Fish in a Stolen Barrel: Fun with the Mets.com Mailbag
With the winter meetings coming up, it seems like a good time to revisit the glories of offseasons past, right? At least that's the idea that one fan writing to Marty Noble had earlier this week.
Which offseason do you think was the best in the Mets' history? With Kevin McReynolds and David Cone coming aboard, 1986-87 comes to mind. What's your opinion?
-- Michael C., Fort Drum, N.Y.
That gave good ol' Marty an opening to reminisce about the moves that built the team in the '80s, fairly interesting stuff. It's when he dabbles in evaluation of more recent offseasons that we enter "seriously, WTF?" territory:
Pedro Martinez and Carlos Beltran signed on in the 2004-05 offseason. But, to me, free-agent signings lack the cachet of trades. The Mets stole their right fielder and catcher, Ryan Church and Brian Schneider, from the Nationals and acquired Johan Santana last year. Not too bad an offseason in 2007-08.
Wait, what was that again?
The Mets stole their right fielder and catcher, Ryan Church and Brian Schneider, from the Nationals
It took me a little time to respond to that sentence, especially since I knocked the mouse off of my desk while I was reading it. Clearly, Noble is either incapable of admitting he was wrong, has a really odd definition of stealing, or thinks that we can't remember things that happened last year. Note his omission of what the Mets gave up in this alleged heist. I've already vented my extreme dislike of the Lastings Milledge trade on more than one occasion, and the main points of that argument still stand. A year ago, I thought the idea that a team that traded a promising young outfielder for the guy he'd be if he aged 6 years without developing any further as a hitter and a catcher whose defense allegedly made up for his inability to hit his way out of a paper bag (as long as you don't count "keeping the ball from skipping to the backstop" as defense or anything) was the one committing the theft was absurd. Knowing what we know now, that this "win-now" move failed at its stated goal, to defend it, let alone praise it as some sort of awesome genius move, is insanity.
But wait, there's more! Noble concludes that the 1998-1999 offseason was the best in Mets history. I'm not about to argue with that; just like pretty much every fan of my generation, the mere mention of the 1999 team and its heroes is enough to bring out my warm and fuzzy side.
But no Mets offseason compares with 1998-99. Mike Piazza could have demanded a trade, but re-signed. The Mets then signed Robin Ventura as a free agent, which allowed them to move Edgardo Alfonzo to second base; signed Pat Mahomes, who produced an 8-0 record; traded for Roger Cedeno, who scored 90 runs; signed Rickey Henderson, who scored 89 and emboldened Cedeno; signed Armando Benitez, who replaced John Franco when the incumbent closer injured his finger in July; and signed Orel Hershiser, who won 13 games.
What I am about to argue with is the idea that, amidst the signings of Piazza (and being eligible for free agency != "could have demanded a trade") and Ventura and Rickey (isn't it funny how just about every big move Noble is citing from the best offseason is a free-agent signing, just three paragraphs after he said they "lack the cachet of trades"?), we should also be celebrating the likes of Pat Mahomes, who was pretty much a textbook case of "it's better to be lucky than good." Mahomes walked 37 batters (5 intentionally) in 63 2/3 innings but got away with it thanks to a .224 BABIP. Of course, he did go 8-0 and everyone knows that wins are the most important measure when it comes to evaluating a middle reliever, right?
15 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Love this feature
Noble is always good for a great laugh.
yea
i’m glad this is a regular thing.
I thought I mis-remembered history when I read “Mike Piazza could have demanded a trade.” Doesn’t the writing of that sentence take an extreme lack of knowing what the F you’re talking about?
by HotChipWillBreakYourLegs on Dec 5, 2008 8:59 AM EST up reply actions
aw, poor marty
i really enjoy marty’s post game write ups on mlb.com. he’s got pretty decent writing voice and he knows and cares about the team. unfortunately, when he tries to add analysis, usually in the form of these mailbags, he ends up looking like a dolt. he really needs to stick to the journalism side of the game and leave the number crunching and retrospection to others.
oh well.
There might be some low-hanging fruit in these mailbags
But it doesn’t make it any less funny.
'Catsmeat!' he cried. 'I see it all. It was that chump, Catsmeat.'
by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on Dec 5, 2008 10:25 AM EST reply actions
Mahomes
may have been lucky, but his results in 1999 were good. I fail to see how the fact a guy got lucky for one season makes picking him up before that season a bad thing?
Also, Milledge had a 91 OPS+ and played terrible defense, while Church had a 106 and played very good defense. And I have a strong feeling that Church would have finished with much better numbers if not for the concussion – not saying he would have kept up his torrid early season pace, but I don’t think he would have slumped as hard as he did. So your statement that they picked up “the guy he’d be if he aged 6 years without developing any further as a hitter” is patently false. I wouldn’t characterize the trade as anything close to a steal, but I also don’t think it was a bad trade.
lookng back...
the mets were bad enough in the first half of the season with church playing well…who knows how much worse they would have been with milledge starting in RF. although maybe that would have led to randolph’s firing sooner, which wouldn’t have been such a bad thing.
still, nats probably win out in the long run on this one.
Too early to call this one
We may end up looking terrible in the Milledge trade or we may end up coming out okay in the long run, but Noble’s assertion that we “stole” Church and Schneider is just absurd.
'Catsmeat!' he cried. 'I see it all. It was that chump, Catsmeat.'
by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on Dec 5, 2008 11:29 AM EST up reply actions
Time
My feeling when the trade was made was that the Mets would probably improve themselves a bit in the short term while ultimately losing in the long term. I think that’s probably still true.
if Marty Pants sees crime in this fashion
i think I’ll go let him “steal” my wallet
I.M. Forme
"When you get yourself in to trouble is when you feel you have to do something, and then you get yourself in trouble." --Omar Minaya
I agree about Mahomes
Kind of unfair to poke at Noble for this one. While Mohomes was lucky, he did provide us with an ERA+ of 121 for the 1999 season. Noble is basically saying Mohomes was good in 99 and he’s correct, being lucky/career year/not an indication of future performance is moot. Also, while wins is kind of shitty way of saying it, remember Noble’s readers (the ones that don’t read to make fun of him) this means something to them. One last thing, Mojomes 8 wins to 0 losses does means that, even with his middling stats, he probably had a pretty good WXRL which is a really good way of measuring a RP.
Milledge
After 8/1/08 last year: 223 PA, .318/.378/.485/.863
true, but
he had a really good August (.336/.410/.570/.980) and a decent, but not great, September (.297/.340/.385/.725). so he certainly has the potential to become an .850 OPS type of player, but i don’t think he was close to that last year.
not talking about church
1) i wasn’t suggesting church was an .850 OPS player. what i was suggesting was that just because milledge hit .863 over the last two months of the season doesn’t mean he’s that good of a player last season. he had one good month, which shows potential, but not much more
2) it is relevant how milledge performed last year because the trade was widely made for short-term gain. it seems pretty clear that the mets were better off with church/schneider on their team last year than milledge, so at least there’s some justification for the trade. whether the trade can be justified in 2009 or beyond depends on how each of the players involved in the trade perform.
Noble
Milledge must have taught his dog how to rap or something. Valentine was so right when he pegged Noble as a moron.

by 























