batmagadanleadoff

I'm undecided. I'd like to see a few more seasons worth of data. But I would be inclined to move the fences in and/or reduce some of the height if it turns out that CF negates HR's to a greater extent than most other stadiums.

What, if anything, should the Mets do about the Citi Field fences? A poll, and an article. Klapisch: Moving in fences is Wright move Whatever you think about the $66 million the Mets have invested in Jason Bay � whether it could�ve been better spent on John Lackey or tucked away for a run at next year�s elite crop of free agents � this much is irrefutable: Home runs have become the most critical currency at Citi Field. It�s a ambitious change in philosophy, considering the Mets hit the fewest HRs in the National League last year. But overwhelming firepower obviously worked for the Yankees and the Mets have a chance to emulate that formula in 2010. With Bay coming off a 36-homer season in Boston, Mets now have the potential to rival the Phillies in sheer muscle. That is, if Carlos Beltran can stay healthy all year, if Carlos Delgado returns and David Wright finds his 2008 stroke. And we haven�t mentioned Jeff Francoeur, who could bat as low as seventh in this power-laden lineup. The mitigating factor, of course, is Citi Field itself and its daunting 16-foot wall in left-center and even crazier 415-foot power alley in right center, 44 feet deeper than it was at Shea Stadium. The Mets don�t appear to be close to any significant up grades in their starting rotation, so if they want to improve their run-differential why not maximize their HR quotient by reconfiguring the ballpark? Doing so would ensure that Bay remains a 30-homer threat, and more importantly, would give Wright a much-needed helping hand. Club officials admit Wright�s transition to Citi was less than encouraging � he hit only five HRs at home � but are waiting to see how the third baseman responds to this year�s bolstered lineup. �Obviously something was very wrong,� is how one official described Wright�s drop-off. That�s one reason the Mets ultimately chose Bay over Lackey and why Omar Minaya flatly said Tuesday, �We felt we had to slug more.� That represents a critical shift by a team that tailored its monstrous new ballpark around pitching, speed and athleticism. The formula worked � to a degree. According to ESPN.com�s park factors that were released Tuesday, Citi was the major leagues� seventh-easiest place to hit a triple in 2009. The Mets finished second in the NL in triples, but were last in the East (and 12th overall) in runs scored. Injuries obviously played a huge role in that disparity, but the Mets hardly can be called a young, fleet team anymore. Even if everyone returns to full health in 2010, who other than Jose Reyes actually can take turn doubles into triples? Bay�s home runs are more important than Reyes� triples, which is why Citi needs to become less asymmetrical and more conventional � and realistic � in the outfield. Will it happen? It�s not impossible. Officials plan to see how Bay and Wright fare in 2010 before bringing in the fences. Wright, in particular, will be watched closely: With Bay hitting behind him, he�ll get better pitches to hit and should return to his 33-home run form in 2008. Still, some believe Wright�s home run drought had nothing to do with Citi, since he hit only five HRs on the road last year. One talent evaluator, however, believes Citi was entirely at fault, noting Wright�s swing was so radically altered trying to reach the fences in Flushing, he developed bad habits that become permanent, home and away. �I think the whole thing [about hitting home runs] got into his head and he was never able to fix that,� said the scout. Bay could be the antidote, as he seems to have the right mix of power, on-base ability and maturity to handle what awaits him in 2010. The new left fielder glided through Tuesday�s introductory press conference with grace and professionalism, which is exactly how he accepted the burden of being Manny Ramirez�s successor in Boston. Bay spoke glowingly (and convincingly) about the Mets, saying his experience with the Red Sox had whetted his appetite for winning. Bay was smart enough to avoid the obvious follow-up: If he was so enamored with Fenway�s winning culture, why did he � a refugee of 5� losing seasons in Pittsburgh � refuse the Sox� offer of four years and $60 million in July? Bay would only say, �I don�t want to get into that.� Clearly, he and agent Joe Urbon misjudged the market as the Red Sox� package ultimately shrank to three years, $44 million. The Mets were far and away Bay�s best option, maybe his only one. But if was Bay was at all disappointed at the way the Sox backed away, he didn�t show it. Instead, blissfully ignoring the last three years of frustration in Flushing, Bay noted his new team�s formidable on-paper talent and asked, �What�s not to like?� http://www.northjersey.com/sports/010610_Klapisch_Moving_in_fences_is_Wright_move.html

