Chad ochoseis

This is Plawecki's second straight start, no? Anything up with d'Arnaud? OE - no, Td'A started yesterday, and Gary said he's now splitting starts with Plawecki.

I was thinking Rob Deer or Pete Incaviglia, but neither of them, either.

Joey Gallo can be what I assume would be the first player ever with a sub-.200 batting average and an .800+ OPS in a reasonable number of ABs. .900 isn't out of reach. He's on the DL with a broken nose/concussion, but eligible for reactivation on Tuesday. Texas is part of the scrum for the AL wild card spots, so it's likely that he'll be activated as soon as he can play.

Frayed Knot wrote: Lefty Specialist wrote: I think Wright is warming up to be a pinch-hitter come September so the fans can cheer him one last time, then he retires. That solves the insurance problem. The net outcome of which is Wright taking the money owed to him and in effect donating to the bottom line of the Mets and the insurance carrier. Not sure that would be the option I'd choose. ...which was the point I was making. There's zero chance that Wright will ever be what he was, and no more than a slim chance that he'll be even a replacement level player again. The Mets would probably love to activate him briefly for sentimental/PR reasons, and then possibly employ him in a non-playing role (that was Gwreck's original suggestion, which started the whole Wright tangent). But doing that would cost the Mets the insurance they're owed, unless Wright agrees to retire. Wright's owed $47M over 2018-2020, and insurance probably covers a large chunk of that. So it could be very pricy for the Mets to employ Wright again in any capacity. And, as sweet a guy as Wright is, I doubt he'd do the Mets and the insurance company a favor and retire, leaving $47M on the table. Even Cuddyer only left $12M, I think. But the Mets have some leverage with the insurer, as they probably have a choice as to whether to activate Wright from the 60 day DL if he's only partially healed. So they can go to the insurer and say "Let us activate Wright for a month so he can get his last hurrah before taking a job in the org, and we'll accept a little less than what we're owed. Say no, and we'll just keep him on the 60 day DL for the next three years, as we can do because his shoulder is still weak, and you'll be on the hook for ever penny of his salary."

CF got my point right about the insurance on DWright. It's not a binary situation where he either rehabs completely or doesn't. There's a good chance he rehabs to the point where he can be a .700 OPSing backup 1B. I'd want to know whether we'd have to bring him back and eat the contract in that situation, or if there are alternatives. To Vic's point that the Wilpons would use the money to buy a jackalope ranch in Mauritania or something, it's possible, but a separate issue. I'd like the Mets to preserve the resources they have; rich and stupid is at least marginally better than poor and stupid. Bruce. I want Bruce back. Dominic Smith is still a question mark. I have doubts about Cespedes' ability to stay healthy for the full season given the leg injuries this year. Bruce can slot into either of those spots if needed, or take the other corner outfield spot if Nimmo/Lagares proves to be an unproductive platoon and we have to move Conforto to CF. He demonstrated this season both that he can hit and that he's an easy guy to root for. I do think that given the way Smith chewed up and spit out the PCL this year that he's our default starting 1B in 2018, even if he's having some growing pains now. But I like the idea of having someone good who can both be Plan B at 1B and get some ABs elsewhere if Plan A works out. It probably won't happen, if only because Bruce (or any other talented hitter) probably won't want to sign on to a deal to be Plan B. But chances are that some stuff will go right for the Mets next year and some stuff will go wrong. When stuff goes wrong, Bruce would be a good guy to have around.

