Frayed Knot

="MFS62":1v8l7x25]I'm not sure that article really answers the question of Bernazard's role in "Player Development"[/quote:1v8l7x25] I'm not sure it does either - although he was clearly on the talent end rather than the business side - and you can never lay the blame (or success) at the feet of one person in a concept as large as 'player development' in a baseball team. But part of what was going on in the initial Bernazard thread was what I thought was a case of scapegoating, taking shots at the low-hanging fruit while it was there for the whacking. Part of that whacking was blaming Tony B for for being in the Bingo locker room when he had no role in player development while simultaneously blaming him for the lack of player development (as evidenced by our "barren" farm system). Then there was the part about the failures being his fault while the successes were no-brainers that anyone could do. Be nice if solving all the problems were as easy as getting rid of one guy but the big picture is a lot more involved than that and I think this summary at least partially shows that. Valadius Jul 28 2009 12:23 PM If I had to rate Bernazard on the player development that occurred during his tenure, I'd guess that he's somewhere in the middle of major league teams. Like around 14-17. Which isn't bad, but I'd like to expect something in the top 5. seawolf17 Jul 28 2009 12:33 PM ="Valadius":2pah4pru]If I had to rate Bernazard on the player development that occurred during his tenure, I'd guess that he's somewhere in the middle of major league teams. Like around 14-17. Which isn't bad, but I'd like to expect something in the top 5.[/quote:2pah4pru] I'd love to see your methodology; where'd you rank, say, Cleveland? Or the Twins? metirish Jul 28 2009 12:39 PM ="seawolf17":1daq6btk]="Valadius":1daq6btk]If I had to rate Bernazard on the player development that occurred during his tenure, I'd guess that he's somewhere in the middle of major league teams. Like around 14-17. Which isn't bad, but I'd like to expect something in the top 5.[/quote:1daq6btk] I'd love to see your methodology; where'd you rank, say, Cleveland? Or the Twins?[/quote:1daq6btk] it's similar to the methodology Val has for giving nicknames to players, just needs to be tweaked a little.

="Ashie62"]It wasn't that long ago when Baseball America ranked the Met farm system in the Top 5. I don't remember it being that high in the last few years (back of the top ten maybe) but these things fluctuate wildly from year to year based on the fact that good prospects get promoted and become ex-prospects which drives the ranking down. ]Buffalo may suck, but true prospects avoid AAA these days if they are for real.. Mets seem to have plenty of talent. maybe I'm missing something They seem to have average-ish talent according to those who follow this stuff. But even then there are different ways to be "average". Some systems have fewer guys but ones who are closer to being ready while others might have a lot of more promising bodies but ones that are still far away. Then there's the system with lots of good talent but no stand-outs vs the ones with one or two potential superstars but little or no depth. Which of those types are better is very subjective.

]... wouldn't think the Met system is nearly as bad as its popularly believed to be Much of this comes from those seemingly intent on proving the adage about 'a little bit on knowledge is worse than none at all' When big-name, high-salary players get put on the block (or just rumored to be) everyone naturally turns their attention to the bigger market clubs since those are the ones likely to be in position to absorb the salaries. Since the better NYM prospects are mostly in the lower levels and not quite ready from prime-time right now, accurate statements like 'Mets don't have the horses' or 'aren't a good match' for this trade get interpreted into 'the system is barren' by those who pay no attention to the system except when some outside superstar is on the move - at which point they wonder why a Santana-like trade can't be made every year and look for someone to blame.