1. The Mets were pleasantly surprised early in the offseason at how open Jason Bay was to playing for them. That early read motivated the team to build their offseason strategy around him. Had they gotten a bad vibe early on Bay, the Mets would have recalibrated and made a very strong push for John Lackey Is this supposed to be an admission that the Mets never intended to sign both Bay and Lackey?

Well how about that Castillo? He's a championship player!

I guess I don't know how to search this forum properly. My "Marchman" search just before my post did not find that thread.

I thought I was going senile: Rosemary's Baby is one of my favorite movies -- I've watched it many times.

Can't leave out The Odd Couple, where a Mets triple play is incorporated into the story line. I was also at Shea for the game when Small Time Crooks was filmed (Dominican Heritage Night against the Cubs) but was unaware of the filming until JCL alerted me so, on this forum last year.

Tim Marchman sez (OK -- said*) that Luis Castillo is good enough to start for a championship team. Mets are in a sorry state of affairs Leave aside the image of a shirtless executive challenging minor leaguers to fist fights, or a general manager accusing a good reporter of being out for a job running the farm system, or rumors that the team's owners will soon be seen on what's left of the Bowery shaking tin cups. What matters about the New York Mets is that, Sunday's sound 4-1 beating dealt to Chicago Cubs ace Carlos Zambrano notwithstanding, right now they're the kind of bad that drives people to drink. If they were a band, they'd be Creed; if they were a food, they'd be tripe soup; if they were a gesture, they'd be a lazy, lazy slouch. Few have seen their like. On their annual visit to Chicago this weekend, for example, the Mets lineup counted one player good enough to start for a championship team. That player, Luis Castillo, hits for so little power and plays such shoddy defense -- on Sunday he managed to reprise the season's most infamous play by botching two pop flies in shallow right field -- that he's barely useful even when getting on base more than 40 percent of the time. Smart fans wanted him released last winter. He's now the team anchor. This is horrifying in its way, but of course the Mets' disabled list is currently populated by players earning salaries of about $87 million this year, comparable to the payroll of the St. Louis Cardinals and greater than those San Francisco Giants, Colorado Rockies and Texas Rangers. The Mets' four best hitters, their three best starting pitchers, their top reliever, and their top hitting and pitching prospects are all injured, and even if this is in part because of bad management and bad medical care, you can still forgive them a bad lineup, or even three. What was really appalling was that Castillo was joined not by limited but useful players forced into roles beyond their talent, but by one of the stranger collections of broken toys you'll ever see on a major league field. The number three and four spots in the lineup were taken by Daniel Murphy and Jeff Francoeur -- pinch-hitters who can't hit. The five spot was taken by Jeremy Reed, a defensive specialist who isn't an especially good fielder, and Cory Sullivan, a bad defensive outfielder who hits like Castillo without the on-base skills. And all three games in the Cubs series were started by middle relievers. You really wonder how this team would do against the Sacramento River Cats. The problem isn't that these players shouldn't be playing -- someone has to take the field, and this is who the Mets have. The problem is that they were on the team to begin with. Except for Bobby Parnell, who pitched on Saturday and, for a third straight game, showed that as a starting prospect he makes a very good relief prospect, none of these players are of any conceivable use. And yet aside from Francoeur and Friday starter Pat Misch, all began the year with the Mets. It's almost as if general manager Omar Minaya has no idea at all what he's doing. What might (or