metirish

Went with Pelfrey for the same reasons as above, I wanted to vote for Humber though, just haven't seen him enough.

Four years for $46 million ,WOW

Condolences to his family, terrible is all I can say.

Hunter needs a new agent.

Seems like a crazy deal, from the LA Times...5 years $90 ] Hunter, who has excellent speed, instincts and athletic ability, will play center field for the Angels, and Manager Mike Scioscia said Matthews would rotate through the corner outfield spots, and right fielder Vladimir Guerrero and left fielder Garret Anderson would rotate through the designated hitter spot. ] Scioscia says he is confident that Matthews will accept the switch. "We want Gary Matthews, there was no happier guy in the clubhouse when we clinched the division," Scioscia said. "He has the drive to put a ring on his finger. It's not going to be a huge adjustment for Gary. I'm sure we'll get a positive response. He'll do whatever it takes to win. I'm sure he'll be on board with it."

Sweet ride.

I'd do that deal for Laird. Neyer on Estrada( no more Neyer from me ) ] How big a catch is Estrada?posted: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 | Feedback | Print Entry From the Department of Did He Really Say That, here's Omar Minaya on the Mets' new starting catcher: "Johnny adds depth to our catching situation," Mets general manager Omar Minaya said. "He's a former All-Star who switch-hits and has hit over .300 three times in his career." Estrada had arthroscopic surgery on his left knee Oct. 4 to repair a torn meniscus. He also had a bone spur removed from his right elbow. The operations were performed by Dr. James Andrews in Birmingham, Ala. Yes. Technically, Johnny Estrada has hit over .300 three times in his career. One of those times was in 2003, when he went 11-for-36 with the Braves, which figures out as .306. To be fair, Estrada also batted .328 with Triple-A Richmond that season. So he certainly had a good year. The next year he batted .314 in 134 games with the Braves, was an All-Star, and even picked up a few points in the MVP balloting (he finished behind Juan Pierre, but still). Since 2004, though, his numbers aren't nearly as impressive: .309 on-base percentage, .406 slugging. And much of that happened in Miller Park, a fairly neutral park. Estrada's a year older and moving to one of the toughest parks for hitters in the National League. He certainly won't be the worst catcher in the league, but I don't see many All-Star Games or .300 seasons in his future. Then again, maybe Dr. Andrews' tender care will work wonders. Estrada threw out only eight percent of the runners trying to steal against him last season, and presumably Minaya believes the elbow surgery was successful. But aren't they all?

Some dissenting voices out there about the MVP. By Joe Sheehan, BaseballProspectus Rollins' career year still not deserving of NL MVP Neyer. ] No rhyme or reason to MVP votingposted: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 | Feedback | Print Entry It doesn't bother me that Jimmy Rollins won the NL MVP Award. He scored a million runs. He stole 41 bases. He hit 38 doubles, 20 triples and 30 home runs. He played 162 games. He's not a great defensive shortstop and didn't deserve his Gold Glove, but he's plenty good enough. What bothers me is the utter lack of consistency from year to year. In 2006, Ryan Howard's team finished three games out of the playoffs, and yet in the MVP balloting Howard outpointed Albert Pujols -- whose team did qualify for the playoffs. This, even though Pujols finished with a higher on-base percentage and a higher slugging percentage while playing his home games in a pitcher's park (Howard played his in a hitter's park). So if you don't have to play for a playoff team, what's wrong with David Wright, exactly? "When Wright's team really needed him in September, he let them down." That is not a rhetorical device. That is something people believe. There are only two problems with it: It's mostly irrelevant and it's completely wrong. First of all, the games in April through August count just as much as the games in September. Actually, they might count for just a little bit more. If you play well early in the season, and your team is winning, management might make a few extra moves with an eye toward winning more games in September and October. On balance, a home run in June might be worth just slightly more than a home run in September. And second, if there was one player who did not let the Mets down in September, it was David Wright. In September he batted .352. From Aug. 2 through the end of the season, he batted .377 and scored 48 runs in 54 games. The Mets lost 12 of their last 17 to blow the division race (with a little help from the Phillies). In those 17 games, Wright batted .397 and collected at least one hit in every game. That's right: The Mets' 17-game collapse also included Wright's 17-game hitting streak. So you can say what you want about him, and you can define "valuable" however you like. But unless you think Wright is responsible for his teammates' performance -- Wright, rather than the manager, and the coaches, and veterans like scrappy Paul Lo Duca -- I don't have any idea why the Mets' collapse would be held against him. Even a single iota. But maybe it's not the Mets' collapse that cost Wright so much as his lack of flash. The one statistical category in which he led the National League -- times on base (297) -- happens to be a category that no MVP voter has ever, in the long history of the award, ever looked at. But they do look at home runs, which I suppose is the only way to explain how Wright could actually finish behind Prince Fielder in the voting. Even if you ignore fielding and focus only on hitting, Wright was the better player. And it's not like Fielder's team was in the playoffs. Anyway I'm not sure the wrong man won the award. Rollins did guarantee before the season that the Phillies would finish in first place. If they had tanked, he would have been roundly criticized for his brashness. Instead, they finished in first place, and that counts for something. Also, according to the Bill James Handbook 2008, Rollins was one of the most effective baserunners in the majors, even aside from his 41 stolen bases; he was +32 bases by this measure, second in the league to only Jose Reyes (+34). (And while we're on that subject, Wright does not fare well by this measure: +3. But Matt Holliday does: +21.) One of the principles that Bill James has long espoused is a simple one: "Everything counts." When it comes to the award voting, it's not so much the product that bothers me; it's the process. Year after year, I just don't get the impression that the voters are counting everything. Rather, they tend to fixate on this salient fact or that one, and forget to count anything else.