I was wondering what the effect on the insurance payments would be if the team moved Dabidrye into a non-playing role. My guess, having worked in large accounts insurance for a good part of my life, is that even if it technically meant that the payments would cease, the terms could be negotiated. The Mets are a prestige client, and unlike regular schlubs like you and me, prestige clients have negotiating power. And the insurance company would probably be glad to pay part of their obligation and have Wright take a FO/managerial position (or even play a symbolic game or two) rather than pay the full obligation while the Mets keep him on the 60-day indefinitely. I have to believe he's finished as an effective player, though, and I have no clue what kind of manager he'd be. He never struck me as a font of baseball wisdom. Duda, not Bruce? So we'd be saying Smith is definitely not ready yet. If we were to sign one of the ex-Met lefty sluggers, as much of a Duda fan as I am, I'd rather have Bruce, who can muddle his way through 1B almost as well as Duda, while being less than a complete flop as a corner outfielder if we need one. So, what is our outfield next year, anyway? Cespedes in left for sure. Conforto someplace. Lagares/Nimmo platoon in center and Conforto in right? I'd be happy to see Conforto in center, Bruce in left, and Smith at 1B, with the possibility of Nimmo or Lagares in center, Conforto in right, and Bruce at 1B if Smith doesn't live up to his billing. Of course, this would imply moving either Nimmo or Lagares; I don't know if we could keep them both on the bench. Or go all in with Smitty and take a run at a corner outfielder like JD Martinez, assuming Conforto in CF. Moustakas. So, we don't pick up Cabrera's option and Flores becomes our second baseman, I think, with Cecchini on the bench. Or Cecchini becomes our second baseman with Flores on the bench. I can see that. Lucroy or Wieters over d'Arnaud? D'Arnaud hasn't blown anyone away, but Lucroy's and Wieters' best years are behind them. I don't buy into WAR, but d'Arnaud's was higher this year than either Lucroy's or Wieters', and the traditional numbers were almost identical to Wieters' and not a whole lot worse than Lucroy's. D'Arnaud's turned into a pretty good defensive catcher. I'd like an upgrade, but if Lucroy and Wieters are the best available, I'll pass and give d'Arnaud another year to live up to his billing. Rotation of Syndergaard, Darvish, DeGrom, and two of Wheeler, Harvey, Gsellman, Lugo, Matz, Montero? Yeah , I guess we have to do this. Whatever happened to five aces, anyway? Relievers - I see both Ollie Perez and Eric O'Flaherty are available! Trade chips - one of Lagares and Nimmo, one of Flores and Cecchini, any number of second-rank pitchers. Don't know what that would get for us, or what we'd need, unless that could bring back a catcher better than d'Arnaud. Mostly, what we need for 2018 is for Syndergaard to not tear any more muscles and Wheeler and Lugo to come back and be OK, at least. That would be a huge boost.

Also, hit like a middle of the order guy, except when he was hitting in the middle of the order. I never understood that. OE - Somehow, I always saw him as a great hitter when he hit leadoff, and a bad hitter when he was 4th or 5th. But the numbers don't bear me out on this. In 2016, he OPSed 1.045 in 100 PAs as a cleanup hitter.

MFS62 wrote: Great guy, but I think the productivity will take a downturn. .235 - 17- 50 in 120 games. Later .228 - 19 - 52, 111 games. That's some good predictin'.

"Real New Yorkers root for the Mets". Or something very much like that when he signed. That took guts, and it was a subtle dig at the Yankee org from a guy who doesn't usually dig, subtly or not. Graduated from the University of Illinois at Chicago, where I got my master's in math. Did the school proud.

Has there been any other player who ended his Met career with a grand slam?

Rene Rivera with him, the twitterverse says. For 3 Ps TBNL. I'm a big fan of Rivera as a backup catcher. Would be happy to see the Mets bring him back in 2018. OE- don't believe everything the twitterverse says. But there's still buzz about Rivera being moved as well as Grandy.

Must...not...get...hopes...up.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: There's hardly anyone beyond deGrom who makes you say "he's fun to watch. Eh, Conforto. Also Rosario. Probably Dom Smith, though I've been away and haven't had a chance to actually see him. Even Flores when he's swinging well. 2009 felt worse than this, when we had plenty tied up with non-performing veterans who weren't going anywhere. If Syndergaaard and Céspedes healthy next year, the team can still be competitive in 2018.

Centerfield wrote: I know there were injuries and shit but this team looks so dickless and weak. Now I'm wondering when the last time was that the Mets had a dick. Without looking, I think it was Tidrow, sometime around 1980.

Really. Attention must be paid.

Hit 9 home runs in April 2016 while Murphy was hitting .400. We all figured this meant we'd get 40 HRs out of Walker and Murphy would go back to hitting his usual .280. Optimism reigns supreme. Moved into Niese's old apartment after the trade.

Ceetar wrote: yes the Yankees, not the Indians, but supposedly he said (5 days before the trade) that he'd likely accept a trade to a contender on the list. I got my info from Cot's, as of 12/15/16. Maybe he had changed the list since then. From the article LWFS linked to - Sandy wrote: Certainly dealing with the Yankees would be a factor, just as dealing with the Washington Nationals would be a factor,” Alderson said. “I think it would be foolish for us to say it doesn’t matter, but at the same time is it prohibitive? No. He also said something similar in the SNY interview a couple of days ago. This may be the stuff of a breakout thread, but this is silly. As much fun as it is to hate the Yanquis, their effect on the Mets' playoff chances is about a micron greater than zero. There are four other teams competing for the NL East and ten others on top of that competing for the NL wild card. Why add more obstacles by worrying about an AL team? You can make the argument that the Mets and Yankees compete for revenue, but I'd like to see actual numbers on the degree to which Yankee financial success hurts Met financial success before I buy into that. My guess without seeing the numbers is that when the Mets and Yankees are both winning, it's good for NYC area baseball in general and the pie gets much larger. There was talk - don't remember where - that the Yankee offer wasn't as good as was hinted at by Mark Carig's tweet, which is one thing. But not wanting to deal with the Yankees just because they're the Yankees is a different story.

The Indians too, I think.

What's funny - or maybe not, because a best of seven series is a very small sample size - is how often the teams that play .650 or better in the regular season don't win the WS. Since 1950: That Seattle team (2001, actually, but I had to look it up) lost the NLCS to the Yankees. The '54 Indians went 111-43 and got swept by the Giants. The Mets won in 1986, but just barely. Maybe Mookie would have beaten out that grounder anyway. The '53 Boys of Summer Dodgers lost to the Yankees. The '69 Orioles were 109-53, and we know how that turned out for them. The Indians played .694 ball in 1995 and lost in 6 to the Evil Braves. The '98 Braves played .654 ball, but lost to the '98 Yankees, who had an even better regular season record. The '61 Yankees, '70 Orioles, '75 Reds, and of course the '86 Mets and '98 Yankees won the WS. So, 11 teams with phenomenal .650+ records since 1950, and only five win the WS. Winning the World Series is hard.

seawolf17 wrote: Because if you claim a player on waivers, his current team has three options: they can pull him back (in which case he can't be traded at all), or they can let you have him and his contract, or you can work out some kind of deal. If the player CLEARS waivers, then he can be traded for anyone not on the 40 before 9/1. So what probably happened in this case was that every team passed on him -- Cleveland didn't think they wanted to take on his salary right at that moment -- but then as time went on, they were like "yeah, let's do this." Is there a time limit at all? Cleveland probably didn't need Bruce until Michael Brantley got hurt on August 9. If Bruce cleared waivers on 8/1, did he again have to go through waivers, or is the 8/1 waiver good for the whole season? Does he have to be traded for someone not on the 40, or is it just that the player obtained in the trade also would have to clear waivers? If, say, Francisco Lindor cleared waivers, could the Indians have traded Francisco Lindor for Bruce?

And Duda specializes in two of the three true outcomes, walking twice and striking out three times. The Rays bat him 2nd. Who would've thunk?

Lagares was activated from the DL and took the Bruce spot.

Rosario is El Niño according to the mets.com buy stuff page. If Blevins is Gordo, maybe Smith is Flaco. No word on the roster move that creates a spot yet, huh?

An Indians fan friend pointed out to me that Progressive Field has the third smallest left field area in the majors, which will be great for Bruce. In my vague memory, at least, his only real OF problem was a lack of range. His arm is above average, and he doesn't make mental mistakes.

Bruce's first stop as an Indian? Playing against Lucas Duda in Tampa Bay.