My first time posting here, though I’ve been lurking for a little while; I’ve been thinking about Mike Newman’s excellent post on the Daniel Murphy Dilemma, and since I already have a SB Nation account, I thought I’d post some related thoughts here.

I think Murphy lies at the heart of the problem for the Mets’ off-season. Heading into the Winter Meetings, Omar Minaya’s priorities seem to be a closer, and a starting pitcher to slot in behind Santana-Maine-Pelfrey. That sounds about right to me, and while I’d love to add a power-hitting corner outfielder to the shopping list (say, Adam Dunn at 3 years and $45 million, with the idea that Dunn could slide over to 1B for 2010 in the event that Delgado departs at the end of his contract), this may be prohibitively expensive: whether it’s Fuentes, at 3 years and $33 million, or K-Rod, at 4 years and $60 million, plus Oliver Perez, AJ Burnett, Derek Lowe, or some lesser talent, signing a closer and a starting pitcher is going to eat up all the space that was cleared when Pedro and Moises Alou came off the books. While there may be a trade out there to bring in a leftfielder, I’m not so bullish on Minaya’s chips (outside of Fernando Martinez, the attractive talents are at lower levels; I may be wrong, but I don’t think Eddie Kunz, Mike Carp, and Jon Niese buy you much). Practically speaking, Murphy is the likely, best candidate for everyday leftfielder.

That said, I am with Newman all the way on this: I think the Murphy to Rusty Greer comp is spot on, and if my eyes believe that Murphy can be consistently above-average, if not quite star-level, in leftfield, my brain is pretty sure it’s not going to happen all at once. After all, Murphy’s .313/.397/.473 debut was built on a .386 BAPIP; and if Murphy’s improving walk rate (12.9 at A+ in 2007; 10.2 at AA, and 8.3 with the Mets in 2008) and ISO (.145 in ’07; .188 at AA and .160 with the Mets in ’08) are positive indicators, neither his amateur-pedigree nor past performance indicate that Murphy is ready to replicate his 2008 numbers over the course of a full season. This brings us to what I see as the Murphy Dilemma: due to (probable) financial restraints, and to a lesser degree, a desire to foster Murphy’s development, the 2009 Mets, like the 2008 Mets before them, will be fielding mediocrities at C, 2B, LF, and RF. (Of course, the Mets can count on very good to elite production from 1B, 3B, SS, and CF; to those who think the Mets should sell-out to win now, I would remind that the Wright-Reyes-Beltran-Santana core should be together through 2011.)

If only Murphy could play a passable 2B! Because, wow, is that Castillo contract ugly; the Mets are on the hook for 3 years and $18 million, and at that length and that number (and Castillo’s lack of production), I have a hard time believing the contract is moveable. If it was one, or even 2 years, perhaps you could pawn him off on a second division club who wanted to make a show of respectability; otherwise, you’re talking a swap of bad contracts. I thought Newman’s Zito/Castillo deal was interesting; Andruw Jones might be interesting too, but neither of those moves supplies a 2B for 2008. Unfortunately, the prevailing wisdom is that Murphy’s glove doesn’t play at second, and if Florida was able to let Dan Uggla learn on the job, the Mets don’t have the luxury of low expectations. Like slotting Murphy into left, Castillo at 2B is a bitter pill to swallow, and yet it may be the right play: you hope that he comes in healthy and in better shape, and that he can give you good OBP and solid defense; if it doesn’t work out, he’s sunk cost.

What I want to suggest it that the Mets should nonetheless try Murphy at second in a platoon: when flyball pitchers Santana (2008 G/F 1.08) and Maine (.99) are on the mound, play Murphy at 2B and Endy Chavez at LF; with a groundball pitcher like Pelfrey (1.62), play Castillo or Argenis Reyes at 2B and Murphy in LF. By no means do I think this is a revolutionary idea: it’s the kind of thing the Strat-minded are wont to suggest, and the kind of thing that most front offices and field managers are loathe to consider. And yet, while I don’t see a whole lot of production on the Mets bench, there is a fair amount of positional versatility. Minaya, for his various missteps, has been a pretty creative wheeler-dealer, but it would be nice to see the Mets see if they could find some value by employing creativity on the field.