="duan":34nzkxyu]listen in the meeja there's no shortage of axes being grinded. However, for Omar to suggest that Rubin was doing this as some way of getting back at the mets front office (Omar & Bernarzard) for not giving him a job he'd have to prove to me that the stories were untrue. Nobody seems to be suggesting that. Therefore, Rubin has decent sources who gave him a good (true) story that you didn't like him printing Omar. He can't be strung up for that. [/quote:34nzkxyu] I don't think Omar was implying Rubin did this to "get back" at anyone. I think the thought process was more along the lines of finding a way to explain the delay in making the decision on TB. IOW: - team knows Tony is abrasive and un-liked in circles but he's "our asshole" and therefore useful as long he doesn't go too far over the line - Rubin & NYDN print articles saying things ARE out of hand and now it's a public embarrassment - Mets want to make it look like they've not been totally clueless and only reacting to the articles so Omar partially explains the time-lag with the 'we had to consider the source' angle which, as it usually does when we try to do something purely for public relations reasons, makes the pr worse off than had you not tried it at all. Stupid? -- Yes Fireable? -- Not on its own I suspect. If his rep within the org was dimming anyway this could be a 'last straw' kind of thing but reports on that are conflicting. metsmarathon Jul 28 2009 07:53 AM y'know, i may be an unabashed kool-aid drinker, but i think i can understand what omar was trying to say there in that debacle of a press conference, and i don't find too much fault with it. basically, his point was that, as part of a thorough investigation, they should at least consider the possibility that the primary messenger might have an ulterior motive. and considering that possibility (and presumably dismissing it as a course of the investigation) is not necessarily the same as accusing adam rubin of torpedoing tony bernazard, so much as it is covering all the bases. ideally, having brought it up in the press conference, omar's next statement should've been, that, though they felt they needed to consider that possibility, there was no factual basis for any such suspicions, and that adam reported the stories accurately and fairly. i guess more ideally, it should never have been mentioned in the first place, unless specifically inquired about by another news organization. so i don;t entirely think that having mentioned that they had to consider adam rubin's potential lack of objectivity in reporting on tony bernazard's actions should be a disgraceful, shameful, and unprofessional act, it was wholly unnecessary. and certainly embarrassing in the way it was actually done, and responded to, and responded to again and again and again. why the mets can't just send out a press release to announce the firing of a guy in the organization whose actual job duties, and how those duties translate to on-the-field success, the average fan doesnt really have an adequate grasp of, i just can't fathom. fire the guy quietly, send out a paragraph, and be done with it. do they need a friggin press conference when they take a dump, too? sheesh! firing omar over this would be an example of making the right decision for the wrong reason. you don;'t fire a gm because he made a boob of himself by butchering a press conference. you do it because he makes bad moves, signing hte wrong guys to the wrong contracts. firing him over this implies that part of what they cae about for the next guy is how he conducts himself in front of hte media. and really, i don't give a rats ass about that. give me a guy who knows how to sign the right players to the right contracts, and i'll be stinkin' thrilled. Ashie62 Jul 28 2009 07:54 AM You Tube has pulled the press conference video. It will take an insane run by the Mets to get in the playoffs. The firing is part of what will the happy recap of insanity. John Cougar Lunchbucket Jul 28 2009 07:55 AM Snoozeday's David Lennon seems to think Omar was on script, and that the Mets typically miscalculated how it would play. ]Adam Rubin vs. Omar Minaya: What happens now? 39 m ago By David Lennon So what happens now? How do the Mets start picking up the pieces after yesterday�s news conference went nuclear? And what effect will Omar Minaya�s bizarre accusations ultimately have on the careers of both him and Adam Rubin? I�ve covered baseball in New York since 1995, both the Yankees and Mets, and I�ve never been part of a news conference like that before. That was an all-timer. In terms of a media circus, that probably surpassed the infamous �Valentine-Stoner� event from 2003, after Newsday�s own report about recreational drug use on the Mets. To sum it up, Valentine acted as if he were batting while high, as both Wilpons and GM Steve Phillips watched in horror. Valentine was fired at the end of that season, more for the team�s woeful performance than his behavior at that news conference, as Phillips won that battle of wills. In this case, yesterday�s attack on Rubin is not going to cost Minaya his job. Not immediately anyway. And here�s why: I don�t believe COO Jeff Wilpon was upset with Minaya for what he said yesterday and I don�t believe that was a spontaneous assault on Rubin. The Mets� decision-makers certainly huddled at length before Minaya sat behind the microphone yesterday and rarely do team officials veer off the script. The GM also walked in that room with a full page of notes, so there were definitely items to cross off his agenda. It wouldn�t surprise me at all if Rubin was among those items. It�s never fun for a reporter to become the story, as Rubin was yesterday. As much as people might think it�s great to get that kind of attention, or that beat writers crave to be in the middle of that spotlight, that�s not really the case. Once we become the story, and have a personal stake in the outcome, it�s very difficult to do the job. We�re supposed to report on such conflicts, and when we become targets, it�s hard to defend yourself and also report objectively on people trying to damage our reputations. So why did Minaya take that shot at Rubin? Clearly, the GM was angry he had to fire a friend in Tony Bernazard, and Jeff Wilpon also was not thrilled by it. Both were close to Bernazard � they each admitted as much yesterday � and I think Minaya�s attack on Rubin was meant as revenge, plain and simple. Obviously, it was a blockhead move, but Minaya only half-apologized. He did not regret what he said about Rubin � only that he said it during the news conference. But again, I believe that was part of the plan. The Mets probably didn�t realize how bad it would come off � and it made them look ridiculous, broadcast live, on their own TV network. After getting battered in the media for a couple of hours, Minaya appeared with Wilpon in the back of the press box for yet another briefing, this time for the half-hearted apology. It was more spin, with Wilpon going as far to say that Rubin did ask him for career advice, adding that there is nothing wrong with that. In doing so, however, Wilpon actually pulled more at the threads that Rubin had provided earlier during his own news conference, when he talked about trying to gather information about getting into the baseball business on the development level. These things usually blow over in time, but yesterday was a fascinating � if extremely awkward � meltdown on a very public stage. Even in New York, that doesn�t happen very often. Sitting in that room yesterday, I can say the media members were stunned. It was a bona fide �Can you believe this is really happening?� moment. For the Mets� sake, they better hope there�s not any more this season. Edgy DC Jul 28 2009 08:01 AM ]�Can you believe this is really happening?� moment. As in, Can you believe the story we're getting out of this? Ashie62 Jul 28 2009 08:07 AM ="Edgy DC"]]�Can you believe this is really happening?� moment. As in, Can you believe the story we're getting out of this? Really..What a pissing contest..."Take that Rubin ya basterd, I had sex with your mother last night!" Omar, whispers Jeff, "his mother is dead" Only in NY and again, fear and consumption drive all media Nymr83 Jul 28 2009 08:20 AM ="Edgy DC":2oqf2z4n]I don't think an Ari Fleischer should replace Minaya as GM, but it might be best if one conducted most of the press conferences. [/quote:2oqf2z4n] We have one, his name is Jay Horowitz and he does just fine infront of the media. Maybe he should be in charge of all press conferences? Ashie62 Jul 28 2009 08:21 AM ="Nymr83":2m5n4mhf]="Edgy DC":2m5n4mhf]I don't think an Ari Fleischer should replace Minaya as GM, but it might be best if one conducted most of the press conferences. [/quote:2m5n4mhf] We have one, his name is Jay Horowitz and he does just fine infront of the media. Maybe he should be in charge of all press conferences?[/quote:2m5n4mhf] Perfect PiggiesTomatoes Jul 28 2009 08:40 AM Why was there even a press conference? Your player development guy gets canned. One or two paragraph press release and move on. The ultimate decision to have the press conference would have rested with sonny boy. Whether Omar went rogue with his comments or the organization miscalculated the response to rediculous statements by the GM, it never should have happened. That rests with Jeff. BTW...other than working for his dad, what has Jeff Wilpon ever done or run to warrant having such a role in a nearly billion dollar endeavor? Not that it's the bee all and end all but any formal schooling beyond high school? Any tangible business experience before being handed these responsibilities? That's where the problem is. Edgy DC Jul 28 2009 08:51 AM ="PiggiesTomatoes":nxv6ctzt]The ultimate decision to have the press conference would have rested with sonny boy.