seawolf17 wrote: Isn't the Reds' management dumb, though? Maybe we can get Dunn cheaply. I'd make that deal, as much as I hate guys who strike out a lot. Used to be dumb, not now with Dusty Baker there.

With Minaya filling the catcher spot and keeping his prized trading chips I would think if he is going to use them it would be on a starting pitcher.

Estrada not working well with the pitchers would be a concern , seems telling that a GM would say that.

="attgig"]Centerfield wrote: I'm guessing makeup of the mets is going to be a positive influence on him. I think that stuff is over rated, if you're a bollox you're a bollox. Frayed Knot Nov 21 2007 07:28 AM From the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinal: Estrada and teammate Tony Graffanino were involved in a dugout altercation with manager Ned Yost in early August - ironically, in a game against the Mets - but that was not believed to be a factor in the trade. "I don't really want to get into all of that," said [GM Doug] Melvin. "It doesn't do any good to talk about negatives." More from Melvin: "We're just looking for more of an energy level and a catcher who works well with pitchers." If Estrada's energy level was down, his agent, David Schwartz, said it probably was related to the injuries he played with. "I don't think Johnny got enough credit for playing hurt all season," said Schwartz. After the season, Estrada had surgery to remove a bone spur from his elbow and repair torn cartilage in his left knee. And from Estrada himself: "I heard they wished I worked better with the pitching staff," said Estrada, who will be playing for his fourth team in four years. "That (ticks) me off. I think sometimes, as a general manager or an owner, or even a manager, you don't have the pulse of the team. (General manager Doug Melvin) is not in the clubhouse." TransMonk Nov 21 2007 07:30 AM From the Brewers' board: I asked: Would there have been any takers if I would have proposed that deal before it happened? Answer: Nope. General consensus here is that we hoped to get a little bit more, especially because we had some leverage without having a replacement for Estrada inked. Most here think Estrada for Mota + our expected FA signing of Jason Kendall is a rather lateral move. metirish Nov 21 2007 07:34 AM Estrada not working well with the pitchers would be a concern , seems telling that a GM would say that. soupcan Nov 21 2007 08:12 AM I like the Post's theory that they may just cut Estrada loose rather than offer him offer him arbitration. Basically just dumping Mota. I keep reading about the Mets having interest in Laird so maybe Omar's trying to swing that deal? But if they keep Estrada keep in mind that although his defense (according to the Brewers fans) was atrocious, he did have a bone spur last season and has since had it removed. Problem solved or at least addressed? Maybe. The Post article also said that Omar has not dismissed out of hand giving Castro a shot a the starting job. Of course thae question of Castro staying healthy enough to do that is a big one. John Cougar Lunchbucket Nov 21 2007 08:50 AM Yeah, I don;t think we're necessarily done trying to find a catcher. Would you guys endorse a deal of Endy Chavez for Gerald Laird? The Rangers want a center fielder. Everyone loves Chavvy but we're nuts thinking we're going to keep on getting greatness out of him. Edgy DC Nov 21 2007 08:55 AM Moving Endy to someone blinded by his highlight reel would be smart. Cold-hearted, but smart. metirish Nov 21 2007 09:04 AM I'd do that deal for Laird. Neyer on Estrada( no more Neyer from me ) ] How big a catch is Estrada?posted: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 | Feedback | Print Entry From the Department of Did He Really Say That, here's Omar Minaya on the Mets' new starting catcher: "Johnny adds depth to our catching situation," Mets general manager Omar Minaya said. "He's a former All-Star who switch-hits and has hit over .300 three times in his career." Estrada had arthroscopic surgery on his left knee Oct. 4 to repair a torn meniscus. He also had a bone spur removed from his right elbow. The operations were performed by Dr. James Andrews in Birmingham, Ala. Yes. Technically, Johnny Estrada has hit over .300 three times in his career. One of those times was in 2003, when he went 11-for-36 with the Braves, which figures out as .306. To be fair, Estrada also batted .328 with Triple-A Richmond that season. So he certainly had a good year. The next year he batted .314 in 134 games with the Braves, was an All-Star, and even picked up a few points in the MVP balloting (he finished behind Juan Pierre, but still). Since 2004, though, his numbers aren't nearly as impressive: .309 on-base percentage, .406 slugging. And much of that happened in Miller Park, a fairly neutral park. Estrada's a year older and moving to one of the toughest parks for hitters in the National League. He certainly won't be the worst catcher in the league, but I don't see many All-Star Games or .300 seasons in his future. Then again, maybe Dr. Andrews' tender care will work wonders. Estrada threw out only eight percent of the runners trying to steal against him last season, and presumably Minaya believes the elbow surgery was successful. But aren't they all? Edgy DC Nov 21 2007 09:14 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Nov 21 2007 07:20 PM How many all-star games does Neyer see in Mota's future? Let's get some perspective here. 1) Mota don't buy gold, not after last season. 