Vic Sage

Edgy MD wrote: Because good pitching, and excellent pitching in particular, is a lot harder to sustain over a career than outstanding offensive performance. yup. and GMs know this too, so no, we're not getting perennial MVP candidates very much in their prime like Trout or McCutcheon, in exchange for ANY of our pitchers. That's just silly. You'll either get a package of blue chip type prospects, or a 30+ All-star with a big contract (with maybe a lesser prospect or 2). Nobody is giving up an all-star hitter, 27 or younger, with years of team control left, for a great pitcher of a similar age, coming off 1.5 years recently missed due to TJ surgery. I'd like Mookie Betts, a quality CFer (and 2bman), with power and top of the order speed, 23, with years of control left, very much ready to become the next McCutcheon. Would Boston do that? I doubt it. They'd probably prefer to give up Boegarts, who i'd be interested in, but only if they gave us a good prospect or 2, as well. But that's the kind of deal i'd want to make: somebody young who already has demonstrated major league ability, with high upside that's about to bust out, with long-term control. Carlos Correa, Lindor, Bryant. Certainly preferable to 30+ guys with huge contracts who have already leveled off or are starting to break down.

blech. Jimmy, just stop talking.

Flores proved to me he could play SS well enough to stay there next year, to keep his bat in the lineup. What he needs is a DP partner with the range to make up for his lack of it. That's not Murphy. I don't know if it's Herrera but it's worth finding out, considering his offensive upside. Also, with Tejada (and with Reynolds, Cecchini and Rosario in the pipeline), Flores' bat and D could play even better at 2b and make room for one of these guys to develop at SS. So I'd rather they took the Murphy money (3-4yr/$40-50m?), and added it to the budget for a power bat in the OF.

i'm always dubious at throwing big money at 35+ utility guys, even very good ones. Yes, he's been a better player than Murphy, but not HUGELY better, and Murphy is likely to maintain his production over the next few years, while Zobrist is past his expiration date. That being said, i'd prefer they threw the money, not at Murphy OR Cespedes (whose pitch-chasing hackitude became quite clear after his 6-week Aug-Sept burst), but at Heyward or Upton.

Granderson ranked 12th in WPA... but CF said he sucked!

On the other hand, i CAN guarantee that I would, in fact, commission the creation of a batmobile. I'd pick up CF, LWFS and whoever else wants to go (if they can fit in the rumble seat), and we'd cruise the streets of Gotham with Steinman music blaring out of rooftop speakers.

One potential reason (at least in theory) would be that the money the Mets would save by getting Betts instead of Heyward could be allocated to filling a different need, like maybe a shortstop and a pitcher to replace Harvey. yes, but that is the exact rationale some of us are tired of hearing about. They could sign Heyward AND spend cash to upgrade elsewhere. That would take them from a bottom third payroll to a middle third payroll. Don't you think that a franchise that owns NYC real estate (one of the most valuable assets on the planet), a new stadium (and the parking,merchandising,ads,and vendor revenues it generates) and its own network, not to mention the licensing revenue from the Mets' intellectual property, should be providing this team with the resources to be at least in the ballpark of the top 10 other payrolls in MLB? I do. Others here do. and we're tired of hearing about the financial constraints.

Young CFers with speed, power and a good glove rarely become available with so many years of team control left. So I'd give up Harvey for Betts in a second, even if his name wasn't Mookie. Good players have longer, more consistently productive careers than good pitchers. Arms are fragile. Plus, Betts would be under team control for longer than Harvey will. Plus we'd be dealing from excess to fill a position of need. This makes too much sense for the Mets -- The Sox would never go for it. We'd probably have to include another prospect. Hey, maybe they'd take Cuddyer!

Sammy Sosa never tested positive (like Palmeiro). He never admitted using steriods (as did McGwire). He never was criminally prosecuted (Bonds, Clemens). What's everybody's problem with him? The corked bat? Sosa DID test positive, one of 104 players who tested positive during the "anonymous" testing survey in 2003 that led to the new drug policy. Sosa and A-Rod's names were leaked. Sosa worked out with trainer Angel Presinal from 2001 to 2003 in the Dominican Republic. Presinal, who also worked with Alex Rodriguez and Juan Gonzalez, has been banned by Major League Baseball from its ballparks and clubhouses. From 1993-97, Sosa emerged as an excellent major league hitter for the Cubs, after a few years with Texas and the White Sox. Then, he showed up in 98 with an new physique and started hitting like Bonds for 5 years. Then, after drug testing he faded quickly away. He is in the category of Bonds, McGwire, Tejada, Palmiero, A-Rod, Manny, Petitte, Braun and Juan Gonzalez, of great players who got caught, not players like Bagwell and Piazza, about whom there are only rumors and innuendo. If you're of the type to make those distinctions, there is evidence to do so. Me, i vote them all in, and let heaven sort them out. I'd vote for Rose too. My problem with Sosa is more the "no comprendo" testimony to congress, which damned McGwire, Palmiero and Clemens, too. Even so, i would vote for Sammy as well as 15 other guys on the outside looking in.

