Ceetar

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Wait, but what if they have fireworks at the Parnell press conference later? Wait wait... INDOOR fireworks! Excited yet, or ar-- Ceetar wrote: It's also not a given that the 17.5 is more value than K-Rod provides. /Head explodes It's just not. potential value is not value. I repeat, what if that money gets spend on someone who has a 2011 season like Santana? Even smart GMs sometimes sign bad guys, or guys get injured. You obviously would rather take the chance with it over the ceiling Frankie provides, but stop speaking absolutes, because that's not how it works.

soupcan wrote: Why would you blame the brown-out on the energy efficient fridge? It's much more likely to be your wife's blow dryer. more likely the extremely faulty wine fridge that only keeps temp in one section and needs to be WD40d every other month at least. I'll let you decide which player the wine fridge is.

I don't see why you're insistant on extrapolating on what I'm saying. All I'm saying is this news does not mean "yay, now we get Reyes!" We could still not get him. We could've gotten him anyway. It's also not a given that the 17.5 is more value than K-Rod provides. (If you need an example, What if last year the Yankees had decided not to spend the 15mill on Mariano and had used it to sign Feliciano and Soriano? Not quite teh same as they're all relievers, but the guy you spend the money on could be Mo Vaughn or just trip and break his leg for that matter) The percentages suggest it's much much more likely. But that's all a GM really controls, percentages. (Paraphrasing Sandy here) The almost certain probability that this ultimately makes the Mets better in the long run is not exciting. It's merely a good financial decision, but in terms of how I feel about the team in general, at this moment, it's hardly more than buying an energy efficient refridgerator. Sure, that money saved probably allows me to keep Netflix even with the price going up, but the fridge could still end up causing brown outs or end up being a faulty model.

Worley's pitching? I hadn't really looked ahead yet. Why? Not that I'm complaining, if I'm gonna sit (513, row 6) in the stands for pyrotechnics night and watch the Mets, I'd rather them face Worley.

Edgy DC wrote: We all know. It's $17.5 million large. That's exactly how large it is. you're mincing words. Only Sandy knows how important it was, and how much that large pile of $5 bills was going to affect his ability to sign Reyes.

Edgy DC wrote: Of course there's a relationship between every single transaction. But it's never been a K-Rod or Reyes situation. It was never that he had to trade him to sign Reyes, or itw ouldn't happen, or that Reyes couldn't decide to leave anyway, regardless of K-Rod. Reyes being resigned is going to be the result of a ton of different things, and freeing up payroll with Frankie is one small indirect part of it. Seems pretty large to me. $17.5 million large. It's one of many factors. Only Sandy/Fred really know how large. It's not like Sandy hasn't stated they could sign Reyes next season, regardless.

Edgy DC wrote: I agree Beltran will hurt more, but he's got no contract for next year that we need to escape. So the pressure to shed him isn't nearly as acute, and there's no harm in waiting a week or two to see how things shake out. And it won't kill us to keep him. I don't think you need to pretend that there's a relationship between shedding Rodriguez and signing Reyes. There is. Of course there's a relationship between every single transaction. But it's never been a K-Rod or Reyes situation. It was never that he had to trade him to sign Reyes, or itw ouldn't happen, or that Reyes couldn't decide to leave anyway, regardless of K-Rod. Reyes being resigned is going to be the result of a ton of different things, and freeing up payroll with Frankie is one small indirect part of it. As for Beltran, there are multiple issues. 1The agreement not to offer him arbitration, making it seem 'wasteful' to many if they let him go and get nothing next year besides the 5+ million dollars they'll still owe him regardless. However, Beltran, especially before Wright and Reyes return, has a much greater impact on the revenue of this team in August and September. Those draft picks are also part of the 'incentive' to the team that would acquire him. Teams may be willing to give up prospects for a rental if they think they're getting similar prospects via draft. The rumor about not getting compensation the same way next year based on a renegotiated CBA. I haven't heard this mentioned much lately, but presumably the people involved in labor negotiations have some thoughts on which way this will go. I don't know how much opposing GMs value 'clutch', but Beltran's 1.3 playoff OPS in 22 games is certainly pretty looking. No-trade. Beltran's experienced playoff races, and playing out the string. I don't know that he'sl ooking to go to he Pirates, or some other 'fringe' playoff team.

