Ceetar

Edgy MD wrote: He's throwing strikes consistently. There's something he's never seemingly done. Remember when Mike Pelfrey had his shit together for half a season? Pelfrey had a bit of an on-season/off-season thing going but it was mostly luck. Wheeler's statcast data is missing so I can't even dig in the way I want.

metsmarathon wrote: Centerfield wrote: So the way the deadline is going, and I realize there is time left, it seems like the Mets will try to contend in 2019. The good news is at least the best writers seem to finally understand that this is going to mean opening up payroll. yabbut.... do the wilpons share that same understanding? Wilpons always seem to be able to be pitched to, so I think there's a good shot New GM is able to convince them to spend a little more, at least in key spots. Wasn't that one of their supposed rules for when they hired Sandy? "Sell us on how you're going to make this team good" I mean, granted, sometimes it's a snake oil salesman. The GM thing is going to be such a crux of it all, it's hard to say anything with any conviction about anything. Does Callaway stay? The coaches? A new GM is going to start bringing in 'his guys' up and down the organization, does that start immediately or do they take a year or so to assess the current staff? Do we hire another analytic person or two to get 'above average' over just average? The entire training staff is new this year as well, and it seems like they might be at least partially data/science driven, do they expand that? utilize it? Sandy's been pretty willing to just punt defense (though it seems like the intent was to be better on the infield this year, it just didn't work out), will the new guy favor some good glove work?

Edgy MD wrote: Mets seven games behind the Nats. A sweep here could get some people fired, and possibly Bryce Harper traded. I mean, it's post trading deadline. He won't clear waivers. They can trade him to the one team that claims him, but they'll get even less for him that way.

d'Kong76 wrote: Ceetar wrote: Sure, but they're hardly the only bad owners. And they're probably nowhere near as bad as they're made out to be nor are they the worst. And Limburger cheese isn't the only smelly cheese. It's just the most famous. And there's nothing wrong with smelly cheese.

d'Kong76 wrote: I get all that, doesn't make the Wilpon's good owners. They've worn out their welcome and need to go. Fifteen years ago I made fun of people who felt that way, now I could be their poster child. Sure, but they're hardly the only bad owners. And they're probably nowhere near as bad as they're made out to be nor are they the worst. Nor do we deserve anything more or less than the Blue Jays because New York. Nor is there literally any chance that anything other than an act of a god likely to change the Mets ownership.

d'Kong76 wrote: I'm not whining, I'm pointing out that a team from NEW YORK CITY is cheap (broke) and hasn't won DICK since 1986. Is it just about winning it all? Cause I mean, since 2004, 14 seasons, both teams have been to the Series the same amount of times. One lost the short-season coin flip, the other won it. They lost, it sucks, but like, if they'd won that series nothing would actually be different except the results of a few timely games and yet this argument would be bunk.

Chad Ochoseis wrote: I suspect that if we cared to look, we'd find 29 teams in any given year that would have articles like this written about them. and the 30th is the Marlins and it's just because no one cares.

smg58 wrote: smg58 wrote: Given that Brach has not been good at all this year (4.85 WHIP, 1.77 ERA) ... . Please tell me you've got those two figures backwards. It would be an extremely remarkable (and somewhat dubious) accomplishment if I didn't. I don't feel like doing the math,but I'm pretty sure that's impossible! I mean, I guess it's not impossible, you could load the bases, have the next two guys score on just completely dumb errors like a catcher throwing to third while the guy runs home, and then walk 2 more. But still, virtually impossible.

For all the whining, the Wilpons wouldn't even be like top 5 in owners that would be removed under some sort of 'performance based' audit of MLB teams. Might be top 10, but it's not like they're an outlier by any stretch.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: For a team with just about the worst record in baseball, the Mets sure do have a helluva lotta untouchables and guys that no one wants to see get traded. Turns out there's been a lot of bad luck this season. Anyway, I'd keep Wheeler because he's a good pitcher that kept getting hurt during his "polishing" phase that maybe is finally reaching that potential thanks to being able to finally pitch regularly. But there's certainly an argument for trading him now or in the offseason at the peak of his value because it's certainly possible he'll never be this good again, or he'll get hurt because he's a pitcher. You're gonna have to pay to replace him though, but if you can swap him for assets that aren't as easy to buy..