might not) soothe the nerves of Mets fans, though, is that this team was probably fated never to do anything at all, even if it hadn't lost four MVP-type players and a Cy Young candidate. Teams structured like the Mets -- the reigning world champion Philadelphia Phillies, for one -- have done well in the past and will do well in the future. But they rarely do quite as well as they should. The injury plague, with the attendant spectacle of Francoeur batting cleanup, is a MacGuffin. The Mets are a stars-and-scrubs team. Like the late 1950s Milwaukee Braves (who had Hank Aaron, Eddie Mathews and Warren Spahn), the late 1990s Seattle Mariners (Alex Rodriguez, Ken Griffey Jr., Randy Johnson and Edgar Martinez) or even the Minnesota Twins of a few years ago (Johan Santana, Joe Mauer, Justin Morneau and Joe Nathan), this team is built on the premise that its best players are so transcendently good that it essentially doesn't matter who plays with them and backs them up. A team like this will typically have a strong minor star like Joe Adcock or Jay Buhner or Carlos Delgado, a strong-willed manager and truly terrible players in key roles. Why any team would ever be built like this is an interesting question -- after all, there is a lot of advantage to be had in making sure that your lesser players aren't actively bad, and no general manager is so dumb or inept that he doesn't realize this. The obvious reason is that star players suck up a lot of cash, leaving less money to fill out the rest of the roster. Another reason is that it can actually be useful to have a lot of C-grade talent around; if someone like Reed or Sullivan gets hot, you ride him, and if he doesn't, it's no big deal. Structurally, though, this puts immense pressure on management already under stress because they have a team with lots of great players and are expected to win a championship. And this is a key reason why organizations set up like this tend to bleed talent. (Think of the Mets giving away players like Brian Bannister, Heath Bell and Jeff Keppinger, or the Mariners losing Jason Varitek, Derek Lowe and Mike Hampton.) Another is that the kind of headstrong manager you need to manage a lot of star players with big egos is the kind liable to run useful players off because he doesn't like the cut of their jib. Put together a team that's built around iffy secondary talent and a structure that's -- if anything -- not built to accommodate it and you get messes like the Lou Piniella Mariners or the Mets of the last few years. In this reading, the Mets' problems, grotesque as they've become because of injuries, are inherent and built deeply into their structure. To change and succeed they'd have to build an entirely different kind of team, one with less concentration of cash and talent. Perhaps they'd have to trade David Wright or Jose Reyes. They'd certainly have to be something other than what they are. That, though, doesn't seem likely at all. For decades now the Mets have operated on a boom-and-bust cycle under management with sketchy lines of authority. This has gone on under enough different regimes that one suspects it has less to do with Minaya and field manager Jerry Manuel or any of their predecessors than with the one constant over this time: the same Wilpon family that everyone expects to see wheeling hot dog carts down the street in exchange for hard currency any day now. They're the ones who brought Mets fans Frank Tanana and Anthony Young, Jeff Duncan and Jason Phillips, Cory Sullivan and Jeremy Reed, and they're probably the ones who will have to go if this team is to put on something other than a hideous parody of winning baseball. For now, Murphy will continue to hit third. *Wrote, really. And last August. But I don't believe that this article was ever posted here.

Matt Franco's game winning come from behind pinch hit against Mariano Rivera and the MFY's can be seen tonight at 7PM on SNY. It was a toss-up between the Dave Augustine ball off the wall game or this rarely seen gem. http://archives.cranepoolforum.net/10800/f1_t10886.shtml

