Ceetar

I kinda like the yearly slogans. They're cheesy and corporate, but you gotta do that stuff anyway, so why not a slogan? The ones that are mallable are kinda fun to watch the evolution over the season (The Team, The Time, the 2006 NL East Champions..) We'll see where "We Believe in __" goes over the season.

Well, I see the stockpiling of outfielders as nice depth, and a hint of a trade. I also imagine Omar's hoping someone has a hot April and he can use him as a trade piece once Beltran's back.

Full autonomy is actually the name of one of the offices at Citi Field.

I know people disagree with this, but I didn't see much of value from Tatis defensively (especially at first) He seemed to have sure hands, so he tended not to make bad catches and throws, but in terms of fielding, getting to balls, etc, my impressions were not positive. And his versitility is extremely limited (speaking from a please please please no platoon please please standpoint), because Francoeur generally plays every day (and if he sits because he sucks, Tatis isn't the answer..) Bay will play pretty much every day and Pagan is better (assuming Beltran back by May), Cora's got 2B (and SS) Wright plays virtually every day, and if Murphy is really our 1B, he plays pretty much every day too. Maybe he'd get a couple more days out from the giving a young player some rest standpoint (something Manuel's never proven to understand too well, rest..). So while we do need a 1B/3B backup guy on the roster, that's really it. I'm not sure Tatis has that much power left, he does appear to be on the decline and it still bothers me that it took him months to fix his swing the way Keith told us he should since pretty much Spring..

Sure, and I'm sure some of the players are feeling down about things, it'd be nice if the Manager could come out with some confidence instead of basically knocking his guys. Again. If lots of things go right, the Mets could be good. It's his job to try to make those things happen. If he doesn't think he can, what he's really saying is "Please fire me, I'm not good enough to do this."

You'd think. I thought Delgado's limp was a death knell for his contract though, so why would something as inconsequential as signing a guy that can play first base stop them?

He's not a power guy, but I'd rather see Jesus Feliciano than GMJ. It's weird how some guys seem to have decent seasons and just never get the call. I mentioned Feliciano last summer I believe, when we were full of injuries and he and Sullivan were doing well in the minors. He had an excellent WBC (I even saw him there), for what that limited sample size is worth, but he's not completely useless and while I'm not sure if he can play a good CF or not, could he do worse than GMJ?

If you look at Tim Redding, knowing nothing about him except he's a baseball player, what team would you peg him as playing for? He just looks like a perfect Rockie to me.

I'd forgotten about Parnell. Barring a trade for a starter, does it really hurt the Mets to try Parnell out starting again in the spring? I understand guys like Niese and Nieve are more likely to 'win' spots but what's the harm? Confidence? It's not like he can't just slot into the bullpen even if he's stretched out to be a starter in spring. If anything it'll help since starter generally go easy, 90-100 pitches in the cold/early April and having Parnell comfortable for 2-3 innings could help relieve long term strain on everyone else in the pen.

The Yankees made the claim because it required the Red Sox to keep Carter on the 40 man roster. It was solely to eat up a spot so they couldn't bring up someone else. What I've always wanted to know is..who's at fault? Who leaked Carter's name (and it was leaked before the Yankees made the claim) the Mets or the Sox or some stupid reporter? The Yankees never would've put in that claim had they not known about the trade.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Given that one of its top two cogs is out until at least May (and likely longer), and that C and 1B and (potentially) RF are-- relative to league-average-- offensive black holes, how good do you expect this offense to be, exactly? Actually, I think he's out until around May 1st, probably sooner. But not much to say on that right now. This offense is the same offense that led the league in runs scored in 2008 and was still somehow near the top in getting on base last year. It's a good offense. Francoeur will probably play at least 'around' where Church did, Bay replaces Delgado's power and Murphy will outdo whatever collection of junk we ran out in LF in the past. Do you really think whatever C mess we throw out there can be much worse than what Schneider's given us? I'm disappointed that things haven't fallen into place with a SP, and hopefully Omar does come through with a trade for another pitcher, but between injury-prone guys, overpaid guys, guys that wanted to stay on the west coast..there hasn't been a lot of options. Things broke badly last year, who knows, maybe we catch some breaks this year. Maybe not signing another pitcher causes Niese to get a shot and he sparks Gooden comparisons. Who knows.

Edgy DC wrote: I don't expect all three to bounce back. I expect one to do significantly better, one to do a little better and one to spend the year frustrated by injury or failure. That seems reasonable, and that's roughly what I'm expecting as well. A little above .500 combined for all three of them. I figure if you factor in a QS guy like Garland where you have a chance to win every one of his, and Santana's, starts you are in good shape, especially given the offense is good. And it's not like the Mets will need 98 games to make the playoffs this year, although you never know.

the numbers are silly. and Garland is better than the typical 5th guy on most staffs. I was using 5 as in, 5th, as in the Mets ave 4 guys right now and need another. Yes, those other guys are question marks, but they're also all capable of giving you a typical top of the rotation start at any given moment. So with an Ace at the front and an anchor like Garland in the back, if you can maximize the flashes of brilliance from the other three while minimizing Perez's 2.2 9BB outings, you're in good shape.

Santana's gonna be the guy most likely to do it, and if he stays healthy I think he just might. (in which he gets an extension, wins three rings and gets his number on the wall, etc) I could see Perez doing it too. Wasn't it A.J. Burnett that did it with 9 walks? Or am I thinking of a different ex-Marlin? I expect good things out of all our pitchers actually. I think they're all going to take a step forward in their careers. I think the Mets expect (but hopefully aren't relying on) good things as well. I think they may have overpaid for Lackey if they thought those three were going to open up at least two roster spots next year.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Their current position seems to be that, among Niese and Nieve and Figueroa and whoever else, they should be able to find a decent fifth starter. And that's probably true. But the problem is, Pelfrey, Maine, and Perez are all question marks, and what the Mets really needed this winter was a number 2 starter who would slot behind Santana and ahead of those other guys. And it no longer looks like there's any hope of that happening. I think there was plenty of disagreement on that. I've always maintained they need a solid, consistant, healthy 5th person pitching in the rotation that could offset a question marks in the other three. Sheets is a question mark, even if he's got more upside. Garland seems to fit that, as do a couple of guys that may be available via trades. They've got a good offense and can win games. Perez, Pelfrey and Maine are all capable of throwing up a "#2" performance during any start. The idea is to minimize the weak performances or the 6th choices and help rest the bullpen. A #2 was never readily available for anything reasonable, unless you count too many prospects for Halladay and tying up 40-50 million in two pitchers.

TransMonk wrote: Yeah, Smoltz' shoulder scares me more than his age. He had great numbers even in 2006-07 when he was 39 and 40. Even his 6 starts in 2008 before the shoulder injury were fine. But he looked like dog poo in Boston last year and below average in St Louis. Ouch. I just remembered I saw Smoltz start a game last year at Yankee Stadium. Was there (for free) with my Uncle for the first game of that series, saw him get absolutely shelled. (Of course, Joba on the other side walked more guys than Ollie usually does but managed to strand most of them, also much like Ollie) Wasn't a real great game, I much preferred the other game I saw in that dump where John Lannan dominated them.

Some secrecy would do this organization good. I'm been suspecting a trade for a bit now. Omar's comment about Nieve just sounds like trying not to sound desperate, which could mean he's talking value about an opposing SP and how much the Mets would give up. We'll see. We'll also see about Garland, who I still feel may have been the best option all along.