Monday Applesauce

by Eric Simon on Dec 8, 2008 10:33 AM EST in Link Dump Comment 25 comments

The baseball world descends on Las Vegas this week, as the sport's best and crappiest general managers alike strive to improve their teams for 2009 or beyond or, perhaps for the most adept among them, 2009 as well as beyond. I'll leave you to figure out which of these groups can count Omar Minaya as a member in good standing, but it should be sufficient to say that the Mets' GM has a lot of work to do and, if you believe the reports, he expects to leave the Bellagio at the end of the week with some new players in tow.

I'm going to do my best to keep up with the news and rumors that float around, but if you guys hear something before I do, don't hesitate to write it up as a FanShot or even in the comments. Don't let the fact that I have a day job stand in the way of your rumor-mongering!

At MetsGeek, Alex Nelson begins a positional retrospective series by examining which teams have been the most successful at generating offense from behind the plate. Like Alex, I also would have expected the Mets to be at or near the top of the list, considering the impressive offensive backstops they've featured over the years. Apparently that wasn't enough to overcome the many seasons of utter dreck they had donning the so-called tools of ignorance.

Somehow I missed it, but last week Joe Sheehan played Mets' GM for a day at Baseball Prospectus and put together a pretty reasonable offseason plan. He seems to underestimate how bad Bobby Abreu's defense was last year, but otherwise his plan is sound.

Speaking of defense, FanGraphs has added MGL's Ultimate Zone Rating (UZR), which can be found on the sortable stat pages as well as all of the individual player pages going back to 2002. When I found out I almost did this (SFW, but viewer discretion advised).

Mets Tailgate also hashes out his offseason blueprint: Lowe, Fuentes and Dunn. Sign me up.

And in the first deal of the winter meetings, the Tigers have acquired catcher Gerald Laird from the Rangers in exchange for minor league pitchers Guillermo Moscoso and Carlos Melo. Tigers reaction at Bless You Boys.

0 recs | Comment 25 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Saying Bobby Abreu has some problems playing defense

is like saying Oliver Perez has some problems with his control. I’m pretty sure Abreu is one of the top 3 worst defensive OF in baseball.

by James Kannengieser on Dec 8, 2008 11:19 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

UZR had Abreu at -25 in 2008

That’s dreadful.

by Eric Simon on Dec 8, 2008 11:33 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Sheehan also dropped Church

Whither Blastings?

by Sam Page on Dec 8, 2008 11:46 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Seems like Sheehan's plan to sign an RF rather than an LF is a little odd...

Abreu’s games played, 1998-2008:
DH: 15
CF: 22
RF: 1,843

He did play a few games in LF in his first couple of years but clearly he’s an RF. Church, you don’t know entirely how he’s going to respond to injury, but he would seem to be the nominal incumbent starter. I guess Sheehan’s plan is Murphy – Beltran – Abreu and Church as a 4th OF?

I’d love to have Juan Cruz, like he suggests, but as a type-A who was offered arbitration, I’m not sure what the real cost would turn out to be. But 12.4 K/9 and 2.3 K/BB (2008 numbers) do sound pretty good.

by JoshNY on Dec 8, 2008 12:25 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Bellagio?!

Well, at least he can pick a good hotel.

I’m really just waiting on the latest and greatest Closer / Bullpen information. I know the country is in an negative economic swoon, but I think the METS need to spend like the market they are in. Go out there and get us:

1st – An above average closer
2nd – An above average #2 starter
3rd – A solid set up guy (or two)
4th – Anything else is gravy in my opinion.

After the pieces are purchased I’m looking forward to seeing how the current pieces are put into place. Especially with Murphy, Evans and Church.

" CITI...It's only money. "

by LOUtheMETandNATSfan on Dec 8, 2008 5:30 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

John Kruk says

The Mets need K-Rod rather than Fuentes because the new Mets’ ballpark will need a face… that the “Mets Media” will need him above Fuentes.