Met 'mob' contracts Shady firms got $52M to build Citi Field The Mets shelled out $51.6 million in taxpayer money to contractors shunned by the city for their ties to the Mafia, labor corruption or bribery, The Post has learned. At least seven contractors the city avoids were hired by the team to build Citi Field between 2006 and 2009, according to government records. The tainted companies were paid from a $91 million pot the city Economic Development Corp. gave to the Mets. Among the contractors was Ruttura & Sons, a Long Island firm that received $23 million for concrete and excavation work. Its vice president, Peter Ruttura, was convicted of fraud in 2004 for paying off business agents and labor officials in mobbed-up unions, according to court records. After the conviction, the company was banned from doing business with the EDC and the city School Construction Authority. It was also placed on the city's "caution list," which warns city agencies of contract bidders' past problems, according to city records. As part of its agreement with the EDC, the Mets had to submit records detailing how it spent the $91 million and to whom it was paid. Those records show at least six other Citi Field contractors on the caution list. Queens-based S.N. Tannor Inc. was paid $3.5 million for electrical work despite owner Evan Tannor's 2007 felony conviction for giving $350,000 in kickbacks to disgraced labor boss and ex-state Assemblyman Brian McLaughlin, according to court records. Another Queens firm, Eagle One Roofing, was paid $7 million. Its principal, Damian Sabatino, was convicted of fraud in 2001 for bribing a labor official, money laundering, falsifying business records and prevailing-wage violations. Sabatino also pleaded guilty to income-tax evasion in 1996. Other shady Citi Field contractors included: * L & L Painting Co., which the FBI is currently investigating over an MTA contract, according to records. It has been suspended from doing business with the school authority. It was paid $5.6 million for stadium work. * The Landtek Group, an athletic-field contractor that in the last four years has been probed by the city comptroller's office and the New York and New Jersey labor departments. It landed $2.4 million. * Danco Electrical, which was busted for submitting fraudulent information to the school authority and banned from doing business with that agency until 2010. It earned $4 million. * Breeze National, a demolition company whose principal was convicted of federal bribery charges in 1988 and reportedly has ties to the mob. It was paid $5.5 million. The EDC said its standard practice is not to vet past first-tier subcontractors. The Mets said in a statement that subcontractors were hired on the recommendation of Hunt-Bovis. "The selections were based on the capability and resources of the contractors and their ability to complete the work on schedule and on budget. Citi Field was built on time, on budget and without incident or injury," the team said. http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/met_mob_contracts_2OCxUXVFkbrXzkSUFM6HgP

Here's an excerpt from Joe Posnanski's LVP's piece (Least Valuable Players): NATIONAL LEAGUE LVP: Milton Bradley, Cubs ALSO CONSIDERED: Emilio Bonifacio, Florida, Jeff Francoeur, Braves/Mets; Jason Kendall, Milwaukee; Russell Martin, Dodgers; Edgar Renteria, San Francisco; Alfonso Soriano, Cubs It is entirely unfair to put Francoeur in the also considered department ... I know this. Francoeur was good for the Mets after he was traded. But I unfairly include him because: 1. He was so legendarily bad with the Braves -- .250/.282/.352 -- that he was well on his way to winning the award before getting traded to the Mets. 2. He was so good with the Mets -- .311/.338/.498 -- that the Mets undoubtedly believe that he is back to being the guy who was on the cover of Sports Illustrated. They will now be inspired to spend considerable money and effort to keep him in New York. And, hey, they could be right. He could be the player he was in the second half... and from everything I know about Francoeur, I hope that is what happens. He seems to be a great guy. However, I would be remiss if I did not point out: They also could be wrong -- after all, over his last 2,500 at-bats Francoeur has an 89 OPS+ and the defensive numbers seem to indicate that he has regressed into a below average outfielder. Francoeur could be a Riddler-like trap, and the Mets could be just about ready to fall in. But he was not LVP. The worst hitter in the league was Bonifacio.... http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/joe_posnanski/11/19/anti.awards/index.html

Dave Magadan says Bay will fit in perfectly with Mets http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/mets/sure_to_be_hit_bg97psa6ySOHcnfdluXvCK excerpt: ...[t]hat experience, Magadan says, should make Bay's transition to the Mets an easy one. "He came here for Manny and had to deal with being the guy that came here replacing Manny," Magadan said. "He came the last two months of 2008 and handled it like a champ. He was very productive for us and a big reason we got as far as we did in the playoffs." Sean Casey, now an MLB network analyst, was Bay's teammate in Pittsburgh and Boston. Casey said he saw a distinctive change in Bay's normally subdued personality as the Red Sox were making a charge toward the postseason two years ago. "What I loved in '08, down the stretch you saw a lot of fire and passion from him," Casey said. "It was pretty awesome to see how excited he got, because all those years in Pittsburgh there were no games that meant anything from July on. He looked like a little kid again." Magadan likes the fact Bay is a straight shooter. "He's going to fit right in with the likes of David Wright," Magadan said. "He's not an excuse-maker and he's going to fess up when things don't go right."