[/quote:nxv6ctzt] I wouldn't conclude that. Fman99 Jul 28 2009 08:58 AM ="PiggiesTomatoes":3a8q8lm6]Why was there even a press conference? Your player development guy gets canned. One or two paragraph press release and move on. The ultimate decision to have the press conference would have rested with sonny boy. Whether Omar went rogue with his comments or the organization miscalculated the response to rediculous statements by the GM, it never should have happened. That rests with Jeff. [/quote:3a8q8lm6] It's a good question, though. One that I was wondering about. Why not just issue a press release? Given Tony B's recent escapades, they could've issued a one paragraph blurb and they wouldn't have been met with more than a bunch of "yup's" and head nodding. Why even have the press conference, unless someone had it in mind to get into this Rubin thing? duan Jul 28 2009 09:04 AM the press conference was definitely intended to clear the air and explain why they took a few weeks to deal with this. It was supposed to be a "Look we're open and transparent" (although they've actually no need to be really). The stuff that's stupidest about the Rubin thing is the CLEAR implication of it was that if had been (say) BEN SHPIGEL from the NY Times that made the allegations it wouldn't have taken them so long to deem them true and therefore they'd have sacked him quicker. That's the biggest insult to the journalist right there. Edgy DC Jul 28 2009 09:28 AM I'm not sure there was anything clear in Omar's constructions. A Boy Named Seo Jul 28 2009 09:47 AM ="John Cougar Lunchbucket"]Snoozeday's David Lennon seems to think Omar was on script, and that the Mets typically miscalculated how it would play. ]Adam Rubin vs. Omar Minaya: What happens now? 39 m ago By David Lennon So what happens now? How do the Mets start picking up the pieces after yesterday�s news conference went nuclear? And what effect will Omar Minaya�s bizarre accusations ultimately have on the careers of both him and Adam Rubin? I�ve covered baseball in New York since 1995, both the Yankees and Mets, and I�ve never been part of a news conference like that before. That was an all-timer. In terms of a media circus, that probably surpassed the infamous �Valentine-Stoner� event from 2003, after Newsday�s own report about recreational drug use on the Mets. To sum it up, Valentine acted as if he were batting while high, as both Wilpons and GM Steve Phillips watched in horror. Valentine was fired at the end of that season, more for the team�s woeful performance than his behavior at that news conference, as Phillips won that battle of wills. In this case, yesterday�s attack on Rubin is not going to cost Minaya his job. Not immediately anyway. And here�s why: I don�t believe COO Jeff Wilpon was upset with Minaya for what he said yesterday and I don�t believe that was a spontaneous assault on Rubin. The Mets� decision-makers certainly huddled at length before Minaya sat behind the microphone yesterday and rarely do team officials veer off the script. The GM also walked in that room with a full page of notes, so there were definitely items to cross off his agenda. It wouldn�t surprise me at all if Rubin was among those items. It�s never fun for a reporter to become the story, as Rubin was yesterday. As much as people might think it�s great to get that kind of attention, or that beat writers crave to be in the middle of that spotlight, that�s not really the case. Once we become the story, and have a personal stake in the outcome, it�s very difficult to do the job. We�re supposed to report on such conflicts, and when we become targets, it�s hard to defend yourself and also report objectively on people trying to damage our reputations. So why did Minaya take that shot at Rubin? Clearly, the GM was angry he had to fire a friend in Tony Bernazard, and Jeff Wilpon also was not thrilled by it. Both were close to Bernazard � they each admitted as much yesterday � and I think Minaya�s attack on Rubin was meant as revenge, plain and simple. Obviously, it was a blockhead move, but Minaya only half-apologized. He did not regret what he said about Rubin � only that he said it during the news conference. But again, I believe that was part of the plan. The Mets probably didn�t realize how bad it would come off � and it made them look ridiculous, broadcast live, on their own TV network. After getting battered in the media for a couple of hours, Minaya appeared with Wilpon in the back of the press box for yet another briefing, this time for the half-hearted apology. It was more spin, with Wilpon going as far to say that Rubin did ask him for career advice, adding that there is nothing wrong with that. In doing so, however, Wilpon actually pulled more at the threads that Rubin had provided earlier during his own news conference, when he talked about trying to gather information about getting into the baseball business on the development level. These things usually blow over in time, but yesterday was a fascinating � if extremely awkward � meltdown on a very public stage. Even in New York, that doesn�t happen very often. Sitting in that room yesterday, I can say the media members were stunned. It was a bona fide �Can you believe this is really happening?� moment. For the Mets� sake, they better hope there�s not any more this season. I don't remember that Valentine press conference. Any of you guys? John Cougar Lunchbucket Jul 28 2009 09:54 AM Oh I remember. I didn't think it was that bad, it was that Phillips and the Wilpons looked embarrassed when it happened was all. duan Jul 28 2009 10:03 AM ="Edgy DC":304opwj9]I'm not sure there was anything clear in Omar's constructions.[/quote:304opwj9] not in his bumbling sentences, but to me it was clear what he meant by "who's writing these reports" god listening to it again it's just horrible. metirish Jul 28 2009 10:09 AM ="A Boy Named Seo"]="John Cougar Lunchbucket"]Snoozeday's David Lennon seems to think Omar was on script, and that the Mets typically miscalculated how it would play. ]Adam Rubin vs. Omar Minaya: What happens now? 39 m ago By David Lennon So what happens now? How do the Mets start picking up the pieces after yesterday�s news conference went nuclear? And what effect will Omar Minaya�s bizarre accusations ultimately have on the careers of both him and Adam Rubin? I�ve covered baseball in New York since 1995, both the Yankees and Mets, and I�ve never been part of a news conference like that before. That was an all-timer. In terms of a media circus, that probably surpassed the infamous �Valentine-Stoner� event from 2003, after Newsday�s own report about recreational drug use on the Mets. To sum it up, Valentine acted as if he were batting while high, as both Wilpons and GM Steve Phillips watched in horror. Valentine was fired at the end of that season, more for the team�s woeful performance than his behavior at that news conference, as Phillips won that battle of wills. In this case, yesterday�s attack on Rubin is not going to cost Minaya his job. Not immediately anyway. And here�s why: I don�t believe COO Jeff Wilpon was upset with Minaya for what he said yesterday and I don�t believe that was a spontaneous assault on Rubin. The Mets� decision-makers certainly huddled at length before Minaya sat behind the microphone yesterday and rarely do team officials veer off the script. The GM also walked in that room with a full page of notes, so there were definitely items to cross off his agenda. It wouldn�t surprise me at all if Rubin was among those items. It�s never fun for a reporter to become the story, as Rubin was yesterday. As much as people might think it�s great to get that kind of attention, or that beat writers crave to be in the middle of that spotlight, that�s not really the case. Once we become the story, and have a personal stake in the outcome, it�s very difficult to do the job. We�re supposed to report on such conflicts, and when we become targets, it�s hard to defend yourself and also report objectively on people trying to damage our reputations. So why did Minaya take that shot at Rubin? Clearly, the GM was angry he had to fire a friend in Tony Bernazard, and Jeff Wilpon also was not thrilled by it. Both were close to Bernazard � they each admitted as much yesterday � and I think Minaya�s attack on Rubin was meant as revenge, plain and simple. Obviously, it was a blockhead move, but Minaya only half-apologized. He did not regret what he said about Rubin � only that he said it during the news conference. But again, I believe that was part of the plan. The Mets probably didn�t realize how bad it would come off � and it made them look ridiculous, broadcast live, on their own TV network. After getting battered in the media for a couple of hours, Minaya appeared with Wilpon in the back of the press box for yet another briefing, this time for the half-hearted apology. It was more spin, with Wilpon going as far to say that Rubin did ask him for career advice, adding that there is nothing wrong with that. In doing so, however, Wilpon actually pulled more at the threads that Rubin had provided earlier during his own news conference, when he talked about trying to gather information about getting into the baseball business on the development level. These things usually blow over in time, but yesterday was a fascinating � if extremely awkward � meltdown on a very public stage. Even in New York, that doesn�t happen very often. Sitting in that room yesterday, I can say the media members were stunned. It was a bona fide �Can you believe this is really happening?� moment. For the Mets� sake, they better hope there�s not any more this season. I don't remember that Valentine press conference. Any of you guys? It was classic Bobby , up at the podium head shaking , eyes wide open ,arms flailing about imitating a stoned player trying to get in the hitters box and hit. It was the Grant Roberts incident that brought it on IIRC Edgy DC Jul 28 2009 10:15 AM ="duan":2hggzf4z]="Edgy DC":2hggzf4z]I'm not sure there was anything clear in Omar's constructions.[/quote:2hggzf4z] not in his bumbling sentences, but to me it was clear what he meant by "who's writing these reports" god listening to it again it's just horrible.[/quote:2hggzf4z] Yeah, but marathon has a valid alternative motivation to character assasination here, and that's that "this is one of the things we needed to check out." His bumbling attempt to bring Rubin into it was lame, but I'm not sure how to infer a clear meaning that the Times reporter never would have come up. It does seem like Omar is immediately backpedaling as soon as he's challenged. I agree that (1) they should have written a press release, (2) Rubin's name should never have come up, and (3) most press conferences should be handled by a spokesperson. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jul 28 2009 11:29 AM ="Frayed Knot"]And you think Jeff Wilpon orchestrated this because there's actually evidence that points to it or because heaping all the blame on the owner's son is fun and easy? In the humble opinion of my lone recent Mets connection (ex-Media Relations middle-management), on the off-off-off-off-chance that this was a calculated (if not well-calculated) move from above, it's Jeff. Of the two, Jeff's far more likely to hold a grudge. Just watched another clip. As G-FAFIF points out in today's post, the garbled-talking-points-like repeated use of "lobby" is disturbing. It's difficult to watch in a few dozen ways. metsguyinmichigan Jul 28 2009 11:41 AM ="Edgy DC":4j6lyoh5][ (3) most press conferences should be handled by a spokesperson.