Community Offseason Part Two: How to Solve Right Field
Congratulations community! You have just collectively sign Matt Holliday to a 5-year, $100 million deal! The harsh competition with the Orioles to lock up this baby paid off. You still have about $15 million in the bank to fill in other positions with! Out of the 70 votes, Holliday netted 34 of them, while far away in second but still with a strong showing was B.J. Upton, with 13.
So, now what? Now, we move on to Right Field. My original plan was to do the outfield positions together, but found it quite impossible to organize. So let's view our options for right field.
The first option is rather obvious. It's to go with what we already have in right with Jeff Francoeur. Francoeur had a salary of $3.4 million last year and it's likely to rise to $3.7-$3.8 this year. Pagan cost about $0.5 million last year and should remain at that number. So let's look at what we are getting for the money. The disadvantages of Francoeur are quite apparent. He swings at everything in front of his face. Lore tells that one time Jeff Francoeur went to a fancy Italian restaurant, and ordered the salad. When the waiter was moving to put it down, Francoeur took a bat and swung at it as it crossed his face. This approach has led him wOBAs of .337, .286 and and .313 over the past three years, which is wabout as well if not worse than Murphy's 2009. What's worse is that Francoeur has been a below average fielder for the past two seasons, with UZRs of -4.7 and -7.8 in 2008 and 2009 respectively. However, there IS a reason to keep him, and that's the fact hat he is 25 and with the Mets hit for a .311/.338/.498 line, and that certainly is useful. If Francoeur can keep this production up, he is worth it. If not.... **shudders**
All of the other options include trading or non-tendering Jeff Francoeur. A possible trade candidate would be the KC Royals, who are likely getting rid of Mark Teahen and don't give a rats-ass about OBP, wOBA or UZR.
These options include:
Simply starting Angel Pagan in right. Pagan is a brilliant defensive right fielder who has a career 18.7 UZR/150 at the position in 278.2 innings. Pagan has also been improving every year at the plate, which is most evident this year with his .358 wOBA. In his time (88 games) Pagan has stolen 14 bases and proven time and time again that he is a worthy outfielder. He finished 2009 with 376 PAs and a 2.3 WAR, which kicks the crap out of a lot of 2009 Mets. His dollar value for this years performance is measured over at Fangraphs at $10.6 million this year. The downsie of starting Pagan is that he has never been a full-time regular before, but more positives include his low cost and that he's still only 29.
For those more interested in bulking up our lineup, options include Mark DeRosa and B.J. Upton (more info on them in the left field post).
Another more costly option would be Andruw Jones. Jones spent little time in the field in his 2009 term with the Rangers, but this was totally unjustified. In his limited time as a corner outfielder in Texas he performed quite well, and there is no reason to doubt that he could have a UZR of at least 20 in right. This is very attractive, as is his pop (.246 ISO in 2009, holla!). Downsides of Jones include that his contract could be $5 million per year or more. He should settle for nothing less considering he was making $14 million a year pretty much every year before, and that he has shown that he is still capable, if not as much as before. He is not young like Upton, but then again he is only a free agent.
On the FA market as well is Marlon Byrd. Byrd will likely cost $5-6 million per year after coming off of a season with 20 HR and a .280 BA. He'll be 32 come April 2010 and may look for 2-3 years. Byrd is a decent centerfielder but is great in the corners, with a career UZR/150 of 10.9 in left and 12.3 in right. Byrd over the past three years has posted wOBA's of .350, .370 and .345. His WARs have been 2.5, 3.5 and 2.3 in 2007 through 2009, respectively.
Jeremy Hermida is another option, he would likely be less costly but he is a miserable outfielder. He could be non-tendered by the Marlins. Hermida is known to have some very good skills and tools, and if he can put them together he could be a weapon in the lineup. Of course, if he isn't he's worth squat. We'll put his predicted contract at $2.5 million.
Available through trade is Milton Bradley, who is signed through the next two years. If traded the team receiving him will likely pay around $10 million over the next two years for him, and he may cost very little in a trade. The downside of Bradley is that he is injury prone and has a famous temper. The upside is that he is a good defender in right and center field, and has had WARs over 2 in every year from 2003 to 2009, with a 1.8 WAR in 2009. in 2008 it was 4.5, in 2003 it was 4.8. He is also an interesting option.