it seems almost a given that the DH is going to happen along with expansion (And possibly some sort of realignment associated with that). Personally I hope it's 4 teams (2 in say, Mexico, 1 in southwestern canada to help travel considerations all around) but either way that's 50-100 more player jobs, and it's going to shift the percentage of revenue going to the players at least for a few years. (Or maybe not. Do two new teams generate 200 million in revenue for the league? they might..) Might serve to dilute to the pitcher pool some, which might help balls in play if that's a concern. We might actually get more playoffs this way. I don't see MLB wanting to abandon the one-game wild card thing so I think you gotta keep the division even. I'd favor four 8 team divisions over 8 4 team ones, but I can see them going the NFL way and it'll make some weird divisions and a lot of teeth gnashing over some division winners in the future. But byes don't really work in baseball. But with 2 8 team divisions you might have to eliminate 'winning the division' as super meaningful. NHL style with the top 3 winning? four wildcards (per league) they each play each other in a 1-game elimination and then play the division winner?

Or they don't really like den Dekker.

Mex17 wrote: Not to be overtly morbid, but the next checkpoint on this will be when Fred comes to his natural earthly end. Fred may have some personal equity with Manfred and the rest of the owners that Jeff does not have and will not carry down to Jeff once Fred is gone. So, it's conceivable (although not verifiable) that they are just waiting the situation out due to respect for the elder Wilpon. I think that very well may be the checkpoint, but more from finding out if Jeff really wants to be in this circle or if he has other aspirations and might want to ride into the sunset and do something else rather than own a baseball team. But that seems unlikely. Maybe he takes a step away and let's someone else within Sterling run things, but I doubt he decides to up and sell. He actually owns 4% of the team personally even.

seawolf17 wrote: A Boy Named Seo wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: Having gotten that off my chest, the Jays on said to be on the verge of finding a new employer for RHP JA Happ although the specifics on his new address have yet to be revealed. The Yanx, the Cubs, and the Brewers are said to be hot on the trail of his tail. Looks like Happ to the Yankees is done for Brandon Drury + other stuff. Outfielder Billy McKinney, sez the internet. So basically eight or ten JA Happ starts in exchange for spare parts. Does that count as spare parts? Hard to tell because NY media always talks up the Yankees garbage. I feel like they were all about the Drury. McKinney is a 23 year old outfielder, just getting to the majors, maybe useful? Also didn't Drury just get hit in the hand? isn't this pending physicals? Anyway, I don't think Happ is really much of anything to be excited about.

evaluating them by team ranking is tough though. Brewer's #13 prospect probably doesn't equate to Oakland's #13 prospect or to Yankees #13 prospect.

we really want to talk about this again? I know I don't. It's not happening. If there was cause as the Madoff money was getting locked up and litigated, that's long past. MLB has shown no indication it's going to force a sale because of 'bad faith' owners or whatever that means, and the Mets wouldn't even be first in line.

I don't think it matters how damaged they are. I think you're basically setting them back to the same place so to speak.

I googled a bunch, which obviously isn't the same thing as talking to doctors or knowing his charts, but it seems to me like the general guidelines are 6-12 months to a heal from that surgery, so 6-12 from 3 months from now. Puts 2019 strongly in doubt if that's the case. He can probably start doing athletic baseball stuff in like June, but if there's any delay/setback that pushes him back into pure rehab mode, it probably puts 2019 in jeopardy. Depending where the Mets are I guess, he could sneak back in for September part-time role, or just some major league reps if they're out of it. I wonder which foot you do first. Right cause it's the load-bearing/swing foot?

