batmagadanleadoff

Jeff Francouer's combined OBP for the last three seasons (2008-2010) is under .300.

In an extra inning game, I'd use my most effective available reliever -- effective defined by the circumstances (opposing batters, base/out situation) as much as by the pitcher's own abilities. Given the sudden death-like nature of extra innings, I can't see holding back on the most effective pitcher. Your team won't bat in the 11th inning if you're losing after 10 innings.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: The solution to this is not to have a designated closer with a designated ego.. This sounds like a great idea. But the reliever's desire to make money, more than his ego, has contributed to the way relievers are presently used. So long as arbitrators continue to weigh the save in determining the reliever's worth, relievers will want to accumulate saves.

metirish wrote: When did this practice become the exception? We see it and it drives us crazy . What really grinds my gears is to see your supposed best guy sitting because it's not a save situation yet he's in the following night in a blowout loss 'cos he needs the work, he thrives on it. I first became aware of this in the early '90's. I read a magazine interview where Mitch "Wild Thing" Williams was quoted as explaining to his new team (Houston) that he's most effective in the 9th inning because of the was his adrenaline supposedly worked. The implication was that Williams' was less reliable prior to the 9th. To me, this was a selfish and transparent attempt on Mitch's part to position himself for saves. I suppose that the agents play a significant role in the way relievers are currently used. Presumably, the team has to promise the free agent star reliever the save situations in order to obtain the pitcher's services. While that promise is unenforceable and not binding, the team might believe that if it reneges, word will get out and the team will have difficulty obtaining their next free agent star reliever.

Edgy DC wrote: Yeah, at this point we need not compare him to starting rightfielders, but to scrubs, weenies, waiver fodder, sad sacks, and nerf herders. You're right. It's too bad though, that the Mets gave him 300+ plate appearances squeezed into half a season before pulling his plug.

I'm sticking today's JoePet in this thread instead of in yesterday's IGT. The cartoon has more versatility than Jerry's bench.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: The numbers are butt-ugly. Among regular NL right-fielders, Francouer is dead last in HR's, BB's, BA, OBP, SLG, RC, RC/27, ISOP, SECA , BB/K and AB per HR. Jeff Francoeur swings like Dave Kingman, but with none of Sky King's power. Francoeur is the least likeliest everyday NL right fielder to hit a homer. Ironically, Francouer's AB per HR rate surpasses those of his outfielding teammates, Bay and Pagan.

The numbers are butt-ugly. Among regular NL right-fielders, Francouer is dead last in HR's, BB's, BA, OBP, SLG, RC, RC/27, ISOP, SECA , BB/K and AB per HR. Jeff Francoeur swings like Dave Kingman, but with none of Sky King's power. Francoeur is the least likeliest everyday NL right fielder to hit a homer.

Yeah. What about that?

Who would actually want him? He's not going to get offered arbi by whatever team who takes him, so he's essentially a rental player. who has a shot to get to the playoffs, and needs an OF'er? More to the point: who needs this outfielder? Players a lot more desirable than him (and Ollie... and possibly TAFKAThrob) have been DFAed and released all year long. Exactly. Before I read through this thread, and was made aware of the possibility that Francoeur might merely be one player in a multi-player trade, I thought to myself: Who the hell would be dumb enough to want him and more importantly, what kind of useless crap would we get in return?

Or Game six of the '86 WS. Granted, the Buckner game wasn't a long extra inning affair (10 inn), but Ojeda lasted six innings in game six. Davey used his bullpen aces (McDowell and Orosco) right away, and ended with Aguilera. The idea that Davey would hold back either of his aces for when a save situation might have presented itself was unthinkable.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: I began to regret this thread about 10 hours ago. In fact, I think I wasted my entire day here. But Cora still sucks. And if I was Mike Pelfrey and Cora tried to tell me when it was OK to joke with a reporter, I'd tell Cora and his tiny batting average to mind his own business. I agree you coulda stfu. I coulda. And probably shoulda.

Edgy DC wrote: The article, of course. I left out an option: Both. I vote for both.

Edgy DC wrote: I think it's ridiculous. The article? Or that Ollie's on the 25-man?

I began to regret this thread about 10 hours ago. In fact, I think I wasted my entire day here. But Cora still sucks. And if I was Mike Pelfrey and Cora tried to tell me when it was OK to joke with a reporter, I'd tell Cora and his tiny batting average to mind his own business.

Ceetar wrote: You know, the more I hear about this the more it sounds like a completely bs story. Sounds like Cora wasn't directed it at Pelfrey (although he may have been backtracking today) but the media. Adam Rubin said cora looked pissy at the noise before Pelfrey even showed up (glad to know Rubin spends his time staring at Cora thinking "gee, this guy looks annoyed. why is he glaring at me?) Sounds like Cora was depressed after the game and in a bad mood, and in roars the media, looking for quotes, making jokes, enjoying life. pissed Cora off more. misery loves company. Love how Martino, who's the one that pointed the finger at Pelf anyway, jumps on the Cora bandwagon with a "He's right, it was too loud for a loss." so my tweet to Andy? Ceetar : @SurfingTheMets since you are the authority, what is the appropriate decibel level post loss? Post win? Different for close/blow out? #mets (in reply to SurfingTheMets) Shouldn't you be asking Alex Cora instead of Martino, when it's appropriate to joke with reporters?

