30" contracts people write about. Upton is young as well. We will learn a lot this winter. For the last few years, I think the Wilpons got away with not spending because of the "building from within" and "fiscal responsibility" party line. (For me, I think you can build from within AND spend money, but that's another story). Now coming off a World Series, rebuilding is over. It's time to win. Like I mentioned before, I think the Wilpons will open it up this winter. The early indicators are pretty good. And if they do, we're all good. If they don't, then they're fucking broke and need to sell the team to someone who has the means to do it justice.

I am really excited about Dom Smith. He sounds like he has the potential to be Keith Hernandez or John Olerud. If he ever develops power? Wow. Am really liking the idea of Smith-Conforto in the future.