Here's Jeff "The Bad Guys Won!" Pearlman's Bay Reaction: Yes, Jason Bay is going to be big in New York -- a big bust, that is The statement came 28 years ago. In the winter of 1981-82, the New York Mets were Big Apple nobodies -- a star-less, charisma-less franchise coming off of a miserable 41-62 strike-shortened season. The team had drawn 704,244 fans, seventh in the National League (and not even half the total of the cross-town Yankees), and its marketing exclamation, "The magic is back!" rang hollow. Unless Joel Youngblood and Pete Falcone possessed some sort of secret, Houdini-esque abilities, the magic was not back. It was, in fact, dead. With this as a backdrop, Frank Cashen, the team's general manager, pulled off a headline-stealing deal. In exchange for three middling players, Cashen landed slugging outfielder George Foster from the Cincinnati Reds, immediately signing him to a five-year, $10 million contract. Did Cashen think the former National League MVP was the missing piece that New York needed to turn itself into a winner? Hardly. While the Mets offense was nothing to brag about, it was the club's rotten starting rotation and lowly middle infield that required the most attention. "But signing George was a message to baseball and to our fans that we were in it to win," Cashen said. "From here on out, we would do whatever it takes." The outcome: Foster hit 13 home runs in his first season in New York. He played an abysmal left field, was booed mercilessly, shunned in his own clubhouse and -- even as he went on to spend 3� more decent seasons with the Mets -- labeled one of the biggest busts in the team's history. By the time the team won the 1986 World Series, he was out of baseball. Why? Because George Foster was a bad fit. * * * As we approach 2010, New York Mets history is about to repeat itself. According to WFAN, the team has agreed to sign Jason Bay to a four-year contract worth nearly $66 million. Like Foster 28 years back, Bay is in his early 30s. Like Foster 28 years back, Bay will play left field and bat in the middle of the order. Like Foster 28 years back, Bay will arrive in Queens accompanied by enough hype and hope to fill three stadiums. Like Foster 28 years back, this will not go well. Jason Bay is a good ballplayer. A fine ballplayer. Heck, an excellent ballplayer. With Boston last year, residing in cozy Fenway Park, the 31-year-old All-Star hit 36 home runs with 119 RBIs, thus making him the pulse of an otherwise aging Red Sox lineup. He has cleared 30 home runs in four of his last five seasons. Bay also happens to be one of the game's truly good guys -- likeable, agreeable, approachable, laid-back. The complete package. Yet for all the positives Bay brings to an organization, he lacks the one tool that the Mets truly need -- an ability to move walls. When New York's brain-dead powers-that-be decided that Citi Field should feature spacious outfield grass and power alleys from here to Hag�t�a, they unintentionally dictated the type of team that GM Omar Manaya is required to assemble. Namely, the modern-day Mets must replicate the '85 Cardinals, who were constructed around speed and pitching; around doubles and triples into the gaps; around shutouts and 2-1 wins. In Flushing, the signature has to be run generation -- Jose Reyes leading off with a single, stealing second, stealing third, being brought home via a sac fly. The Mets need men who take lots of pitches and work deep into counts; who can hit to the opposite field and run like Miguel Dilone. Sluggers? What sluggers? Playing in Shea Stadium in 2008, David Wright was a power monster, producing 33 homers and 124 RBIs. Playing in Citi Field in 2009, Wright was, well, George Foster circa 1982, with a paltry 10 homers and 72 RBIs. Or, to put it more bluntly, the Mets' leading home run hitter last season was Daniel Murphy -- with 12. If Bay has an absolutely outstanding 2010, he might hit 25 homers. He might. In their new digs, the Mets also require arms. Lots and lots of arms. They require starters who can hold a game close -- guys like John Lackey; guys like Javier Vazquez; guys... whom the Mets completely ignored as others pounced. No doubt those Met fans who had been waiting for their team to make a statement will be pleased. Bay, like Foster, is a big name with big power and big skills. He will also be a big bust. Jeff Pearlman can be reached at anngold22@gmail.com. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/jeff_pearlman/12/30/jason.bay/