At this point, acquiring another player pretty much guarantees that the Mets are not in the running for John Lackey, so for all those who want Lackey keep that in mind. In fact, at this point it seems that any budget under $18 million won't be enough to land Lackey, and any budget under $15 million would definitely restrict us from landing Halladay in a trade.
0 recs |
208 comments
Comments
The sad thing is we all know what is going to happen
Its going to be Francoeur out there with a sub .300 OBP lumbering around the OF. I hope I’m wrong, and I have no issue using Pagan out there assuming we sign Holliday for LF.
A Holliday Beltran Pagan OF would be very nice both defensively and offensively.
by Balagast on Oct 5, 2009 6:52 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Pagan is good and cheap
I think the cost of acquiring guys (either by FA or trade) isn’t worth the small improvement (if any).
by EtSuKe on Oct 5, 2009 6:53 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I don’t mind Francouer in right…We have mich bigger priorities and for under 4 mil he will be a serviceable right fielder with some upside. If we need to throw money at something, let it be for a SP and LF. Dream Scenario….
Sign Holiday
Trade Carlos Beltran away for Robinson Cano (Yanks would jump over that deal, clears us salary)
Trade Fernando Martinez away for King Felix (for whatever reason the mariners are shopping him, they need a CF, we can give King felix the money he deservers) If That won’t work out, give F-Mart to the Chisox for Jake Peavy instead. Will be just as good.
Sign Nyjer Morgan to play center.
lineup is Reyes, Morgan, Wright, Holiday, Cano, Francouer, Murphy, Thole/Santos
Pitching would have a great 1-2 punch
salary would be cheaper overall than last year, with room to sign a dependably arm or two in the bullpen.
by Rey-O on Oct 5, 2009 7:29 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Now would be a good time to invest in a fire-retardant suit.
by gogomets on Oct 5, 2009 7:41 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Retardant is right
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 5, 2009 8:51 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
lol ok.
Anything over 2 mil for Francouer is a joke. The guy is a below replacement level player. Pay him like one. Pagan is clearly better, and should be given at least the opportunity to win a job.
No problems with signing Holliday.
2B is currently our 4th best position. Trading our star, MVP calibur CF for a 27 year old 2B coming off a career best year with a high BABIP only one year removed from a disastrous 08? Don’t think so.
Sure, the Mariners would gladly trade one of the top 5 pitchers in baseball at age 23 for a 20 year old outfielder with a questionable health record and less than two months of big league experience. Gimme what you’re smoking. That said, you don’t “give” F! to another team just to move him for a pitcher, especially for Peavy, whos downsides are numerous (injured, high contract, and beginning to decline.) Plenty of better options that actually make sense.
Nyjer Morgan is a nice pick. But, if we’re smart, there’d be no reason to sign him…
Lineup? Yes, n/a, yes, yes, NO, NO, NO, i guess
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 5, 2009 8:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
lol
Nyjer Morgan won’t be a free agent for a while.
Francoeur isn’t worth the money. Why not have Pagan start for under $1 million?
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 5, 2009 9:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And trade Beltran for Cano?
Neither team would do that.
Plus we’d be getting ripped.
Also, I’m pretty sure the Mariners want Jose Reyes and Jenrry Mejia if they’re trading the King.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 5, 2009 9:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The latest rumor I've heard regarding Felix Hernandez
is that the Red Sox are prepared to give up any five of their top ten prospects to get him. I’m not sure F! will get that deal done.
"He's definitely mixing it into his repertoire. That's French for 'repertoire' " - Keith Hernandez
by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on Oct 5, 2009 9:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pagan's good, cheap
And we’ll have Evans, Francouer, Murph, F!, and others to choose from if he gets injured.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 5, 2009 8:40 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
is it crazy to suggest signing gabe kapler?
kapler would be cheap and he’s killed lefties the last two years. i think it would be smart to platoon him with pagan in RF in 2010 if the mets need to improve on the cheap.
kapler 2010 vs. LHP: 145 AB, .276/.379/.552
kapler 2009 vs. LHP: 82 AB, .354/.379/.622
kapler has also averaged about a 10 UZR/150 playing mostly CF/RF the past two seasons. in addition, i imagine some fans would consider kapler to be a “gritty veteran,” so signing him could appease that crowd while actually putting a quality player on the mets’ roster.
by englishgrey on Oct 5, 2009 10:15 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
It's certainly an interesting idea
I’m going to include it when I post the “How do we solve the bench” section, and there is one.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 5, 2009 10:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes
realistically, he’s more of a bench option than starting RF option. i would certainly prefer him over reed or sullivan. and i bet he wouldn’t cost too much more either.
by englishgrey on Oct 6, 2009 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting, I hadn't realized he was such a lefty masher
The next step after that signing would be teaching Jerry about platoon splits.
by James Kannengieser on Oct 5, 2009 10:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't we have a lefty smasher 1B/OF in the roster already? I think his name was Nico, Nicholas or something
by Michkin on Oct 6, 2009 6:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
but Kapler could cost as low as $800,000 this year, and if the Mets have the extra cash I’d go for it.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 2:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought his name....
was Francoeur.
by acerimusdux on Oct 7, 2009 5:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
you'd be mistaken.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 7, 2009 5:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I vote Francoeur because I think he has good potential.
Pagan, to me, is a 4th OF.
That said…..if I have to include Francoeur or Pagan in a trade for say….Prince Fielder, consider it done.
by fxcarden on Oct 6, 2009 8:57 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Do you have any reason to back this up at all?
How Pagan is a 4th OF and Francoeur is filled with potential
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
first round pick!!
ain't had enough...
by BlackOps on Oct 6, 2009 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't say "filled"
don’t put words in my post. I also said I would include either of them in a trade that gets me Prince Fielder.
Pagan has played in a total of 267 ML games over 4 years, and has never been anything more than a bench player
Francoeur has played in a total of 706 ML games, and has been a starter on two teams since 2006. Bobby Cox thought enough of him to make him his everyday RF. Did he have 2 bad years ?. Yes, he did. Does that make Pagan a better player ?. No. Not until Pagan can clearly demonstrate otherwise.
Pagan started 80 games on a shit team in 2009. Of course he stood out. He only started because there was nobody else, especially when Murphy flopped. Pagan needs to prove his worth over a larger sample size, just like Murphy.
I am not a Francoeur lover, but he is, to me at least, a more stable presence in RF than Pagan would be. Let me see Pagan beat him out in ST, and then I’ll be open to changing my mind.
by fxcarden on Oct 6, 2009 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
huh?
Francoeur has played 312 games the past two seasons. That’s a pretty large sample that says he is not replacement level. I just don’t understand at all how he’ll be more “stable.” What does that mean?
ain't had enough...
by BlackOps on Oct 6, 2009 4:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
all I'm saying is Francoeur has more experience than Pagan
and was good enough to start for Bobby Cox, so that’s good enough for me.
I trust Bobby Cox’s judgement far more than Jerry’s or Omar’s.
by fxcarden on Oct 6, 2009 5:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
julio franco has more experience than pagan too
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 6, 2009 5:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
And Jerry and Omar think Francouer's good enough to start for them too.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 6, 2009 5:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bobby Cox didn't have Pagan
So how can you say Cox would start Francoeur over him?
They wanted to give him every chance to work things out, and he didn’t, so they traded him.
The fact Francoeur started for another team (before being dumped), is irrelevant to whether he should be starting for us next year.
by Balagast on Oct 7, 2009 10:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Francouer played 75 games on a shit team too.
Mets:
Francouer: 75 games, 0.3 WAR
Pagan: 88 games, 2.3 WAR
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 6, 2009 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, and Francoeur had a bad first half, and then he played hurt for the last 6 to 8 weeks.
Pagan had the hammy early on.
I’m not saying Pagan can’t be the RF, I’m saying right now he shouldn’t be. He needs more seasoning.
by fxcarden on Oct 6, 2009 5:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He needs more seasoning?
He isn’t a delicious steak, he’s a ballplayer, and also he WOULD get more “seasoning” if he actually PLAYED.
Just by his defense Pagan would give more value to us than Francoeur would. Also, he’s $3 million cheaper. Your argument is just getting weaker and weaker.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 6:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Time will tell
one of these two will be either not here or on the bench taking up space.
Francoeur has enough votes for second place in your poll, so some people believe he is the guy.
Let me know what Omar and Jeff say when you show them the results at the winter meetings.
by fxcarden on Oct 6, 2009 6:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is dumb
Time will tell
Man, maybe it’s a pet peeve of mine, but I hate when people leave an arguement at that. We all know time will tell. Thanks oh wise fxcarden.
Let me know what Omar and Jeff say when you show them the results at the winter meetings.
If you’re going to sit here and mock the whole concept of this post, why the hell are you here?
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 6:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
at 52 years old, I can afford to be patient.
as for the mockery…..you said it’s all hypothetical anyway, so why not have some fun…..I mean, you put Andrew freakin’ Jones in the poll….what could be more comical than that ?.
by fxcarden on Oct 6, 2009 6:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well
Maybe it was a joke in good humor and I appreciate that, but the tone (because we’re on the internet and it’s all written-word) was that you were just being a dick.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 6:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm an old dick.
in fact, I think I’ll change my handle.
by fxcarden on Oct 6, 2009 6:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mmm...delicious steak.

"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 6, 2009 7:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
what kind of seasoning did they use on him ?.
by fxcarden on Oct 6, 2009 7:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't even want to think about that.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 6, 2009 7:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So
I also said I would include either of them in a trade that gets me Prince Fielder.
No shit. I don’t think anyone’s rushing to cancel a deal for Fielder because of Pagan or Francoeur
Pagan has played in a total of 267 ML games over 4 years, and has never been anything more than a bench player
Francoeur has played in a total of 706 ML games, and has been a starter on two teams since 2006. Bobby Cox thought enough of him to make him his everyday RF. Did he have 2 bad years ?. Yes, he did. Does that make Pagan a better player ?. No. Not until Pagan can clearly demonstrate otherwise.
What is the context here? Bobby Cox really isn’t a genius. Of course, you’ll refer to all the times the Braves won the NL East but remember, players win games, managers don’t. The Braves had one of the best GMs the game has ever seen and had a slew of aces because of it, and players like Chipper and Andruw. Also, Jeff Francoeur wasn’t competing with much in 2008: he beat Josh Anderson and Matt Diaz for the job, and other members of their outfield were Kotsay and Gregor Blanco. Also in 2007 his only competition was Langerhans.
Pagan was behind Jacques Jones (.285/.334/.499) and Matt Murton (.297/.365/.444) in 2006. In 2007 he was behind Jones, Soriano and Floyd. In 2008 he backed up Tatis (1.8 WAR), Beltran (6.7 WAR), and Church (1.6 WAR). In 2009 he had a higher WAR than Francoeur has had over the past 3 years (2.3 for Pagan, 2.1 for Francoeur over 3 years) and he didn’t even get a lot of time. Also, Francoeur has had 4 straight shit years at the dish. Also, over the past 2 years Francoeur has had a -12 UZR.
In every aspect, Pagan is better,.
Pagan started 80 games on a shit team in 2009. Of course he stood out. He only started because there was nobody else, especially when Murphy flopped. Pagan needs to prove his worth over a larger sample size, just like Murphy
While I understand Pagan’s hitting has been a small sample size, his fielding hasn’t. His fielding in the corners has reached almost 1000 innings. And he still manages a positive UZR, unlike Frenchy since 2007. Also, over a rather large sample size (say, 4 years?) Francoeur has been terrible presence at the plate. The only time he showed true value at the plate was his rookie season — about the same sample size as Pagan has shown now.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bobby Cox isn't a genious, but ....
compared to Jerry and Omar he is a Nobel Prize winner.
by fxcarden on Oct 6, 2009 5:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
and Jerry and Omar
started Francoeur as well…..