[video:31atomge]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDkrprZcO3Y[/video:31atomge]

i can't get past this CGI animation -- Peanuts cartoons should be simple, hand-drawn cell animation, not high techy. It's just... wrong. ranking PEANUTS cartoons -- Top 12: A CHARLIE BROWN XMAS A BOY NAMED CHARLIE BROWN ITS THE GREAT PUMPKIN SNOOPY, COME HOME CHARLIE BROWN'S ALL-STARS A CHARLIE BROWN THANKSGIVING HE'S YOUR DOG, CHARLIE BROWN RACE FOR YOUR LIFE, CHARLIE BROWN YOU'RE IN LOVE, CHARLIE BROWN YOU'RE NOT ELECTED, CHARLIE BROWN IT'S THE EASTER BEAGLE, CHARLIE BROWN IS THIS GOODBYE, CHARLIE BROWN

Or make it triangular, with some Hooters girls dressed as stewardesses, and call it the "Delta of Venus", Or put some clowns out there and make it the "Party City Porch", Or make it smaller and call it "The Verizon Vetibule", or make it wider and call it "The Verizon Horizon", Or make it a place for our new free agents to sit and call it "Bob's Discount Place"?

or any beer company with Germanic lineage could give us "The Putsch Porch".

A deal with Dick's sporting goods could get us "The Dick Deck".

the one edge we have over the Cards is that their arrogance prohibits them from overbidding on a guy like Heyward. "We're the NL Yankees," they say, "and you should be honored to play with us, so we don't pay top dollar." So we need to use that advantage. Assuming Fred has the wherewithal and Sandy believes in Heyward. As for Desmond, he's a 20/20 SS who gives you 3+ WAR every year, with a net positive dWAR every year. 2 years ago, Desmond went 24hr/24sb, with 3.8WAR. Even in a crappy year, he gave you a 2+ WAR, which is more than double what Flores produced. And he's 30, so he probably has a few productive years left. That being said, i don't think, he's a marked improvement over Flores (Dez has more defensive range, but he's more erratic, and he's got more speed, but makes less contact, with over 180 Ks a year), with Flores on the upside and Desmond having peaked and perhaps on the downside. I don't think a combo of Desmond/Flores is significantly better than either Flores/Herrera or even Tejada/Flores, so the impact we need is best served by finding an OF bat.

and the backlog will continue into 2017, with the addition of the 3 Caballeros: Vladdy, Manny, and I-Rod

Because of the backlog and the steroids issue, I've now got 16 guys on my ballot (17, if i include Pete Rose). Here are the top 10: *Bonds *Clemens Griffey --- Bagwell Piazza Walker E.Martinez --- Schilling Trammell Raines *If i exclude the 4 steroid boys, then i would add Mussina and Kent. borderline/yes(eventually, maybe): Mussina Kent *McGwire *Sosa Hoffman Sheffield Borderline/no: McGriff Wagner L.Smith worth a mention: Garciaparra Edmonds one and done: Anderson Ausmus Castillo Eckstein Glaus Grudzelanek Hampton Kendall Sweeney Winn When i looked at the numbers (WAR, JAWS, OPS+, HoFm, HoFs), i was surprised by the viability of the candidacies of both Mussina and Sheffield. I just couldn't get myself to vote for Sheff. And i still don't know how to evaluate closers. None of these guys (Hoffman, Wagner, L.Smith) have the numbers that Gossage had, but they're comparable (or better) than Sutter and Fingers, so i'm open to suggestion.

I'm less convinced that he's a stud so much as the best available guy on the market. That may be true. I'll trust Sandy on this. But if a 5+WAR season is considered an "all-star" year by stat guys, Jason's had 2 consecutive seasons of that, and he's still just 26, so I'd put my money on him. or more accurately, Fred's money.