The New York Times offers up another angle on the (Jason) Baywatch: Some Hesitant as Mets' Ticket Deadline Looms By KEN BELSON Published: December 30, 2009 With the Mets on the verge of signing Jason Bay to fill one of their biggest needs, a left fielder, the question arises: Who, literally, will notice Bay next season? One of the biggest complaints from Mets fans about Citi Field last season was the obstructed views from the seats in left field. From the highest of the three decks, many fans could not see the left fielder, the warning track or the fence, and sometimes could not see the center fielder, either. Fans in the lower decks also struggled to see plays in left field, and often had to crane their necks to watch replays on televisions hanging above them. Mets executives have defended Citi Field�s geometry, saying that the partly obscured views of the field are the tradeoff for putting fans closer to the action. In good times, a debate over stadium sight lines would be a footnote. But these are not the best of times. Many Mets fans are frustrated by the team�s dismal 2009 season and by their uncertain prospects in 2010. Other than Bay, the Mets have not made any big off-season moves. Fans have also voiced concerns about the cost of tickets. That issue, combined with the discontent over the team and some of the views, has left some fans in no mood to renew their season-ticket plans by Thursday�s deadline, which had already been extended earlier this month. �For the life of me, I don�t know why I�d want those seats again,� said Len Jokubaitis, who had a Saturday plan with two seats in the top row of Section 531 in left field. He was one of more than two dozen fans who talked to The New York Times about their ticket plans for 2010. �I wish the team well and I�d love to see them turn it around, but I just don�t think they are worth it right now.� Jokubaitis said he would go to fewer games next season and search for single-game tickets on StubHub. He is willing to pay more than face value for those tickets, he said, because he will be freed from the risk of being left with tickets he cannot resell, something he said happened repeatedly last year. Fans sitting in the outfield are not the only ones making other plans. Ominously for the team, fans like Jamie Schreck are also taking a pass. He had two seats in the Metropolitan Bronze level last season that cost an average of $150 per ticket. But the team�s poor play, the relative lack of free-agent signings and the slim resale market for his seats persuaded Schreck to opt for single-game tickets in 2010. �I�ll probably go to the same amount of games that I did last year, but I�ll remove the stress of having to get rid of the 50 or 60 games that I don�t want to go to,� he said. Acquiring Bay, he said, will help the team. But, he added, �there�s got to be a very strong chance of them going to the playoffs year after year to justify these prices.� To induce fans like Schreck to buy new plans, the Mets cut ticket prices by as much as 20 percent on some seats. The price of Schreck�s seats, though, fell just 3.3 percent. In the sections farthest from home plate, where many holders of partial season tickets plans sit, prices were mostly unchanged. That includes the Promenade Reserved sections in deep left field, where tickets cost as little as $11 a game. Mets officials declined to say what percentage of their season-ticket holders have renewed their plans, or what impact they expect the Bay signing will have on ticket sales. The team, of course, may still make some significant off-season moves, but even that might not satisfy every disgruntled fan. For instance, one fan named Jay, writing on The New York Times�s Bats blog, listed an array of reasons for not renewing his tickets on the promenade level, including the location of his seats and the lack of access to some of the stadium�s clubs. What seemed to really set him off, though, was the team not meeting his request for a Johan Santana bobble head doll. �Well, it�s been two years and I reminded him every time I spoke with him,� Jay wrote on Bats Blog about his conversations with a Mets ticket-sales representative. �But he has no problem calling me every week or so asking when I�m going to renew.� http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/31/sports/baseball/31tickets.html