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 6:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, well, what do you expect
they took Bobby’s lead…….
Jerry and Omar also started Murphy in LF
by fxcarden on Oct 6, 2009 6:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't understand the significance of this
I just said Bobby Cox is an idiot for reason X, and then you said Jerry and Omar are even dumber, and then i responded that they are also dumb for reason X
In logic, that would make reason X something totally retarded.
And in response you just said something totally non-sequitir.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 6:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No. That's Reason X to the Z
Xzibit yall
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 6:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
right, because logic has no place in this discussion.
the only thing that matters is what Omar thinks.
by fxcarden on Oct 6, 2009 6:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Then
why even participate?
The whole point of this is that it is a HYPOTHETICAL OF WHAT THE COMMUNITY WANTS.
The reason I started this is to start discussion and also gauge the general will of the community. If you don’t see the point, no one forced you to vote or post.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 6:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
well, as part of the community, I cast my vote, and I said why, and you started questioning the vote.
and then it took off from there….
by fxcarden on Oct 6, 2009 6:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My role in the comments section
is as a member of the community. And the point of this is to have the community discussing it. In the actual post, I put all kinds of options up there, a lot of which I’d really rather not. I think this would be MUCH less legitimate if I hadn’t put Frenchy up there at all.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 6:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Isn't that the point of this place?
To post opinion and back them up with logical factual arguments?
Others here disagreed with your opinion/vote, and you really haven’t backed it up with any logical or factual arguments.
by Balagast on Oct 7, 2009 11:04 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
How about stats, scouting, and well, facts in general
Pagan was a career replacement level player, a career +5.9 RAR, before a 376 PA sample this season, in which he turned 28 years old, and put up a ..358 wOBA. This is very likely to be Pagan at his peak. There’s not a lot of untapped power there. As a prospect coming up, he was mostly a speed player, and that’s a tool that peaks on average by age 24.
Francoeur meanwhile, came into this season a 25 year old with 63.9 career WAR under his belt over 4 seasons, an average of 16 RAR per season. He struggled some in the first half, but bounced back with a .350 wOBA in 308 PA with the Mets. Note that the second half sample size there is only 68 PA less than the sample size that is being used to credit Pagan as a full time starter.
Defensively, Francoeur is a career +26.2 UZR, -32.6 positional, for a -6.4 run net defensive value. Pagan is a career +5.3 UZR, -5.5 positional, for a +0.2 run net defensive value. That’s a net of 6.6 runs difference over their careers. That would come to about 1.5 runs in a season.
Statistics only really make a good argument if you use them in combination with some sense of probability. This is what seems to be missing from most of the arguments against Pagan here: using only 2 years data for Francoeur while ignoring that a true decline in ability at his age is very rare; relying on a half year sample for defensive stats, which are known to be far less reliable for such small samples than offensive stats, while ignoring the much smaller difference in career defensive stats; ignoring also the importance of a 2.5 year difference in age for a young players projection; ignoring also other useful data, such as minor league stats (Francoeur, .813 OPS, Pagan .715 OPS).
And that is without bringing scouting into it, where Francoeur has always been easily the more highly regarded player. When has Angel Pagan ever ranked on a top prospect list?
Check the sporting news for a reasonable source for the current scouting view:
Assets Few in baseball possess his combination of size, strength and power. Owns one of the best outfield arms in baseball.
Flaws Relies a little too much on his natural gifts (at the plate, in the field and on the bases). Is too much of a free swinger at the dish.
Career potential A potential star in right field.
Assets Is a solid switch-hitter with great speed around the bases. Can play all three outfield positions with aplomb. Can produce with runners in scoring position.
Flaws Strikes out too much, and doesn’t walk enough, for a guy with below-average power. Tends to struggle from the right side of the plate.
Career potential A solid fourth outfielder.
That said, with all that, I actually voted for Pagan. Because I do think Pagan right now at his peak, is currently narrowly the better player, and should start as often as not over Francoeur in RF. I really think it should be a platoon, but Pagan as the lefty should get at least half the at bats there. Noentheless, I think Francoeur clearly has the higher potential.
by acerimusdux on Oct 7, 2009 4:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I should proofread
“63.9 career WAR” should read “63.9 career RAR”.