Maybe I'm all over the place. But I've felt all season that the impending doom of a firesale and losing Reyes (and Wright and the paint needed to paint "METS" behind home plate) was massively overstated. Maybe I should just pretend their is a direct relationship between trading K-Rod and resigning Reyes and focus on that. And this is K-Rod, who's just a reliever. I don't actually care that he's gone. Beltran's gonna hurt if it really does come to fruitition like seems inevitable.

sorry Vic, i stopped reading after "yes it is next year". talk to you next year then, i'm gonna watch baseball.

seawolf17 wrote: Ceetar wrote: I don't think Omar invisioned being up against a wall financially after 2008, the Mets were a solid bullpen from being in the thick of things and he went after it. Exactly. I think he -- and the Wilpons -- saw the cash cow that they expected a full Citi Field and thriving Madoff investments to be, and figured they'd be flush with money. Which, had the K-Rod/Putz gamble worked out (and all the injuries not happened) probably would've been the case. Or at least, the full Citi Field would've neutralized the 60-70 loss the Mets are expecting this year and kept them separate from the Madoff mess. And perhaps we wouldn't have had Jason Bay.

Edgy, you missed my point. I just mean that while I get that this is a good thing, and I'm glad that they did it, I don't get exciting for 'possibilities'. I don't want to root for anyone to get traded, or celebrate it, even Frankie. 99.9% of my enjoyment comes from the actual team on the field, which is worse now, even if slightly. I know that there is now a somewhat higher percentage that my enjoyment will be heightened sometime in the future, but that doesn't mean I'm going to look at the trade today and feel good about it. That's just now how I enjoy baseball.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Ceetar wrote: Yes, I'm not sure how the Brewers getting better is a anti-Phillies move? Certainly doesn't make the Mets or Braves more likely to beat them. Isn't it obvious? The implication is that it makes the Brewers more likely to beat the Phillies in a playoff series, thereby keeping them from the World Series. Oh, guess I wasn't giving anyone an automatic bid yet. I wouldn't put the Phillies as favorites as it is anyway as it is, but can't hurt.

Edgy DC wrote: An improvement by Acosta is certainly possible, as is a subsequent opportunity for a Manny Alvarez, a Jose De La Torre, a John Lujan, or a somebody else. The back end is for auditioning and redemption. I've been done with Acosta for a while. I'd have rather been auditioning and redemptioning some of those guys with or without Frankie. And I hope it's one of those instead of Thayer or Igarashi or Misch.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Ceetar wrote: I'm not sure how that silver lining works out, are you suggesting the Braves beat out the PHillies and the Brewers take the WC? That's a current first-place Quaffmaking Crew you're talking about, sir. (Tied with the one run by the Souse.) Yes, I'm not sure how the Brewers getting better is a anti-Phillies move? Certainly doesn't make the Mets or Braves more likely to beat them. So the move is rated on the assumption that we trust Sandy Alderson blindly? Supposedly there were other, similar, offers or bites. I'm not going to make assumptions about how desperate Sandy was or what other possibilities were out there. I expect him to make this team better, and while jettisoning salary certainly raises the percentages he can do that next year, it's not quite next year is it? Perhaps there is more value on players to be named later, there probably is, but I don't think it was unreasonable to expect an actual player to be named now. That's how most trades go. I'm sure there will be additions to match this subtraction, because regardless of what fans think, it's too early for the _organization_ to write the season off. Maybe an analogy? I know I have to sell my old car to get a new car, but it's the new car that's exciting, not selling the old car that's done me well or even the window shopping for the new one.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: If it's the one hole on your otherwise-unsinkable ship, you can overpay the vet closer and sleep well. Of course, that ain't us. was in 2008, even if he should've tried to do something earlier. But no, it wasn't this year, and it's been pretty obvious all year that Sandy wasn't going to allow that option to vest. Are new capable guys gonna emerge from the backend? or is Acosta going to get more innings?

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: JCL: Comparing Gamel to Murphy might be an insult to Murphy. But, hell, Nelson Cruz was a post-hype guy, too. Cee: "Two random minor leaguers" are worth a lot more than you seem to value them, even if they're less winning-lotto-ticket and more reach-in-the-grab-bag. And if you're looking into in-season silver linings-- it's possible that Sandy just put a potential Philly playoff roadblock over the top. I'm not sure how that silver lining works out, are you suggesting the Braves beat out the PHillies and the Brewers take the WC? It's not so much that I'm dissing the value of those minor leaguers, I'd just like to know who they are, but I guess logistically might as well watch a crop of 10 or so and pick the best two a month or two down the road.