So, we need to sign K-Rod because he’s going to make others happy, not necessarily be the best option for the team? Hmm…

Who's world is it? It's yours.

by BlackOps on Dec 8, 2008 5:47 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

That sounds eerily similar to the Fiesta Bowl committee thinking.

Due to the fact that Ohio St. “travels” better, they were selected for the Fiesta Bowl (despite two losses) instead of Boise St. (undefeated).

It’s economics baby. Do fans want to come and see Fuentes or K-Rod?

" CITI...It's only money. "

by LOUtheMETandNATSfan on Dec 8, 2008 5:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

If the Mets win

The fans will show up. Names mean nothing in the end.

by ams258 on Dec 8, 2008 6:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

agreed.

But do you have a better chance of winning with K-Rod or Fuentes? The fan base is going to be more excited with K-Rod. Do you want steak or chicken?

" CITI...It's only money. "

by LOUtheMETandNATSfan on Dec 8, 2008 6:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Depends

If the Mets can sign Fuentes for substantially less than K-Rod and then use that extra money to add a big bat or some other need, then I’d rather have Fuentes.

Money aside though, I’d of course rather have Rodriguez. But Eric’s posted quite a bit demonstrating that the difference between the two pitchers is not as great as you might think.

by ams258 on Dec 8, 2008 6:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

ok

" CITI...It's only money. "

by LOUtheMETandNATSfan on Dec 9, 2008 2:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed.

New stadium aside, which will presumably draw people anyway, a winning team is the recipe for bringing people out. Hopefully those fans wouldn’t care if it was Rodriguez, Fuentes or me closing so long as the team was winning.

'Oh yes, I know all about that duty-of-a-citizen stuff. It doesn't go. There are exceptions to every rule, and this was one of them. When a man risks his liberty to come and root at a ball-game, you've got to hand it to him. He isn't a crook. He's a fan.'

by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on Dec 8, 2008 8:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

ok

" CITI...It's only money. "

by LOUtheMETandNATSfan on Dec 9, 2008 2:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Whichever

Nobody goes to the park to see the closer. Not even Yankee fans. You may go to see the starting pitcher, or a great hitter (especially on a visiting team), but no one goes to see the closer. They will, however, fill the seats for a winning team.

by BobbyV_Incognito on Dec 8, 2008 7:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

damn

that’s exactly what I was gonna say. Beat me to it. There’s a better than 50% chance the close won’t even pitch that day, so even if people were stupid enough to care about name recognition for their closer, they hopefully aren’t stupid enough to waste money to go to the park for a 40% chance of seeing him pitch one inning.

by cjmulrain on Dec 8, 2008 9:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

ok

" CITI...It's only money. "

by LOUtheMETandNATSfan on Dec 9, 2008 2:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

scared of Fuentes

Somehow he reminds me of Braden Looper. At closer, I’d rather pay a premium for a star than look for a bargain, at least here in New York, given the attention and pressure. Rodriguez has handled the spotlight, and if that kind of reasoning often drives me up the wall, there’s some appeal to it here. And Fuentes, after all, was the guy who lost his job to Manny Corpas in 2007 (though admittedly, Corpas was very good that year…).

by Patrick Clark on Dec 8, 2008 6:56 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Why does Fuentes remind you of Braden Looper? It’s certainly nothing about his mechanics or the results, and I’m guessing that you haven’t watched him pitch enough to get any kind of feel for him (please, correct me if I’m mistaken).

The evidence suggests that, all things considered (including ballpark), Fuentes might have been better than Rodriguez last season and, despite being older, we know that he has fewer innings on his arm. It appears that Fuentes may just be that “star” you’re looking for, and not merely a “bargain”. Rodriguez, outside of his first playoff stint with the Angels, actually seems to be unable to handle the pressure of the spotlight. Does that give you a warm-and-fuzzy?