“arguments against Pagan here” should read “arguments against Francoeur here”.
“a young players projection” should read “a young player’s projection”.
by acerimusdux on Oct 7, 2009 4:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I still think Pagan/Francoeur platoon is the way to go
with Reed/Sullivan/Cheap defensive outfielder to be 5th outfielder
"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"
by firejerrynow on Oct 7, 2009 6:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t know if I’m for or opposed to the signing of Holliday. I guess it depends if it prevents a trade (not FA signing) of a stud pitcher. Maybe Minaya can give up a package similar to the one for Santana to another team for an Ace.
But for the sake of this post if Holliday is in LF I am more than happy with a combo of Pagan and Frenchie.
I know Dunn is dreadful in RF but seriously how bad could it really be? I don’t wanna answer.
by RIPShea on Oct 6, 2009 12:53 PM EDT via mobile reply actions 0 recs
combo of Pagan and Frenchie a rock.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 6, 2009 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Meh
I held my nose and went French. I want Pagan on the bench where I think he will contribute at a good level in all three outfield positions. Since we are almost certainly stuck with Le Goofball, I say stick him in RF until F! is ready. Which hopefully will be around April 23rd…
by deadspy3 on Oct 6, 2009 1:16 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
no offense, that kinda doesn't make sense.
If Pagan can contribute at all 3 OF positions, than primarily start him in RF and spot start him in other positions if needed.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 6, 2009 3:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
2 words: ENDY CHAVEZ
"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"
by firejerrynow on Oct 6, 2009 4:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
huh?
You’re completely missing the point. Sure, Pagan would be a good 4th OF and contribute a great deal. But the fact of the matter is, with what Deadspy was saying, Francouer should start because Pagan can contribute to all 3 OF positions. Ok, that’s great. But that means Francouer, the worse player, would be getting more playing time. So why not put the GOOD player in for MORE time by STARTING him?…
In 2006, if Endy started instead of being inserted in games later, we would have been better. What, just because Endy did his role well as a 4th OF, he wouldn’t have been an upgrade as a full time starter in a season in which he put up a 2.5 WAR in only a half season’s worth of PAs and in which we gave significant playing time to Shawn Green, Xavier Nady, and Cliff Floyd in the corners?
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 6, 2009 4:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know
It seems kind of counterintuitive to me too, and I can’t quite resolve it in my mind, but I would prefer Angel to be a super OF sub who is always ready to go in any of the OF spots for days off or even defensive replacement for the corners, and have Frenchy start, for now. I see Pagan having a potentially long-ish term stint with the team as a bench player, and I don’t really see that with Francouer, so I prefer not to mess around with the long term roles (like I didn’t like Parnell going to the rotation even temporarily). Not entirely rational I know, just my view.
by deadspy3 on Oct 6, 2009 4:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
sorry, dude, but that makes no sense.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 6, 2009 4:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But if they are both on the team
Francouer is incredibly limited on the bench, he can back up one OF position and pinch hit and isn’t a defensive sub. If Pagan were to start, then, as the conversation seems to be going below, the Mets would have to acquire another backup. I’m not against that, I’m just saying how I would prefer the Mets to use the two pieces they have.
by deadspy3 on Oct 6, 2009 5:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Only thing is...
Do you mean they need another backup like defensive replacement? Because what, you couldn’t put Francouer in right and move Pagan to left to spell someone like Holliday (if we signed him)? If you felt we needed another backup OF with good defense, fine. But those guys are a dime a dozen the way the MLB currently values them.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 6, 2009 5:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
no...you can't do that...
moving Pagan around like that will disorient the piss out of him and then we’ll be stuck with 2 Francoeurs.
by fxcarden on Oct 6, 2009 5:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's a mature adult.
