Centerfield

My only rooting interest in this series is for Philadelphia to be weakened for 2009. I haven't quite figured out how that can happen. Part of me wants them to win it all and hope they can get lackadaisical. Their free-agents to be can become World Series heroes, get overhyped, and price themselves into a range where the Phillies can't afford to bring them back. Another part of me thinks that the best thing that can happen is for Brad Lidge to be perfect all season long then give up an absolute bomb to blow Game 7, have him go back into a funk and be completely worthless next year. Or they could win it all, and in the celebratory pileup, have Cole Hamels blow out his elbow and Chase Utley blow out his achilles.

The Mets can make this chalkboard material. I wouldn't mind having an "Us against the World" type attitude next year.

Where are the bullpens? And I don't like that funky shit in right-center either. I hope we don't have any contrived "quirks" in this field.

The interior of that stadium looks very nice. The outside, with the gold lettering, and attempt to re-create the original stadium, not so much. I really liked the look of MFY Stadium II. And I know that they wanted luxury boxes, and shops and stuff, but really saw no need to replace it.

I voted for Back to School. I liked it. I've never seen Christmas Story.

Just a guess here, but runners on first and second (or bases loaded). Line drive hit to a fielder, the baserunner fails to yield to the fielder and gets called for interference. The batter would be out by way of interference, then the runners called out as they would, in the umpire's judgment, not been able to get back to their original bases.

You want them to demolish it rather than pick apart piece by piece?

AG/DC wrote: I disagree. By action or inaction, we have a hand in this. Turning away is to divest ourselves of the result. Either you triumphed in your advocacy for this or failed in your resisitance. But this is yours and this is mine. A hand in what? How they take down Shea?

When you build a team, I think it works better to think about filling in slots in the lineup first, and then try to fit them at different positions. That's why I believe it's too simplistic to say "we need a 2nd baseman, and left-fielder". Such an approach shows a tremendous lack of creativity. The way the lineup stands now, we are solid at slots 1, 3 and 4. (Reyes, Wright, Beltran). Everyone else is a question mark. If Delgado returns, we should expect him to be nothing more than a #6 hitter. It would be nice if he repeated his second-half surge, but it is without a doubt, a gamble. That leaves us relying on Church and Murphy. That's a lot of question marks to have in your first 6. I think for the Mets offense to improve in 2009, you need another middle-of-the lineup type guy. If you look for a second baseman or a leftfielder to bat in the middle of the lineup, the candidates out there scream "bad contract down the road". Burrell has been up and down and is a poor fielder. Manny is old. Adam Dunn is probably the best candidate, but his average is low, plays poor defense, and there have been questions about his heart. Orlando Hudson has an OPS in the low 800's. On the other hand, Texiera is a legitimate superstar heading into his best years. If free agent dollars are to be spent, it would be foolish to ignore the best player on the market. Now, if we had a Reyes or Wright playing first base, it wouldn't be a good fit. But the guy we have slotted in right now is old, signed for one year, and makes a lot of money. Fortunately, his second half gives him trade value. And makes him moveable. I would love to get productive players back. But if we do nothing but move his salary, that's fine too. Let's assume the price difference between Texiera and Delgado is $6 million ($12 for Delgado, $18 for Tex...it might even be less if Tex agrees to backload his deal). That still leaves $20 million or so to upgrade your other positions even if you get nothing back for Delgado. Now your lineup looks like this: 1. Reyes 2. Church/Murphy 3. Wright 4. Texiera 5. Beltran 6. LEFTFIELDER 7. Church/Murphy 8. Schneider Yes, you've used up $6 million, but now your middle of the lineup is solid, and the leftfielder/second baseman you want to sign can bat towards then end of the lineup. You've also addressed a need for the coming years with the type of player you want to lock up, rather than being forced to take what is available later.

Don't look anymore. Remember her when she looked her best. Take a moment to reflect next time you go out there. But let her go with dignity. No need to have her pictures broadcast everywhere looking the way she does.