Mets activate Ollie, deactivate season Perez's place on team is proof positive that playoffs are a pipe dream in Queens By Adam Rubin ESPNNewYork.com PHOENIX -- Left-hander Oliver Perez was activated from the disabled list by the New York Mets after a 3-2 loss to the Arizona Diamondbacks on Tuesday night. And that's all you need to know about why the Mets are not serious contenders for a postseason spot, and why the organization would be wasting minor league resources pursuing a notable trade-deadline acquisition by the July 31 non-waiver deadline. Forget for a moment that after losing five times in six games to begin a second-half-opening road trip, the Mets now sit 6� games behind the first-place Atlanta Braves in the National League East. This is the relevant question today: How can the Mets be considered serious contenders when they choose to play with a 24-man roster? Infielder Justin Turner was optioned to Triple-A Buffalo after Tuesday's game to make room for Perez. Here's the bottom line, and it's no secret: Oliver Perez is rejoining the Mets because he is owed $16,918,032.79. He is rejoining the Mets in the false hope he can be rehabilitated enough that someone would trade for him and take on some of the salary. He is rejoining the Mets because of an irrational fear that if the Mets cut him loose and he signed elsewhere for the major league minimum salary and was productive, the Mets would have egg on their face. News flash: There's enough egg on the Mets' face from the initial three-year, $36 million contract that no one would notice another speck under the far-fetched premise that Perez, if cut loose, would go elsewhere and flourish. It's no revelation to note that the Mets will pay Perez's remaining salary through 2011 whether he is on the roster or released. Instead consider the more subtle roster implications of Perez's activation: Manager Jerry Manuel isn't going to use Perez in a meaningful situation because Perez is no different now than when he initially was placed on the disabled list June 5. A scout who watched Perez's final minor league start with Triple-A Buffalo offered this: "Vintage Ollie. 85-88 mph with two BBs in liberal strike zone. Also gave up two monster bombs." Pitching coach Dan Warthen and Manuel both acknowledged Tuesday there was no discernible difference between pre-DL Perez and the one who returned. Manuel on Tuesday described Perez's new role as a second lefty-on-lefty specialist, but obviously behind -- waaaaaay behind -- Pedro Feliciano in the pecking order. For insight into the manager's faith, just look at when Manuel last inserted Perez in a game before the southpaw landed on the DL. Perez pitched the final 2 2/3 innings of an 18-6 loss to the San Diego Padres on May 31 in his last appearance with the Mets. So the Mets will play with a far different 24-plus-one roster than the one then-GM Steve Phillips once described when discussing the organization's objection to signing Alex Rodriguez many years ago. The Mets now have to carry a seven-man bullpen. That's because they essentially will have a six-man bullpen plus Perez, who will be used only in the shortest of bursts, likely in the most noncritical of situations. A seven-man bullpen means a five-man bench. And that means if the Mets carry two backup catchers and Chris Carter, a lefty bat not trusted in the field, there are only two legitimate backup fielders available: outfielder Jeff Francoeur and infielder Alex Cora. That limits Manuel's in-game maneuverability. And if Hisanori Takahashi again struggles in the rotation at Dodger Stadium on Thursday, would the Mets dare use Perez as a starting pitcher the next turn, on July 28 against the St. Louis Cardinals at Citi Field? The walk-up gate might be pretty good, just so the Flushing faithful could voice its objection. Adam Rubin covers the Mets for ESPNNewYork.com. You can follow him on Twitter. http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/news/story?id=5397460

I'm still not sure what it is that Cora earned or why he earned whatever it is that he earned. All I know is that he sucks. And though I recognize the absolute necessity in having to have an Alex Cora on the team, having said that, If I were the manager, I'd hope to hell that I'd have to use Cora as seldom as is possible. Because the more playing time Alex Cora gets, the worse off the Mets are. That's why he's a backup. Because he's not good enough to play regularly. (He wasn't good enough to play regularly when he was a regular, either.) And I'm not gonna ignore his sub .300 OBP because now he gets respect for being the last guy on the team that'll joke with reporters. This is how Frank Cashen musta felt when Randy Niemann sprayed him with the bubbly.

I'm all mixed up here. I don't understand the nature of our disagreement. Cora can say whatever the hell he wants to say. But it seems to me that it takes a lot of balls for a crappy sub .250 below league average for his entire crappy career crappy hitter to criticize Pelfrey for joking with a reporter. Whether or not the article specifically said so or not, Cora's clearly questioning Pelfrey's heart or desire. But this is the only way that Cora's ever gonna get favorable press: by feeding into the old wive's tale about how Cora's character should override the fact that he sucks. Of course, he'll get that occasional clutch game-winning extra base hit too, but for every one of those, Cora's making like 30 or 45 outs.

Frayed Knot wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: I don't think Cora - or anyone for that matter - needs to check the stat sheets before deciding whether or not he's allowed to say something. I agree with you. But Cora hitting .280 correlates stronger with the Mets winning than whether or not Pelfrey's joking with a reporter. Therefore, if Cora wants to win, maybe he should hold up his end of the deal by figuring out how to hit .280 instead of worrying whether Pelfrey prefers sausage or pepperoni on his pizza. Right, because the acts of what to say in a locker room and hitting better are like choices one merely has to decide to make in order to carry them out. You're right. But so what? Like Leiter wrote a few posts above, who the hell cares that Pelfrey joked with a reporter? I guarantee you that Cora's batting average is hurting the Mets more than Pelfrey's less than somber mood.

Ya gotta get up pretty early if ya wanna start an IGT around here. You probably should start it before you go to sleep.

Frayed Knot wrote: I don't think Cora - or anyone for that matter - needs to check the stat sheets before deciding whether or not he's allowed to say something. I agree with you. But Cora hitting .280 correlates stronger with the Mets winning than whether or not Pelfrey's joking with a reporter. Therefore, if Cora wants to win, maybe he should hold up his end of the deal by figuring out how to hit .280 instead of worrying whether Pelfrey prefers sausage or pepperoni on his pizza.

We'd be winless (0-6) after the All Star break if not for ump Cuzzi's blown call.

So how come no one's defending Pelf? We're supposed to believe that Pelf cares less about winning because he was joking with reporters?