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Ceetar wrote: metirish wrote: I think you are far too optimistic in Omar's long term thinking strategy. I think others are too willing to be automatically "Omar did everything completely wrong" Not that he's not without faults, but he also wasn't working with the same budget Sandy is. That shouldn't have excused him. Really I suspect Omar was put up to the Rodriguez contract -- as well as the idiotic Putz trade -- by Jeff Wilpon. You can find JW quotes from the day that offseason began telegraphing the awful offseason to come ("We'll be making big changes in the bullpen" "addition by subtraction" etc etc). It's Omar's fault for either not standing up to Jeff and/or for agreeing with the notion that the way to solve last year's problems was to pay the most money for the free agent with the most saves. This should have been easily apparent given what a failure the Billy Wagner contract was. I don't think the Wagner contract was a failure. Sucked that he blew the save in the NLCS, but those things happen to them all. Sucks that he got injured in 2008 though. I don't mind overpaying for guys if they're going to contribute and it's not going to inhibit you from making other moves. I don't think Omar invisioned being up against a wall financially after 2008, the Mets were a solid bullpen from being in the thick of things and he went after it. He pushed his chips into the pot, got a bad beat, and then perhaps foolishly tried to throw more chips at the problems to try to make up for it.

It's in interesting thought. I generally ignore most of what Boras says as bluster in public, but if K-Rod truly planned to block a trade as a setup man, that would certainly kill a lot of the leverage. I wonder if it was the otherway around, that Frankie switched to Boras when he learned the Mets were going to trade him and his option likely wouldn't be vesting. Boras' might be making sure everyone knows "He's a closer not a reliever" so as to try to emphasize that he will command closer money in the offseason.

metirish wrote: Is does create a potential problem...Axford starts to suck the calls for K-Rod to close get loud and bang you're on the hook. What's the rate now, 21 games with like 74 or so to play? Probably won't be a dire issue unless Axford starts to suck immediately.

metirish wrote: I think you are far too optimistic in Omar's long term thinking strategy. I think others are too willing to be automatically "Omar did everything completely wrong" Not that he's not without faults, but he also wasn't working with the same budget Sandy is.

TransMonk wrote: I never disliked Frankie. I was disappointed after the brawl, but didn't dislike the guy. Personally, I actually found more things to like about him than Wagner. And he was rarely anything but money on the field. That being said...his contract was horrible. Clearly a reaction signing and we all knew it at the time. Agreeing to a year where any reliever can make $17.5M is almost criminal. I'm glad he's gone for financial reasons. Personally I wonder if Omar intended to do just what Sandy just did if it needed to be done. Got the guy he wanted immediately, and created a workaround to limit the length. The precident is there on a smaller level, with Cora. Cora got more PT than he signed him for, and BAM, released. I think these option years are horrible for the players (besides being illegal). It's like a phantom year that the team is planning on being able to avoid from the get-go. edit: bay's contract is structured the same way. Really easy to avoid a player that's not helping from getting 600 PA. Just by sitting him against tough Righies or one DL stint.

metsmarathon wrote: there was no way we could keep him, no reason we would want to, and a thin market to trade him into. thus, no leverage. typically, the worst thing that can happen for a team in looking to trade away a veteran is that they fail to trade a player, and lose him at season's end, getting nothing in return. in our case, the worst thing that could have happened is we keep the player and are forced to pay him. thus, no leverage. This is pure speculation? Who knows how thin the market was? I mean, Milwaukee wasn't even 'rumored' for whatever that's worth. how many other suitors may have been out there? The leverage is the 2.5 weeks until the trading deadline, plus the waiver period possibilities. Could've just released him too. Maybe paying 3.5 next year is worse than paying 5million this year (or really, paying nothing this year, since they were going to pay him that anyway) or maybe it's not. And this is without getting into 'mucking with his playing time' issues, which would've been really easy if the Mets fell out of it. Then you're paying 3.5 for some draft picks. I'm not unhappy with the move, I just expected to get more than two random minor leaguers sometime in the future. Something more than a pure salary dump in early July.

Edgy DC wrote: Ceetar wrote: neither of Wagner's PTBNL probably should've gotten much, if any, playing time. I sure would've liked to have seen more of Chris Carter, especially as Lucas Duda was hitting .050 last year. I would've liked to see him earlier, and then when he failed to be good, not held onto all season and used in key pinch hitting opportunities. Duda didn't get brought up until the'd pretty much given up didn't he?

Edgy DC wrote: Ceetar wrote: Was a good pitcher, nice to have. Enjoyed for the most part (more often than most anyway) that if we could get the game to the 9th, pretty much had it won. And there's the rub, while this is true, I never considered this more true of the Rodriguez era than of any other era. He's a good pitcher, but a better one than say Wagner? even Looper was generally pretty good. Benitez pissed me off, but hey, he did usually get it done.. The question has always been how much are Sandy/Terry married to the idea of a tried and tested closer?

soupcan wrote: Doesn't matter to me. Give 'em all a shot and see who sticks. Well yeah, I doubt Terry's gonna keep a guy there if he struggles just because he called him a 'closer'. Judging by last Sunday's game, I expect it'll be Niese on days he doesn't pitch.