2) There are worse things than a catcher with a .715 OPS. 3) GMs tend to say nice things about a player they've recently acquired. We all know there's a downside, but it makes more sense to talk about the factors that motivated you to pull the trigger. The question they're answering, after all, is "Why did you acquire that guy?" (if only implicitly). The Mets had plenty of good things to say when they got David Justice. then they flipped him before the week was over and it seemed they'd been planning to all along. Benjamin Grimm Nov 21 2007 09:23 AM Is Laird really anyone to get excited about? I mean, it looks like he'd be decent enough, but why trade anyone to get him? He doesn't seem like he'd be much of an improvement at all over Estrada and Castro. Let's go into 2008 with what we have at catcher and try again in 2009. (Too bad Jesus Flores isn't an option.) GABRH2B3BHRRBITBBBSOSBCSOBPSLGAVG 2007120407489118394714230103620.2780.3490.224 Career279881130217485199333261210940.2970.3770.246 Rockin' Doc Nov 21 2007 11:24 AM I'm not familiar with Laird, but seeing the stat line Yancy posted makes me want to steer clear of him. A career .246 hitter that strikes out close to 25% of his at bats while providing little power does not appear to be the answer for the Mets catching situation. I believe I would rather go with Castro/Estrada and keep Endy Chavez. smg58 Nov 21 2007 12:18 PM And Laird's putting up those mediocre numbers in Texas. His upside is Estrada's 2007 numbers. Would anybody here start him over Castro? Centerfield Nov 21 2007 12:23 PM metirish wrote: ="Centerfield"] I'm guessing makeup of the mets is going to be a positive influence on him. I think that stuff is over rated, if you're a bollox you're a bollox. I'm being misquoted here. I feel like Paul LoDuca. soupcan Nov 21 2007 12:32 PM I think I read that Laird is very good defensively. I'm not advocating Castro, Estrada or Laird. Just looking at what the Mets options are and trying to figure out what Omar's thinking. Nymr83 Nov 21 2007 01:00 PM Centerfield wrote: ="metirish"]Centerfield wrote: I'm guessing makeup of the mets is going to be a positive influence on him. I think that stuff is over rated, if you're a bollox you're a bollox. I'm being misquoted here. I feel like Paul LoDuca. tell him that other guys on this forum speak english too RealityChuck Nov 24 2007 06:10 PM Johnny Estrada is already the best Estrada to play for the Mets (as a Met). Though, of course, it's unlikely he'll be as interesting a trivia question as Chuck (a pitcher who won just one game for the team -- but a very historic one for the Franchise). SteveJRogers Nov 25 2007 09:22 AM RealityChuck wrote: Johnny Estrada is already the best Estrada to play for the Mets (as a Met). Though, of course, it's unlikely he'll be as interesting a trivia question as Chuck (a pitcher who won just one game for the team -- but a very historic one for the Franchise). UMDB is your friend Tom Seaver's debut That is a pretty interesting bit of trivia. And I assume that is why you said "the Franchise" the way you did! RealityChuck Nov 25 2007 10:17 AM Yup. I followed Chuck Estrada fairly closely that year, for his first name alone. He also was a pretty good pitcher when he came up: won 33 games his first two seasons, but hurt his arm and never came back. His win was the only decent game he pitched that year, and once his ERA flirted with 10, he was released. Edgy DC Nov 25 2007 02:19 PM He'll have to log a couple of games to best Francisco Estrada. metirish Dec 13 2007 06:59 AM News on Estrada, Johnson,Padilla and others. Mets cut ties with players Mark Prior and the Cubs part ways, he's worth a look I guess but his agent says Doctor Andrews expects Prior will be ready to pitch mid-May although the agent then said " "if you want to be conservative, tack a few months onto that." ". Edgy DC Dec 13 2007 07:20 AM Adkins gets one inning pitched. Johnson gets 27 at-bats. That Ring-Bell trade is looking pretty bad this morning. And henceforth shall it remain. John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 13 2007 07:36 AM Adam Rubin acknowledged that Johnson and Padilla were each recovering from their respective injuries slowly. I wondered if that wasn't a message from the Mets to lay off these guys, we want to re-sign them to minor league deals. Johnson is a real disappointment. I was hopeful they'd made a steal there.

Milledge is going to have a fine year in RF, will it be for the Mets?

Steve J Rogers.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: yost may have just been being a manager, but made a point after his shoving match with Estrada that Johnny was only defending another teammate. What I recall about Estrada was that he was traded for Kevin Millwood. Yes and I remember at the time the Braves were being questioned for that move because Millwood was a stud (sorta) at the time, had a big year the season before IIRC. The Braves though maintained they were getting a future star catcher.

Damn good when he came over and had a steller playoffs, last year was horrid.

Seems like a good bit of business for the Mets, I would never have thought you could get him for Mota. I guess the surgery has something to do with that.

I don't believe we got him for Mota.

I broke the link to that board and thread , I was accused of spamming so I said feck it they can keep it.

Valadium wrote: I'd consider Estrada, but I'd be cautious. Did you hear some gossip on him or what?

This si from a certain blogger on a major sports site. ] Questioning Randolph's comments posted: Monday, November 19, 2007 | Feedback | Print Entry I went easy on Willie Randolph down the stretch, partly because I've always admired the way he carries himself, and partly because I didn't watch enough Mets games to criticize his bullpen maneuverings. But when I read something like this, I cringe ... Says Willie, "I felt all year long we didn't have that killer instinct consistently that we should've had. We had it at times when our backs were against the wall, and we did show some fight (the Mets went 8-2 after the first four-game sweep by the Phillies), but you have to be careful when you put your back against the wall, because you can't always get off that wall. In the end, that's (exactly) what happened." Randolph says he believed in his players' character right to the final game, confident they would right themselves, and admits now the faith was misplaced: "I definitely gave them too much credit. I was looking for them to reveal to me that they were ready to be champions, but they showed me they weren't ready. "It's a tough thing to look at in retrospect, but that's the truth." They weren't ready to be champions? What about 2006, when mostly the same group of players came one or two swings away from being champions of the National League? Did they get un-ready between then and September of '07? I should mention that Randolph didn't completely throw his players under the bus. Later in the same piece, he talks about what he should have done differently down the stretch, and what he'll do differently next year. I just don't see what good it does now, to question the character of his players. When I was at Kansas, Larry Brown coached the Jayhawks. When they got beat, afterward the first thing he'd say to the media was, "We got outcoached." As a fan, I wasn't satisfied by that answer. I wanted to know which player to blame, plus I wasn't convinced of Brown's sincerity. In retrospect, I can see his point. It's the coach's job to get his players to play as well as they can play. If they don't hustle, maybe it's a character problem. But maybe it's a coaching problem. If they don't have that killer instinct, maybe it's a character problem. But maybe it's a coaching problem. Like I said, I like Randolph. I hope he figures out the bullpen stuff. If the players seem to have a character problem again, though? I'd think about getting them a new coach. Randolph

Neyer defending his love for Wright. ] John (Washington DC): Rob, can you explain to the viewers yours, and Keith Law's, complete love for the NY Mets? David Wright is "NOT" better than Chipper Jones. The award he was GIVEN was the gold glove...has NOTHING TO DO WITH OFFENSE. He's a good ball player, but come on. He is being punished because his team will be known this past season as the ultimate chokers? Give me a break. He was nowhere near as VALUABLE as Rollins or Holliday. Rob Neyer: (12:53 PM ET ) John, EVERY non-traditional measure of offense and EVERY non-traditional measure of defense suggest that Wright was better than Jones in both phases of the game. You're ignoring park effects in your "analysis," which is okay because you don't get to vote for anything. But it's a shame that many of the actual voters share your awareness. I'll take this down in a while.

I'll get rid of it....sorry.

...

I'd go with J Rollins, he talked the talk as it were and I'm sure voters will have that in mind as much as the Mets collapse.