If you have some substantive reason for being scared of Fuentes, please share it. Feel-claims based on insufficient evidence may fly elsewhere, but here you’re going to have to back up your assertions with reason.

by Eric Simon on Dec 8, 2008 8:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Fuentes is the Rockies (relatively unknown) closer

the Rockies came into the league in 1993. The Marlins came into the league in 1993. Braden Looper was their (relatively unknown) closer the year before we signed him. Hence, Fuentes = Looper. YES! I did it…

by cjmulrain on Dec 8, 2008 9:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Plus Brian and Braden are almost identical first names. SAME.

by James Kannengieser on Dec 8, 2008 10:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Fuentes has a secretary named Looper.

And Looper has a secretary named Fuentes.

by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on Dec 8, 2008 10:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

don't be so reactionary/what's with the piling on?

Looper’s WPA from 2001-2003, the three years before joining Mets: 1.61, 2.27, 1.99
Fuentes WPA from 2006-2008: 1.22, -.78, 2.21

You have to go back to 2005 for Fuentes’ WPA 4.0 season. Help me out with park adjustments if you’ve got ‘em. Of course, Looper’s first year with the Mets was a pretty good one.

Fuentes reminds me of Looper in that he represents, for me, an attempt to pay less than top dollar for a closer. (I can’t tell you there was somebody better or more expensive that the Mets passed up leading into 2004—maybe someone else can, I’ll try to look for it later.) When I say that Rodriguez has handled the spotlight, I’m not thinking specifically about 2002; but since that World Series, he has been a national star, even more so now after breaking the save record. (A mostly meaningless record, sure, nonetheless the national and stat-minded media were both pretty honed in on K-Rod all summer.) I suspect that there is some value to that experience, but even if there isn’t, Rodriguez has a reputation that will protect him (to a degree) if he struggles. Perhaps it’s irrational to think that Fuentes will crumble under the pressure, I just feel more confident with Rodriguez, in spite of the mileage or the declining stuff. And—at the risk of drawing further ire (and lame ridicule from the peanut gallery)—my instinct is that closer is a position that the richest clubs should be willing to overpay for.

At any rate, it’s an opinion, and I don’t think it’s a particularly insidious one.

One thing that will be interesting is to see how the closers market falls out. It seems to me whichever of the K-Rod, Fuentes, Wood threesome will get more from the Mets than they will from anyone else. No, I don’t have any data to back that supposition up.

by Patrick Clark on Dec 8, 2008 11:12 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Better

Fair point about the leeway Rodriguez might get from fans and/or the local media versus a less “established” name. I hadn’t really considered that angle. It doesn’t clearly affect Rodriguez’s value, and it shouldn’t influence a baseball operations decision (lest we return to the days when Mets PR decisions were essentially made by beat writers), it’s probably real even if it isn’t quite tangible.

My vote is still for Wood because of the compensation issue, but it’s not as if Rodriguez is vastly different from Fuentes (even though I prefer the latter). If we consider Rodriguez and Fuentes roughly equal in tangible value (I don’t know that we can, but let’s suppose so), maybe your point about everyone cutting Rodriguez more slack than Fuentes puts him over the top. At any rate, it’s worth having an honest dialog about.

by Eric Simon on Dec 8, 2008 11:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

"the days when Mets PR decisions were essentially made by beat writer"

You mean last winter when they ran Milledge out of town?

by JoshNY on Dec 9, 2008 9:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I made jokes

but to be honest I’d prefer Rodriguez to Fuentes myself, so long as his price tag isn’t ridiculous (and the fact that we seem to be the only team interested leads me to believe it won’t be).

Does anyone else wish we had offered a mega-deal to Mariano last year when he was a free agent for like 15 minutes? I know, I know, we wouldn’t have been able to afford Santana and all that, but Rivera had probably one of the 10 best seasons by a relief pitcher ever last year, and sticking it to the Yankees is always fun…

by cjmulrain on Dec 9, 2008 2:42 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs