Mex17

I do not forsee them bringing in a big money Wade Davis type. Someone in the vein of Joe Smith though? Yeah, I can see that. Think Familia/Ramos/Blevins/Smith as the veteran guys who are your reliable bread 'n butter going into the season, then you round out the rest of the pen with your organizational youngsters (which may or may not include the likes of Lugo/Gsellman/Montero depending upon how the rotation shakes out).

smg58 wrote: I do think the pickings at third base in the free agent market are better next offseason than this one, so I would lean in the direction of finding a second baseman now and letting Cabrera play third. The question then becomes, what's on second? Dee Gordon now, Machado or Donaldson a year from now. Count me in as supporting that.

Vic Sage wrote: Cf or Rf (with Conforto at the other spot) So are we dismissing out of hand the very possibility of Lagares' defense preventing runs scored against as an asset that might be comparable or perhaps preferable to going out and getting another "big bat" for the outfield?

Frayed Knot wrote: Actually, teams are capped at six in-dugout coaches. So bullpen coach would not count in that scenario I am supposing, which is why they were able to have the "assistant hitting coach" the past few years in addition to bench/PC/HC/1b/3b in the dugout and then BP outside of the dugout. Maybe they do get an OF coach then. Strategy from game to game/series to series with regard to how to be positioned for each hitter or scenario is going to be a thing along with coaching and correcting flaws/bad habits with regard to mechanics as the season goes on.

New info. . . "Mets will name Pat Roessler as the new hitting coach and Ricky Bones will remain as bullpen coach, according to industry sources." Just guessing, but I would not be surprised if keeping Bones is a quid pro quo in exchange for letting Callaway have his man in the form of Bere.

I doubt that there will be an "assistant hitting coach" going forward. I'm not saying that it is going to be this, but based upon what reports are out there this is an educated speculation of what the staff could look like. . . Bench - Acta Pitching - Jason Bere Hitting - Roessler 1st Base/infielders - Teufel 3rd Base/catchers - Sherlock Bullpen - Bones Do you think that there is a need to add one more guy to coach the outfielders? Is coaching the outfielders even enough work to justify another position on the staff?

1) Regarding third base, do you go after Frazier or Moustakis now, or do you pick up Cabrera's option, let him play third in 2018, and wait for Machado and Donaldson to hit the market a year from now? 2) Do you go after a big corner outfield bat (as in Bruce or JD Martinez), thereby forcing Conforto to centerfield again (and subsequently Lagares to the bench or to another team), or do you place more value in the prospect of Lagares preventing runs from being scored against you as opposed to another big money slugger creating runs on your behalf? What say you?

It's time for another Marlins fire sale, and this time it is Jeter doing the Crazy Eddie routine. Dee Gordon is rumored to be on the block, and I think that this is who the Mets ought to target. Speed, OBP, stolen bases, Gold Glove caliber defense at second base. Going into his age 30 season in 2018 and locked in for four more years. Put him at the top of the lineup and let him do his thing. Also, having him, Rosario, and Lagares up the middle ought to prevent a lot of runs from being scored against us. If Flores and Wheeler was able to net Carlos Gomez two years ago, then Flores, Wheeler, and Guillorme should be able to get Gordon now, yes? By adding Guillorme, they might even be able to snag away one of the several "projectable" young outfielders that the Marlins have at the lower end of their top 30 prospects list. http://m.mlb.com/prospects/2017?list=mia

https://www.sny.tv/mets/news/mets-release-outfielder-aoki/260181804 I thought that he could have helped coming off the bench and also in the first part of the season when Conforto may or may not be available. But it's a money thing too, and he was due to make some.

Cleveland.com wrote: CLEVELAND, Ohio - The Indians did not consider Jason Bere as a replacement for pitching coach Mickey Callaway, which may have led to his surprising departure from the team's coaching staff. Bere, 46, just finished his third year as the team's bullpen coach. Previously, he spent nine years as a special assistant to the Indians' baseball operations department scouting, evaluating and instructing the organization's pitchers. Bere reportedly was not considered for the pitching coach job. He was told the Indians were "moving in a different direction." Bere reportedly has been in contact with Callaway and could interview to be the Mets pitching coach. You have to figure that, if he left a job that he still had (bullpen coach for Cleveland), that there had to have been some sort of assurance that there would be a place for him in the Mets organization, don't you think? I'm not saying that Callaway could have guaranteed the pitching coach job for him, but maybe he said to Bere that he could get him an interview and that bullpen coach or minor league pitching coordinator would be on the table if they went in another direction for pitching coach. At the very least, my guess is that Callaway is vouching for Bere and Bere is going to interview for something.

http://www.cleveland.com/tribe/index.ssf/2017/10/jason_bere_passed_over_as_clev.html

Edgy MD wrote: I'm not sure what disaster approach you're referencing. But if you hire abusive managers that tell coaches to fuck themselves, and insubordinate coaches that tell managers the same, that's generally bad no matter what the backgrounds of the principals. http://nypost.com/2017/10/24/mets-hired-their-own-version-of-mlbs-modern-manager/ The approach that I am referring to is one that would say that Callaway has no leverage to pick his own pitching coach because he is a rookie manager and should be grateful just to have a job so let's go out and get Dave Righetti (or whoever) because he is a "name". You have no idea if your "name" is going to jive with Callaway, especially if the "name" is more old-school. This above linked article expresses what should be happening now that they have committed to this direction. I'm not saying that it has to be this, but if Cleveland's bullpen coach or that organization's AAA pitching coach fits the bill moreso over the guy whose identity your can instantly recognize, than so be it.

http://nypost.com/2017/10/25/world-series-winning-pitching-coach-on-the-mets-radar/ I was going to let this go, agree to disagree, and just see what actually happens, but instead I guess that I am going to reference the above link and reiterate how much of a potential disaster this approach could be. The risk involved is possibly on the level of destroying this entire experiment of hiring a guy as your manager who, has not only never has managed before on any level except Division III college, but also someone who comes from the non-traditional avenue of being a pitching coach first. I don't have the specific numbers in front of me right now, but they have been referenced recently in the media to illustrate that the "pitching coach to manager" career track is infrequent. It has always seemed to me as a sort of independent department that has to report to and coordinate with the manager, but generally does it's own thing separate from the rest of the team. Frayed Knot, I obviously agree with you when you say that Callaway was hired to be the manager and not the manager and de facto pitching coach, but only in the sense that the manager cannot get involved with the day to day minutia of being a pitching coach on account of obvious time constraints. This particular manager was hired clearly to, among other things, set the policy and the philosophy with regard to how the pitching is going to be handled. If he isn't going to be permitted to do that, than there were other candidates out there. But they selected this candidate. Generally speaking, if you put two Alphas in the same room or on the same staff or whatever who share the same field of expertise but have differing approaches, then the results are not going to be good. . . "Fuck you, I have been doing this for blah blah blah amount of years and I know that my way works because it has worked and I know what I am doing so get out of my way and manage the rest of the team!" "Fuck you, I'm the manager around here and I've done your job and you work for me!" That's what you do not want. I could be wrong, and am open to be persuaded, but that is not what you want.

Mex17 wrote: Do you think that there will be a presser today or do MLB rules prevent that until after the World Series? Set your watches for 4:00.

Ceetar wrote: And from our standpoint, I think we want someone strong in the role. Someone we can trust to take the decision from Callaway about who's ready, who's hot, who's gonna get this guy out. We don't want Mickey running out there to talk to the pitcher instead of the pitching coach. What is the point of hiring Callaway then?

I think that you can count out any pitching coach that you have heard of to get the job. Callaway's first move is not going to bring in a guy for his old job who might try to override him as the manager of the team. If you want to speculate for pitching coach, it's probably better to start digging around the Indian's official website to see who they have as minor league pitching coaches/coordinators. My guess is that Callaway will try to poach one of them away.

The guy ascended quickly as a coach after deciding to retire as a player, didn't he? There is a life lesson in there somewhere. Sometimes you toil and toil doing what you love but the thing isn't quite loving you back. You flame out in MLB and then go to Asia for five years because you love it so much. Then, you make an adjustment, and find yourself in the career path that you were meant to be.

Do you think that there will be a presser today or do MLB rules prevent that until after the World Series?

I don't know the answer to this question, maybe someone else does. If you are, say, the third base coach for one team, and another team wants to bring you aboard as the bench coach, is that considered a promotion (with more money involved), or just a lateral move with different responsibilities? The obvious specific reason why I am asking this is because I am wondering if they are thinking about making Acta the bench coach for Long, but I would like to know nonetheless for general purposes.

Figure that Conforto is going to miss the first month. Nimmo I think has proven that he belongs in the majors, so give him a roster spot. I think that they are going to concentrate more on defense now that the "five fireballing aces in the rotation" idea pretty much failed, so think that there is going to be a more accepting view of putting him out there more regularly. So, not that I would be upset with bringing Bruce back or going hard after J.D. Martinez, but I can live with a Cespedes/Conforto/Lagares/Nimmo/Aoki outfield with Aoki playing a lot of April and then coming off the bench when Conforto gets back. I bet that his bat is consistent enough that he can be a reliable pinch hitter as opposed to an "all or nothing" power hitter in that role. What say you? And for what price for Aoki?

I would like them to sign him to a five-year deal, but at what AAV? I think that the goal should be to be fair to him but also leave some wiggle room for Syndergaard to be able to surpass that AAV in a few years when it is time to lock him up past the arbitration years (give Noah a goal to shoot towards). So what should that number be?

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I was just responding to your statement that Phillips or Kendrick can be had on a shorter-term deal than Reyes. I think Reyes can be had on a one-year deal. Whether the Mets should do that or not is another thing entirely. You misunderstood slightly. What I meant was that they could be had on a shorter term deal as opposed to what Walker will probably get or a mega-deal that a superstar in his prime would get.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I doubt that either of those guys can be had on a shorter-term deal than Reyes, who would probably agree to a one-year contract. Kendrick is 34 and Phillips is 36. Both had better statistical seasons compared to Reyes. I could live with two years for either one. Unless you are thinking about just holding the fort down and saving bullets to possibly bring Murphy back in 2019, in which case Reyes for a year would be the better option. . .

They are going to have Familia, Ramos, Blevins, and the rest of the current peanut gallery (including all the guys that they got in the trades). There have been reports that they do indeed what to add to this during the winter. The question is how. Two options are included here for you to choose from. Keep in mind that option A probably precludes the team from retaining Familia (or Ramos) beyond 2018.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Bruce may be a possibility, but I'm pretty sure we've seen the last of Walker and Granderson. OK, so this is what I am specifically thinking about. . . It looks like Cabrera is coming back. Rivera is coming off an injury and you cannot really say that he is a veteran who can provide clubhouse leadership anyway. You might want to make Flores available to platoon with Smith at first or maybe even take over the position entirely if Smith flounders and the team as a whole is not tanking and is actually in a race. Plus, you probably still need depth even if you want to go with Flores at second and Cabrera at third or vice versa. So you can argue that they are going to need another veteran middle infielder. Brandon Phillips and Howie Kendrick are both going to be out there, are probably both better than Reyes at this point, and probably can be had on a shorter term deal. Do you go after one of those two and ignore Walker completely thinking that a) Walker is going to want a bigger contract, and it is better to have Kendrick or Phillips anyway because they have the ability to bring something to the clubhouse that is fresh and completely from the outside?