I don't know, maybe Jones isn't the right guy, but I'd kind of like the Mets to be working the trade angle more than the FA angle here. i don't understand that view. Why give up players instead of $$, if you don't have to? How often does a 26-27 year old 5-tool stud OFer come onto the open market?

Upton's WAR over past 3 seasons = 3, 4, 3.6 Heyward = 3.4, 5.2, 6.0 I don't want to overstate the difference here, but looking at WAR, i'd say Upton has been a very productive and consistent corner OFer (and i'd be happy to have him), but that Heyward has been slightly better, is 2 years younger, is better defensively, throws better, runs better, and has major league experience in CF, and has not yet hit the offensive plateau that Upton seems to have.

If Cespedes can play CF, then so can Heyward... and he has. Heyward has played a few hundred innings in CF over the last few years, so, while it hasn't been his primary position, it's not like he doesn't have recent MLB experience there. Upton, on the other hand, hasn't played CF at all, and is a little older, and is nowhere near as productive. The only full-time CFers available are guys like Rasmus, Span, Fowler and Jackson, all of whom are strictly 2nd tier and are near or on the wrong side of 30 (Rasmus and Jackson are 29, Fowler 30, Span 32). They are backup plans, to platoon with Lagares. Our primary goal should be Heyward. And the problem with the Cano deal was that Cano was already over 31, and while still very productive, had at that point 3 consecutive years of decreasing OPS+. At his best, Cano was an 8+/year WAR player. Heyward isn't close to that yet and so doesn't warrant that sort of deal. But buying a guy's 27-32 years, at the cost of overpaying for years 33-37, is a much better sort of 10-year deal than buying a guy's 31-41 years, whatever the price. I think Heyward is probably worth an 8-year/$160m deal, and the Mets should be willing to pay that. Bu even if the bidding goes into Cano territory (10yr/$24m), Cano's deal was signed prior to the last 2 seasons, so that might be the going rate today for a player with a more modest track record but who is significantly younger and still trending upward, coming off a 6+ WAR season. The point is we shouldn't be scared off of him, if Sandy thinks he's the right fit, even if we have to overpay. This will give us a 5-year window with most of our aces and a lineup of Heyward, d'Arnaud, Comforto, Flores and Duda (with Granderson and Wright there early on at least), and Herrera, Nimmo, Cecchini, and Dom Smith in the pipeline. I like our chances. But if Heyward's already off the table, and we're looking at a 2nd tier CFer to replace Cespedes and platoon with Lagares, then i'm not excited, particularly with the Cubs' young studs on the upswing.

Centerfield wrote: Mark Carig has an article in Newsday that indicates that the Wilpons don't intend to significantly increase payroll. It appears to be all speculation but sounds very plausible if you take into account recent history. Effectively he writes off Murphy and Cespedes. Heyward and Upton are off the table too. He thinks Parra and Span are more likely targets. I don't know how to link it from my phone, but should be easy for you guys to find. I don't know. Thinking about losing talent like Cespedes and Murphy while listening to management justify Gerardo Parra is pretty fucking depressing. I hate the Fucking Wilpons. I hope Carig is wrong. Why is Heyward off the table? He fits all the parameters. He's 27, just coming into the prime of his career; his WAR over the last 3 seasons has increased from 3.4, to 5.2, to 6.0 (Fangraphs); his speed allows him to hit just about anywhere in the lineup; his arm and overall defense are excellent, and he has experience in CF. The only reason we may not sign him is money (assuming he's not otherwise opposed to coming to a pennant winning team in NY), and that would be outrageous betrayal by the Wilpons, and proof that the notions we've had about their financial situation are true.

and we were right... there was no way we should have given up a draft pick for Cuddyer last year.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Problem with your 2B platoon is that both guys are RH hitters. wouldn't be the first time. situational platoon, with Flores sometimes sliding to SS/3b, as needed.

Farmer Ted wrote: This potential 2016 starting lineup doesn't knock me over. It's better than most lineups they threw out there in 2015, but not scary. Granderson Wright Conforto Duda d'Arnaud Lagares Flores/Herrera Tejada/Flores if you replace Lagares with a RHed power bat between Conforto and Duda, suddenly that lineup looks a lot different different. And if Herrera is next year's Conforto, then a 2b platoon with him and Flores could be formidable.