Ben Zobrist can handle playing multiple positions. Kevin Youkilis can handle playing multiple positions. I think Angel Pagan will be ok if he occasionally starts in a different outfield position.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 6, 2009 7:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
seriously, he makes a good point with the bench
also Pagan is a switch hitter, so he is even more valuable off the bench or as a defensive replacement for either Francoeur or Holliday since he is clearly a better fielder.
but still……Pagan doesn’t speak french or fly delta, so Francoeur wins.
by fxcarden on Oct 6, 2009 5:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
How does something
make you more useful on the bench that doesn’t make you more useful on the field?
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 6:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not saying he wouldn't be valuable off the bench.
But when you’re BETTER than your competition for a starting role…you shouldn’t be on the bench. That’s great, that his switch hitting would be valuable off the bench. It would be even more valuable on the field.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 6, 2009 7:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
THAT I won't argue with.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 6, 2009 7:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
By that logic
We should keep Beltran on the bench too, he’d be incredibly valuable for his switch hitting, defense etc.
If Pagan is a more dynamic valuable player that is a reason to start him.
Use Francoeur as a pinch hitter for late in games etc.
by Balagast on Oct 7, 2009 11:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No because Beltran is a much better player
whereas IMO Pagan and Francouer are likely to contribute similarly next season
by deadspy3 on Oct 7, 2009 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
not if they play at the same level as 2009.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 7, 2009 5:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I do take your point
and I realise I’m not making a whole lot of sense, but I just feel that with two guys who are probably not going to be massively different in value, even if Pagan will be slightly more valuable per AB/inning, the faff of moving people around to accomodate Frenchy’s single use of starting RF (or PH, but seriously, he’s not even good enough to PH really) says to me that you put your versatile guy on the bench where he gives the most utility through his options and put the less flexible guy in the place where he has to play. Because, if in your scenario, you need to move Pagan to LF to spell Holliday, you have to put Frenchy in RF regardless of platoon splits and if it’s tight at the end of the game I don’t want Le Goof coming in all guns blazing in the outfield. I just think where the relative merits are marginal, keep the most flexible guy in the place where flexibility is useful…
Though if we don’t have both Francouer and Pagan, I’m totally with you. I’ll take Pagan and Chavez, certainly, though if Nick Evans (who?) is the fifth OF on the bench we are seriously lacking a righty-mashing PH… and Endy mashes no-one.
by deadspy3 on Oct 6, 2009 6:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why don't we just GET RID OF FRANCOEUR?
or, if Holliday gets injured, we can moved Pagan to left and put Francoeur in right. Putting Pagan on the bench for some random ass reason that isn’t even clear is not only ludicrous it’s absolutely and positively one of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 6:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK but
I don’t have it in my power to get rid of Francouer, I am only saying how I would prefer him to be used in a hypothetical situation alongside Pagan and, potentially, Holliday
by deadspy3 on Oct 6, 2009 6:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
wtf
all right.
Can we clear something up?
Everyone here understands that this is all hypothetical correct?
So, theoretically, you DO have the power to get rid of Francoeur. The whole point of this series of posts is that it’s hypothetical and the fans have the power. So now I’m saying why in God’s name would you waste $4 million on a crappy player?
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 6:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
if you're running the poll for every position, you should really try to be neutral and let the rest of us idiots fight it out.
by fxcarden on Oct 6, 2009 6:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, I'm trying to convince you
but I’m not stuffing ballots or anything. You can be as stupid and smart as you want.
I’m not saying. “here’s the poll, vote for X.” In the actual post, I try to be as analytical as I possibly can. I stated Francoeur’s cost and career-long struggles, and also stated that there is some reason into signing him. In the comments section, stating my opinion is a bit different.
In fact, so far the only thing I’ve really objected to was keeping Francoeur, and I’ve tried to be as open as possible. It seems as thought the community has been appreciative, so if you don’t like it, ignore my comments or don’t participate.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 6:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fair enough.
I choose to be stupid and participate.