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Kernan is calculating 8-10 months after the surgery is completed. If the surgery is staggered (one heel at a time), that puts Cespedes's return at August of 2019. And that's an absolute best case scenario, timewise, let alone what condition he's gonna be in. Best case scenarios are unlikely, both logically, and statistically. Because they're best case scenarios. And that's my beef with your post and your analysis on pretty much everything. It's always an absolute best case scenario, it's always gonna be the player's best season ever. Every player. All the time. Even if he's back next year August, (and I doubt it because injury return predictions are historically wildly optimistic) he'll have missed most of the last three seasons. The actuarial tables aren't on his side. I've already cited the facts as to why my post is not the best case scenario, and it's really besides the point. What does it matter if the ASB is wildly optimistic? Why does it offend you so much that I'm hopeful about some Mets things? I'm not even suggesting the Mets operate 2019 with a plan to play Cespedes 70 games post ASB. I'm merely stating I think that's the time frame we're looking at. Were you against this contract to begin with? Because surgery or not he'd be under contract in 2019 and 2020. If you think he'll be that diminished that much by age it was clearly a bad signing. If you think this surgery, which isn't exactly cutting edge new surgery with a low rate of success, is going to ruin him, why. (don't say "because it's the Mets" that's not a reason) It's meant to clear up something that's bothering him, something that took years to degenerate. I think there's probably little risk it becomes debilitating again in a year and a half before his time with the Mets is up. But saying, as Kernan did, that anything you get from Cespedes after and 8-10 month surgery encompassing and off-season for a player with 27 months left on his contract is just dumb. Centerfield wrote: It’s ridiculous that no reporter sought clarity on the time frame. It is the first thing everyone asks. Just goes to show you there are no Einsteins on this beat. I'm kinda just happy no one asked why he isn't doing both at once.

Gonna need clarity on this 8-10 month window, but it has to be from the first surgery right? It makes zero sense to ever float a timeline that's 2-3 months short of the truth? Apparently this must be different than what Tulowitski had. He seemingly had both heel spur surgeries at once. The initial reports say 8 weeks. This was roughly 4/2 and he hasn't done anything yet though. Anyway, a lot of editorializing in that Kernan article. 'brutal heel surgery'? sources? research? A lot of LOLMets with no facts. "Everything does not go right in the Mets' world" "No bigger if than one attached to the Mets" dude, this is just crass. The crux of it is true. The Mets can hope that Cespedes is available for the second half, but you don't plan on that. I don't know why they would. Hell, I don't think they would've signed Jay Bruce if Conforto was healthy, and he was only slated to miss a month. Also pushes the dumb narrative that the Mets were "Cespedes' team" and that "he carried them in 2015 (and 2016?)" when that's pretty much never true in baseball. team game. Whatever. So many players have injuries, big ones, big surgeries, and come back, even at 34. To assert that the game is faster and aging is harder and that a Met having surgery will basically just be dead to baseball forever is unrealistic and stupid. Maybe Cespedes is diminished and is only 15% better than average instead of 35 or 40? Maybe he's merely average? That's still valuable.

I'd imagine it depends on what the setback was that pushed him to 2020. Is it spinal stenosis? Did his foot fall off? is he dead? Anyway, how soon until he can play golf again?

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Sure. That's if everything goes right and Yoenis and the Mets get the best possible result. Which is what you always take for granted is going to happen. You left out the part where next year, 11 Mets are gonna have the career seasons of their lifetimes. If everything goes right, it's closer to the 8 in the "8-10" projected window and he gets about 3 weeks of rehab/spring games he could be back by Opening Day/early April. If it's 10, that's June 1st. So I'm literally suggesting we estimate nearly 2 more months. If you're going to add on at least 2-3 more, I suggest you cite something other than 'LOLMets' for that reasoning.

Sure, but this is with an eye towards 2021-2022 and I'd rather focus on 2019-2020. But yes, if the Mets intend to punt and rebuild, absolutely trade him, that's almost a given.

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Ashie62 wrote: He'd be 34 2020 will be Yoenis's 35 year old season, the way these things are calculated. And that's if he didn't pull the Cuban baseball scam about lying about his age. Plus he'll have missed most of the last three seasons due to major surgery. That's like 75 in baseball years. this is his age 32 season. he'll be back for the second half of his age 33 season, under contract through his 34th. He literally just hit a home run in the majors, and mashed this year before the aches caught up to him. So he'll be off for roughly a year, I wouldn't expect a huge dropoff. It's a fairly straight-forward surgery, as these things go.

A Boy Named Seo wrote: Ceetar wrote: fuck prospects. None of them will approach being as good as Thor is. Keep him, win next year. It's not absurd. Thor was a heralded prospect we acquired who became good. Prospects become good all the time. Some of them great. Get several heralded ones and we could not only replace his production, but get better at multiple positions. It's not absurd. sure, 'all the time' but it's still a crazy low percentage. Unless you're getting like, top 5 picks that are already mashing in the upper levels, it's a crapshoot. Keep the talented guy, fill in around him.