Talent like Texiera's doesn't come around every year. Using free-agent money wisely means recognizing these opportunities and taking advantage of them. Teams who fail to do this can end up giving big money contracts to incomplete players simply because they are the best free agents available that year. This is why Carlos Lee got the money he got. Same with Barry Zito, to a lesser extent Johnny Damon. You don't want your organization to be in a position where they have to get better when the free-agent pool is lukewarm. On the other hand, guys like Beltran or Vlad Guerrero are superstars with complete games. When they come free, you have to jump at them because you don't know what will be available in years to come. 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. We have no idea what will be available next year...meaning we could end up in a spot where we don't have the luxury of signing a great player entering his prime. If Delgado hadn't bounced back, the Mets would have paid him $4 million to walk away and pursued Texiera. They would have been foolish not to. Delgado's resurgence is an unexpected benefit to them. Pick up his option, if you have to eat $4 million to get something back for him, consider it found money and make the best of it.

That is actually part of my ire. I think I've posted it here before, but my anger is not from trading Kazmir, the bulk of it comes from selling so low. To summarize: 1. The Timing of the Deal: I don't like trading young pitching prospects at the deadline. Deadline deals are for guys who want to upgrade to win now. If you've got a "win-now" type player, you're in a position to take advantage of the team that thinks they have a chance to take it all and will over-pay for the Raul Ibanezes of the world. If you deal a prospect at the deadline, you're probably selling low. Had the Mets held off until the winter, they could have shopped him around. If I remember correctly, both Hudson and Mulder moved that off-season. I have no doubt Kazmir could have brought either player back. 2. Having no idea what is value was: There were GM's who lamented the deal afterwards saying "I wish I knew Kazmir was available." It is grossly incompetent to move your best prospect without first calling everyone and seeing what they have to offer. Hell, the least they could have done was leak it to see what came back. They leaked everything else, why not do it with something that could help you. Like Ben Grimm said, almost everyone knew how dumb this was besides the guys in charge. It's incompetence at almost an incomprehensible level. 3. Win-Now: Only an idiot could have believed that the Mets had any realistic chance to make the playoffs, or go deep into them, in 2004. 3. Zambrano was never great: Top-flight pitching prospects should be moved for great pitchers. Duh. 4. HE WAS HURT: Are you fucking kidding me? You didn't check his elbow? He made three fucking starts that year. 6. Refusing to acknowledge their mistake: It was pretty clear after 2005 that he sucked. So when they built the team that was trying to win it all in 2006, you had to upgrade that position. Instead, they kept him, relied on him, hoped against hope until eventually his arm fell off. Maybe if we had addressed that spot in the rotation, we wouldn't have had to rely on 45 year old El Duque who went and got hurt during warmups before the playoffs 7. Even Bartolome Fortunado blew out his arm: Just to make things a complete wash.

For the record, re-reading some of the earlier posts, I have nothing against Kazmir, nor do I wish failure upon him. My ire is directed at the Mets and the idiots who made that decision. I didn't like Victor Zambrano either, but I tried to disassociate him with the trade. It's not his fault he was traded for Kazmir. It was his fault that he couldn't throw strikes and looked like he was going to cry every time he took the mound. I've tried to move past the idiocy of the trade. I think I've tried everything. Far-fetched Justification: Maybe if the Mets had refused to move Kazmir, the Rays would have insisted on David Wright. Making light of it: At least we got Bartolome Fortunado who has a really really long name. Minimizing its effect: We have a pretty good left-handed ace anyway. Using perspective: Ed Hearn for David Cone. Deep breath, deep breath. But each time I find myself wanting to spit every time I think of the trade.

I think Kazmir has earned a split thread by now. Getting back to the game, Balfour is a terrible name for a pitcher.

You did. We're tied.

="metirish"]I would like to know once and for all how many members here still pine for Kazmir when they see him now for Tampa , are you as has been suggested hoping he gets lit up as some sort of revenge or something silly like that. I suspect a poll here would show that most of us have moved on and can watch the kid pitch without cursing him or the Mets. I'm not over it. Not even close. Lots of trades can look bad in retrospect, but with nearly every single one, you can justify it based upon the information available at the time. People give Steve Phillips shit about Jason Bay, but no one could have known at the time. You can argue whether you should trade outfield prospects for middle relievers, but there was no outcry when the trade was announced. The Kazmir trade was different. The trade was roundly criticized the minute it happened. For the life of me I cannot think of any occasion where a team undervalued a prospect to that extent. It was utterly and colossally stupid. It has to be one of the dumbest trades ever.

We also have Jason Vargas returning from surgery. I'd throw Heilman into the mix too. See if he can start and get himself out of this rut.

AG/DC wrote: ="Centerfield"]="John Cougar Lunchbucket"]I actually don;t think the Mets will pursue him, although I think they should. This is what worries me. I fear that Omar will put too much stock into Delgado's second half and go into the winter with the mindset that "We are set at first base" not recognizing that first-half Delgado is just as likely to return as second-half Delgado. The double-whammy there might be that Omar counts on Delgado's resurgence as a middle of the lineup force for next year and short-changes left field. What do you think they will do, on the offensive end? I don't know if I would go as far as to say it's likely, but I can see the Mets overvaluing a guy like Orlando Hudson because he's "gritty". I can see them using precious free agent dollars on a guy who is good at a lot of things, but great at none. His career OPS is under .800. I can see them eating Castillo's contract to get this done. I worry that they will count on Delgado to repeat his 2008 performance and rely on Daniel Murphy for left field.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I actually don;t think the Mets will pursue him, although I think they should. This is what worries me. I fear that Omar will put too much stock into Delgado's second half and go into the winter with the mindset that "We are set at first base" not recognizing that first-half Delgado is just as likely to return as second-half Delgado. The double-whammy there might be that Omar counts on Delgado's resurgence as a middle of the lineup force for next year and short-changes left field.

Using a cheap inside solution, or a cheap outsider is not likely to get you the production that Texiera will. Going cheap a first base will mean you have to fill that void in another position...and other positions may not be as easily filled as first base. To me, it makes all the sense in the world. A multi-year deal to Texiera certainly makes more sense than long-term contracts to an aging Manny Ramirez, or less complete players like Pat Burrell or Adam Dunn.

You've said this to me before. I think a few of Adam Rubin's articles have said Delgado can be traded. Plus, if you remember, nothing in his contract barred him from being traded to the Mets. He had the right, if I remember, to demand a trade, but he did not exercise that. No 10 and 5 rights either. GET TEXIERA.

I've been thinking about it, and I think signing Texiera will be the key to success not only next year, but for several years down the road. The Mets were decent offensively this year, but they got better than expected production from Delgado. I loved what he did in the second half, but I'm skeptical about him staying at the level next year. With Texiera, not only can the expect to duplicate those numbers in 2009, but they can expect them to be even better (.962 OPS vs. Delgado's .871). Plus Texiera is young, only 28, and plays good defense. I would think Delgado would have some value considering the year he had, and you'd think an American League team would want to take a flyer on him. At $12 million for the next year, I would think that it's a reasonable enough salary and short enough commitment that something of value could be brought back. Ideally he could be traded for bullpen help. This would drastically help the team without bumping the payroll significantly, especially if Texiera is willing to backload some salary. He is a young, all-around player going into the prime of his career. To me, he makes a lot more sense than Manny or even Sabathia. Long-term, you'd have Reyes, Church, Wright, Beltran and Texiera all locked up for the next few years. It wouldn't take a whole lot to build around that core.

soupcan wrote: Dodger fans were understandably stunned at that loss last night but Met fans weren't. This year the Phillies are never out of any game until the 27th out is made. Victorino in 2008 is to Phillie fans as Lenny Dykstra was to Met fans in 1986. This is great news. That means next year he'll decide he's a home run hitter, and his career will trend downwarnd until he's eventually traded to the Mets for Luis Castillo.

Asswipe wrote: 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. Forget everything else, but wasn't Game 6 of the 2006 NLCS kind of important too?

I can't believe this is just starting now. If the schedule is going to be this protracted, you might as well make the Divisional Series seven games.