[/quote:4j6lyoh5] Hell no!!! You, as a fan -- and me as a reporter -- don't want to hear from Jay Horowitz in something like that. You want the spokesman to give you the stat sheet you're looking for and the game notes from last week that you can't find, or to call the Cyclones manager to set up the interview you want to do later. But you ALWAYS want to hear directly from the people in the leadership positions in a situation such as this. Doesn't mean the spokesman can't coach the snot out of the decision-maker before he goes before the cameras. But you want someone there who can answer the questions, not someone who can say, "I'll have to talk to Omar and get back to you on that point." I deal with this kind of thing a lot. You can't let them hide behind the mouthpiece. metsguyinmichigan Jul 28 2009 11:49 AM Chass says better what I was trying to say yesterday ... which is why he's at the New York Times and I'm ...... ANOTHER CONFLICT FOR THE METS � SOMEONE ELSE�S By Murray Chass July 28, 2009 The newspaper industry is dying quickly; we all know and acknowledge that. But can�t it at least die with dignity? Of course, to die with dignity you have to have lived with dignity, and not all newspapers and reporters have done that. Many certainly have acted with an absence of professionalism. Believe it or not, these thoughts in my head stem from baseball. As bad as things have gone for the Mets this season, with more injuries than a rehab center and fewer hits than Tiny Tim, they got worse on Monday. The Mets fired Tony Bernazard as their executive in charge of player development and bungled their way through a related episode. General manager Omar Minaya raised a serious, relevant issue involving a reporter for the New York Daily News at the Bernazard news conference, then reconvened reporters in the rear of the CitiField press box and apologized for bringing up the issue in the context in which he did. He was right in the first instance, wrong in the second. But in the second instance, Minaya was accompanied by Jeff Wilpon, the owner�s son and chief operating officer, which helped explain his turnabout. The Mets obviously concluded that Bernazard�s bad acts, among them challenging minor league players to a fight and screaming at the Mets� superstar closer on the team bus, compelled them to jettison the former second baseman. Minaya, following an in-house investigation, made the decision and passed on his recommendation to the Wilpons, who agreed. What Minaya didn�t mention to the Wilpons, though - and this was his mistake - was that he planned to bring up a related issue at the news conference. Adam Rubin, the Daily News reporter, who wrote the Bernazard story last week, did not have completely clean hands in his report. At the news conference Minaya disclosed that in past years Rubin had lobbied him, Bernazard and others in the Mets� organization for a job in the player development department. �When the report came it was by Adam Rubin,� Minaya said. �I had to tell myself wow.� �Are you saying,� Minaya was asked, �when he wrote the stories you were suspicious about what he was trying to do?� �No,� Minaya replied, �I�m saying I had to scuffle a lot when I made the decision because I knew the person writing this has been lobbying myself and others in the organization for a position in player development.� �Coming from Adam Rubin,� Minaya added a minute later, �you have to understand that Adam for the last couple of years has lobbied for a player development position. He has lobbied myself, he has lobbied Tony. So when these things came up I had to think about it. I said we have to find out about this.� Minaya reached that conclusion even though he was aware of Rubin�s stated interest in player development. �When the stories came out,� Minaya said, �I had to look at the stories and say look, I know who�s writing the stories, but I owe it to the organization to make an even more thorough investigation and expedite the investigation.� The Mets� human resources department, the general manager said, had begun looking into Bernazard�s behavior even before the Daily News reports. In response to a question, Minaya said he had never come across this sort of scenario in any other organization he worked for. At one point, Rubin, who was at the news conference, asked, �Are you alleging that I tried to tear Tony down so I could take his job?� �No, I�m not saying that,� Minaya said. �All I�m saying is that in the past you have lobbied for a job. You have told people in the front office that you want to work in the front office.� �Over the years,� Minaya added, �he said he would like to work in the front office, in my front office, not only me but he has asked others.� Again Rubin asked if Minaya was saying that he had a �personal stake� in what he wrote about Bernazard, and Minaya said, �I am not suggesting that.� When the news conference ended, reporters surrounded Rubin, who suggested that perhaps Bernazard had given Minaya the idea to say what he had. Is Omar lying, I asked Rubin. Anybody who says he was asking for a job is lying, Rubin said. �The most forward I think I have ever been,� Rubin began, then stopped and began again, �There may be some e-mail somewhere that they dig up, but my intention was always how do you go about doing this? That was always my intention and nothing more than that.� Explaining his desire to find out about working in baseball, Rubin said, �The way newspapers are going we all need to look out for ourselves. I�m 35 years old. I�m thinking about the next 30 years of my life. I�ve asked in the past how do you get into that.� Rubin said he had asked people from all 30 teams how one gets into the baseball business, but someone who has covered baseball for more than five years, as Rubin has, should not have to ask how. It has all been there in front of him. Much of what Rubin said sounded like good old spin. The saddest thing he said was �There is no conflict of interest.� But of course there�s a conflict of interest. I�m not suggesting that Rubin wrote the stories to undermine Bernazard, but whatever his intention was in speaking to Mets� officials about working in baseball Rubin created a situation that raised questions about his motives. That�s certainly how Minaya saw it, and he was justified in thinking that way. Rubin was wrong for not understanding it. I sent an e-mail to Leon Carter, the Daily News sports editor, asking if he thought Rubin was guilty of a conflict of interest. He did not reply. Instead I received the newspaper�s statement from the editor-in-chief, Martin Dunn. �This was a well-reported, well-researched, exclusive story, and it�s a shame that the Mets deemed fit to cast aspersions on our reporter instead of dealing with the issues at hand. We stand by Adam 1,000%.� The Mets, of course, did deal with the issues at hand. They fired Bernazard. But the Daily News editor-in-chief did not deal with the conflict of interest so I sent another e-mail on the conflict question but got no further reply. In the meantime, Minaya and Jeff Wilpon came to the press box for news conference Part II. Minaya apologized not for what he said but for when he said it. �That was not a proper forum for me to raise those issues,� he said. I disagree. That was the absolutely right forum. When else? When no one was paying attention any longer? A few years ago I defended and supported Rubin when a few of his colleagues on the Mets� beat attacked him for what they considered a soft interview with Art Howe, the team�s manager whom the other writers didn�t like. They were wrong because it was a legitimate interview. In this instance, all of the other writers and columnists are virtually certain to side with Rubin against the Mets because the way most reporters think the writer is always right and the team wrong. In my view, though, Rubin was wrong because yes, Adam, it was a conflict of interest. Edgy DC Jul 28 2009 11:52 AM As a reporter, you're right. You want the story. As a fan, I want the organziation I support to be representing itself with it's best face. And a guy who got his job by climbing up the talent evalutation ranks but seems indifferently educated outside of baseball may not be that guy. I've got a brilliant president here that we all respect, but we wince painfully when he goes off talking points. The man would have been smarter to keep suspicions about Rubin to himself and now the organziation has been ill-served. metirish Jul 28 2009 12:00 PM I do find it interesting to read what Chass and other journalists like PGIM have to say on this. Edgy DC Jul 28 2009 12:03 PM Chass certainly makes Minaya's statements a lot clearer than they came out his mouth. Gwreck Jul 28 2009 12:10 PM They're also accepted as face-value true, which I found odd. metsguyinmichigan Jul 28 2009 12:18 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jul 28 2009 12:39 PM "I've got a brilliant president here that we all respect, but we wince painfully when he goes off talking points. " I understand your point. But we LIKE when they go off the talking points because you get a better picture of what a person -- politician or baseball executive -- is really like as opposed to how he's being packaged. Omar should have known better than to have brought Rubin into it, and it was unprofessional. And Rubin should have known better than to have entered the fray. I didn't have a problem with him asking Omar to clarify what he was actually trying to accuse him of, because goodness knows it was a jumbled mess. But when Rubin tossed out the "despicable" line, he crossed the line. And that's a shame, because I think he's the best Mets beat reporter our there. He can let his opinion people use that line instead. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jul 28 2009 12:33 PM ]Explaining his desire to find out about working in baseball, Rubin said, �The way newspapers are going we all need to look out for ourselves. I�m 35 years old. I�m thinking about the next 30 years of my life. I�ve asked in the past how do you get into that.� Kinda the dirty little secret of the sports press these days-- with major papers slouching toward obsolescence, EVERYONE who's at all savvy has to be asking themselves this, no? metirish Jul 28 2009 12:37 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jul 28 2009 12:43 PM I for one have lost respect for Rubin . I do dread a Jon Harper taking over the beat if it came to that, or a Bondy. I like Lennon more anyway but Newsday the paper is a mess to read and the website just as bad. John Cougar Lunchbucket Jul 28 2009 12:42 PM "Dig up an email" doesn't sound too good. Crazy for Omar to be trying to put 2 and 2 together but I suppose Rubin did open the door for this kind of speculation as off-base and poorly-timed as it was. Here's what Marty Noble told me about Jeff Wilpon by the way. "You don't have to be his friend but you wouldn't want to be his enemy." Edgy DC Jul 28 2009 12:45 PM How hot is that next chatroom going to get? Ashie62 Jul 28 2009 03:38 PM ESPN'S PTI Kornheiser-Minaya goes Wilbon-he stays bmfc1 Jul 28 2009 03:56 PM Tweets from CF say that Jeff Wilpon apologized on behalf of the organization. So that's 2X the Mets have convened the press to discuss what they said. Well done Mets! NYPost_MetsJeff Wilpon spoke to reporters again today to give yet another Omar Minaya confidence vote: "Omar is our GM. He's going to be our GM." Mex17 Jul 28 2009 04:13 PM Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Jul 28 2009 06:51 PM ="Edgy DC":2irgauv7]As a fan, I want the organziation I support to be representing itself with it's best face. And a guy who got his job by climbing up the talent evalutation ranks but seems indifferently educated outside of baseball may not be that guy. [/quote:2irgauv7] Both of the Boston assistants that I have been touting the past few days have Master's degrees. Just sayin. Edgy DC Jul 28 2009 05:58 PM They may consider a press secretary job with the Mets --- greater team though they may be --- a step down. TheOldMole Jul 28 2009 07:40 PM Omar seems to fairly inept at firing people gracefully. This is not the worst flaw to have.

A side discussion broke out in one of the Bernazard threads about his role (or lack of it) in player development. Here, courtesy of Tim Good-Times (Bontemps) in the NYPost is a summary of how things have gone during Tony B's (now terminated) tenure as player personnel dude. 2005 Draft The Mets lone top 10 pick during Bernazard's tenure with the team was in his first draft, when they selected Mike Pelfrey with the ninth overall pick. While Pelfrey has turned into a solid major league starter (25-26, 4.49 ERA, 1.48 WHIP), he hasn't turned into the kind of impact player that some later draft picks (in particular Tampa Bay's Matt Garza and Cincinnati's Jay Bruce) have. The Mets did do a nice job of developing some later picks in that draft, particularly two rookie pitchers currently on the staff - starter Jonathon Niese (7th round) and reliever Bobby Parnell (9th). They also picked catcher Josh Thole (13th), an All-Star this year in the Double-A Eastern League. 2006 Draft The Mets' top pick in 2006, Kevin Mulvey (2nd round), was one of the pieces involved in the trade for Johan Santana. The next pick, Joe Smith (3rd), was a dependable reliever for the team before being shipped out last winter in the J.J. Putz trade. One of the Mets more notable mid-round selections occurred in this draft as well in Daniel Murphy (13th), who now is the team's starting first baseman. The other player of potential note from this draft is pitcher Tobi Stoner, who now is with Triple-A Buffalo. 2007 Draft The Mets had five picks in the top 100 in this draft, and all five of them have pretty serious question marks at this point. The top pick, reliever Eddie Kunz, is doing OK with Triple-A Buffalo, but doesn't seem like he's going to be the dominant closer the Mets hoped he'd be when they took him with their first pick in the supplemental first round. Their other supplemental first rounder, left-hander Nathan Vineyard, had shoulder surgery last year and has hardly pitched in the majors. Scott Moviel, the Mets first second round pick, is another projectable pitcher at 6-foot-11, but is still far from a finished product. Right-hander Brant Rustich, who was drafted out of college, still has yet to advance beyond High-A, while their third rounder, Eric Niesen, has bombed so far in several starts with Double-A Binghamton. This seems to have been the Mets best draft in terms of mid-round talent under Bernazard. Lucas Duda, a seventh-round pick, has performed well through Double-A, while pitcher Dylan Owen (20th) is in Double-A and pitchers Michael Antonini (18th) and Dillon Gee (21st) are in Triple-A. 2008 Draft The 2008 draft class could prove to be a pivotal one for the Mets organization. With three first round selections, the Mets had a chance to quickly stock their system with three long-term answers at the big-league level. So far, it looks like they got at least one of them right, with the other two up for debate. The one that they've nailed - at least so far - is the third one, right-hander Brad Holt (33rd overall). He's shot through the minors, and after a bit of a rough start with Double-A Binghamton, has quickly found his groove there as well. He's now mentioned as one of the top prospects in the Mets' system, and could be in the rotation in Queens as soon as next year. The other two, first baseman Ike Davis (18th overall) and middle infielder Reese Havens (22nd), have left more questions than answers. Davis, the son of former Yankee reliever Ron Davis, took nearly 300 at-bats to hit his first major league homer. Since then, though, he's been on a roll. This season between High-A and Double-A, Davis is hitting .295 with 14 homers and 52 RBI. He could be the Mets starting first baseman as soon as next season, and could be the team's answer there for years to come - both offensively and defensively. Havens, on the other hand, has spent much of his time as a pro hurt with various nagging injuries. He's shown some serious pop in limited action (12 homers in 80 career games) but needs to prove he can stay on the field. The rest of the organizations' '08 draft class has had too little time in the system to judge one way or the other. The same can be said of last month's draft class, of which several top picks have yet to sign. International signees Under Bernazard's watch, the Mets have signed several prominent Latin American players who developed into known quantities. From the 2005 class, pitcher Deolis Guerra was part of the Johan Santana trade, while Fernando Martinez has developed into one of baseball's top prospects. In 2006, the Mets inked Ruben Tejada, who is starting as short for Double-A Binghamton, as well as Francisco Pena (Tony's son). The Mets also signed Maikel Cleto that summer, who turned into the biggest piece of the Putz trade. The organization followed that up with inking two of its current top 10 prospects, Wilmer Flores and Jefry Marte, in 2007, along with its top overall prospect right now, Jenrry Mejia. FK: To compare the above record to what a team should reasonably expect to get out of the same situation draft & money-wise is always speculative and shirley something beyond what I'm capable of assessing (not to mention that the players are still young enough and their acquisitions recent enough that we're talking about a still-moving target). Armed with hindsight it is, of course, easy to see who the "right" picks were, but one can always find a player drafted later that looks better than an earlier one even if the one you got was is developing nicely. Bottom line is I think the both the pct of success coming from the draft and the rate at which they develop is the area that fans in general most consistently over-estimate. It would be great if hitting studs and ace hurlers were strewn all over every draft but that's just not the case in a sport where nearly 1/3 of all 1st round picks never spend a day in the majors and only around 1-in-4 even becomes a regular much less a star. The 'our picks always suck' lament or the one where they don't turn out to be what we were "promised" they'd become are pretty universal themes amongst fans of all stripes. My guess is that that record would stand up at least reasonably well against most; particularly when taking into consideration that there was just one top half of the 1st round pick (Pelfrey) in the whole bunch, but then it's tough to demand prime draft positions, competitive teams each year, and numerous big-name FA signings all at the same time.

And you think Jeff Wilpon orchestrated this because there's actually evidence that points to it or because heaping all the blame on the owner's son is fun and easy?

Except that the price they can exact for Halladay will probably never be higher than it is now since the receiving team gets him for 1-1/2 seasons rather than just one. (And if you call in the next 4 days we'll throw in a bonus pennant chase for you!! - just pay extra shipping and handling) And again, it makes a big difference depending upon whether Riccardi merely thinks it's advantageous to deal him now or is under orders to do so.

Jays talks with Phils "not going well" says Jayson Stark. With the non-waiver trading deadline 4 days away and the supposed Jays-imposed deadline for Halladay tomorrow, the two teams are playing a guts game over how high the price will be. Phils don't want to include current hurler JA Happ, plus their top pitching prospect Kyle (son of Doug) Drabek and their top OF prospect Dominic Brown. I suspect what Philly is gambling on is that JP Riccardi doesn't merely WANT to deal Halladay but that he's being ordered to by ownership. If so, the Jays are likely to be the ones to blink and will do so at the very last minute (theirs or MLB's). IF he's NOT under orders to move him now Riccardi can hold out for the best deal and see if Philly GM Amaro blinks instead and drives the prospect-mobile up to Canada himself; or see if any other team (several are mentioned) jumps in; or simply hold onto him and maybe look for a deal this winter.

Maybe they just need a Vice-President in charge of press conferences. Let Omar handle the contract negotiations and other behind-the-scenes stuff while staying the hell out of public gatherings.

I admit it, I thought Tatis was cooked after getting to 0-2. Thought he was going to see a big ol' curve in the dirt and whiff at it.

Joined this conversation late so I turned on FAN trying to catch up ... unfortunately it's Benigno & Roberts on intelligent talk is nowhere to be found.

That's a lineup that takes a lot of walks. Virtually every guy up there has an OBA around 100 points above his BA - so don't get fooled by some of those pedestrian-looking BAs.

]Mr. Met should give all future press conferences. Certainly fewer stupid things would be said.

If true, Rubin wouldn't be the first person to go from the media covering a team to working for the team*. The question(s) that need to be cleared up are how did Rubin go about this (if he even did) and what set Omar off about it to where he thinks he has something to gain by going after him. * Off the top of my head: Michael Kay - Yanx (NY Post beat writer, to radio man, to all-around YES man) In the early days of the Islanders, Newsday's Pat Calabria was the beat reporter. He later went to work for the club as pr/communications director or some such title Larry Rocca works (or has) w/Bobby V in Japan after covering the team for Newsday

Sheffield always threatens to revolt - but the thing is, this time he could easily make it stick. He was all but ready to retire anyway after being released by Detroit; he had $14mil coming to him and nothing monetarily to gain from playing unless he's really lying and is secretly dying to play next year too only for a fraction of this year's salary. But the Mets (he claims) were a good fit for him and so he took the gig when offered. But now if dealt somewhere he doesn't like (I don't think he has any No-Trade protection) he can simply walk-away rather than pull up stakes and move across the country for 9 weeks and not lost a thing except a possible shot at another ring.

="Edgy DC":2nvdgu80]Give it up for him by batting him leadoff and Pagan second.[/quote:2nvdgu80] Funny how Jerry's pre-season idea of hitting him leadoff not only didn't come through but still hasn't even as Castillo displays everything you'd want in a lead-off hitter AND done so while Reyes's absence left the spot in the lineup wide open. Of course the fact that "everybody knew" what a bad idea it was at the time might just be part of what's keeping it from happening. Edgy DC Jul 27 2009 08:02 AM ="Frayed Knot":ug2alamh]But Luis Castillo (middle name: much-maligned) on the other hand: [u:ug2alamh].391/.487[/u:ug2alamh]/.469 w/8 RBIs & 2 Ks - not that a .078 IsoP number (essentially the same as Wright) is all that much to write home about but we are grading on a curve here. Plus his season-long OBA now stands just two ticks below the .400 mark -- give it up for the lad[/quote:ug2alamh] Exactly 19 minutes after you wrote this, The Staten Island Advance ate the crow you ordered for them. Frayed Knot Jul 28 2009 05:02 PM Castillo's season OBA = .402 Vic Sage Jul 29 2009 08:44 AM sell NOW! LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jul 29 2009 09:18 AM ="Vic Sage"]sell NOW! My thoughts exactly. (Giants, mebbe?)

And today's: Sunday, July 27 - Shea Stadium: Reds 6 - Mets 3 -- Gerry Arrigo (a 1966 Met) vs Don Cardwell Cardwell gives up 3 in the 1st (Perez 2R-HR) and is replaced with 1 out in the 4th after giving up 2 more (in large part thanks to a 3-error inning) Mets get 2 back in the 6th (Jones RBI-1B, Clendenon SacFly) and 1 more in the 8th (Shamsky GO) but never get closer despite Ryan, McGraw & Taylor combining for 5.2 IP of 1 run on 1 hit relief. Arrigo: 7.1 IP, 3 R (1 ER) 7 H, 2 BB -- Wayne Granger: 1.2 IP of scoreless/hitless Game Time 2:27 55 -41; 2nd place; 5.0 Games out of 1st (Cubs lose to Dodgers 6 - 2)

Dang, I forgot yesterday's entry! Saturday, July 26 - Shea Stadium: Mets 3 - Reds 2 -- Tony Cloniger vs Tom Seaver Score is 1-1 in the 5th when the Mets put together three straight two-out hits: a Harrelson single, a Seaver double, and a 2-RBI single from Agee Reds get one back in the 6th as Tolan singles in Rose, but Seaver shuts the door the rest of the way including coaxing DPs in each the 8th & 9th innings. Final line: 9 innings, 2 ER, 8 hits, 2 BBs, 8 Ks Game Time 2:15 55 -40; 2nd place; 5.0 Games out of 1st (Cubs beat Dodgers in 11)

]It used to be that political giants represented New York in the U.S. Senate - towering figures like Robert F. Kennedy, Daniel Moynihan and Hillary Clinton. One of whom actually lived in the state. This is the same sort of article we see in the sports sections all the time; writers whining about the lack of "superstars" to write about because they think covering these lesser mortals makes their job more boring and less important. And isn't that really what it's all about?

The trip to Houston made for some improvement for our boy: his July batting line now "up" to .218/.322/.295 w/6 RBIs & 18 Ks But Luis Castillo (middle name: much-maligned) on the other hand: [u:37bi497t].391/.487[/u:37bi497t]/.469 w/8 RBIs & 2 Ks - not that a .078 IsoP number (essentially the same as Wright) is all that much to write home about but we are grading on a curve here. Plus his season-long OBA now stands just two ticks below the .400 mark -- give it up for the lad

* If/when Beltran comes back he's playing CF. * I do think Pagan is fine (if not better) as a fill-in CF and I'd like to see us hang onto him as outfielder #4 for next year. Now he just has to work on staying on the field * Martinez looked better defensively than I expected based on prospect reports that universally had him tagged strictly as a corner guy.

The SHaMs are running wild!!

Was ready to throw Livan to the wolves after inning 1 (and still wouldn't mind finding a replacement) but it would be a big deal if he can continue this post-1st inning shut-down.

So I don't guess the odds are real good of Kubek giving George S. a big public F.U. ... but I hold out hope.

="Valadius":p156qt5i]Holy crap, Bob Feller is 90 years old?[/quote:p156qt5i] Feller is, I believe, both the oldest living HoF-er (took over for Rizzutto) and the earliest inductee among the still-breathing set. SteveJRogers Jul 26 2009 01:03 PM ="Frayed Knot":jxh1idq0]="Valadius":jxh1idq0]Holy crap, Bob Feller is 90 years old?[/quote:jxh1idq0] Feller is, I believe, both the oldest living HoF-er (took over for Rizzutto) and the earliest inductee among the still-breathing set.[/quote:jxh1idq0] Doerr I believe is a few months older than Feller. Valadius Jul 26 2009 01:11 PM Yup. Frayed Knot Jul 26 2009 01:24 PM So I don't guess the odds are real good of Kubek giving George S. a big public F.U. ... but I hold out hope. metsguyinmichigan Jul 26 2009 02:48 PM Feller is one tough SOB -- and vigorously protects his legacy. Valadius Jul 26 2009 07:00 PM Great Rickey quote: ]"They kept that s--- a secret from me ... I wish they had told me. My God, could you imagine Rickey on 'roids? Oh, baby, look out!" � Henderson on steroids, The New Yorker, Sept. 12, 2005 Fman99 Jul 26 2009 07:14 PM Looked up Joe Gordon (inducted today by the Veterans committee) on Baseball Reference. His career compares most closely with none other than the "Stache" himself, Jose Valentin. G-Fafif Jul 27 2009 03:45 AM ="SteveJRogers":8sj12too]="Frayed Knot":8sj12too]="Valadius":8sj12too]Holy crap, Bob Feller is 90 years old?[/quote:8sj12too] Feller is, I believe, both the oldest living HoF-er (took over for Rizzutto) and the earliest inductee among the still-breathing set.[/quote:8sj12too] Doerr I believe is a few months older than Feller.[/quote:8sj12too] Feller's distinction is having lived as a Hall of Famer (47 years) longer than anybody else.