I’ve earned the right to be stupid by following this stupid team for most of my life, and now I am compounding it by participating in this stuff ( the online stuff ).
by fxcarden on Oct 6, 2009 6:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK fair enough
but it’s not in a vacuum – you still have to do something with Francouer and I don’t agree with non-tendering him, and I’m not sure we’d get fair value back in a trade, so in my opinion, I want to use him as a stopgap until Fernando is ready and use Pagan as a supersub. That’s an option, and that’s what I want to vote for.
by deadspy3 on Oct 6, 2009 6:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
How are you going to fill RF better for under $5 million total than keeping them both on the roster?
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Oct 6, 2009 6:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Depending on what they're planning on signing Frenchy for...
Anyone from Evans to F! to Davis would merit at least a mention in the discussion, and signing someone like Endy <3 would give us a better player instead of Francouer for less.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 6, 2009 7:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It pains me to think about Endy in a purely hypothetical sense
Since it just winds up reminding me how poorly this organization values defense. As for the other guys, they’ll still be there even if Francoeur is around. Being that none of them, aside from maybe Evans, the least likely to be a productive, is going to be given a role on the big league club if they’re not starting most games, I’m not sure how it really hurts you to keep Francoeur around. If one of those guys looks like a better option, great, but you can’t make that decision by December.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Oct 6, 2009 7:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fernando Tatis, Gabe Kapler, Eric Hinske,
Nick Evans, Fernando Martinez, …
by EtSuKe on Oct 6, 2009 7:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't see any reason to trust any of those guys
aside from maybe Kapler or Hinske, over Francoeur. You have to remember part of the practical issue here is that the decision on Francoeur has to come by December. To decide in December that the team is going to rely heavily on F! or Evans seems unwise. You can bet Fernando won’t even be on the opening day roster unless he really distinguishes himself in the spring. And as for Tatis, its worth pointing out he posted a 1.3 hWAR and .337 wOBA this year in 378 PAs, while Francoeur posted a 1.6 hWAR and .358 wOBA beginning with his arrival in NY in 304 PAs. And that Fernando is 33 and more likely to decline than improve, while Francoeur is 25 and is, at the very least, unlikely to decline due to age.
Still, I’ll agree that if the Mets were willing to non-tender Francoeur and offer Hinske or Kapler a contract, they’d probably get better value in the short term. But we’re still talking about guys here who figure to be nominally productive at best, and also taking a guy who’s 25 and under control for multiple seasons for one year of a guy in his mid-30s.
I panned the Francoeur deal as much as anyone when it happened, I thought it was a joke of a trade and a poor decision. I’m not trying to be an apologist for Omar or Frenchy. But I am trying to point out that unless the organization is willing to get really creative, they’re probably better off with him than without him at this point. Given all the depth problems the Mets have had in the outfield, I just don’t see justification for non-tendering a young player who was as productive as anyone else in the lineup after he came over and is set to make less than $4 mil, especially in favor of someone like Angel Pagan, who had an solid year, but seems just as likely to revert to his previous career track as Francoeur, if not even moreso. All these claims about how awful Francoeur is seem to be operating under the assumption that Pagan’s “breakout” was somehow much more legitimate, when if anything, it looks like its the other way around to me. Nothing about Pagan’s line stands out aside from a higher rate of triples and doubles and his .349 BABIP. Given that his ISO boost came much more from XBH in play than homers, the high BABIP is probably a huge contributing factor here. Everything else is right in line with what he’s done previously. Francoeur, on the other hand, actually managed to start trending the big factor in his decline back upwards, his power. His HR/FB jumped back to 7.1% with the Mets, which was exactly the area of improvement we should have been/were looking for when he came over, and even helped him break the trend of decline he’d shown in this area through his tenure with the Braves (yes, even if you go cumulative, his HR/FB was 4.9% last year after declining in each subsequent season, and in total was 5.4% this year, a product of 3.7% with the Braves and 7.1% with the Mets). Being that Francoeur is younger (he just completed his age 25 season, Pagan made his big league debut at 25) and his improvement seems to be in a more tangibly controllable area (Raw power vs. hits in play), if I had to choose between the two as to which “breakout” looked more legit, I’d have to choose Frenchy.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Oct 7, 2009 1:20 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
"Tatis is more likely to decline"
Francoeur’s been declining since his rookie year, and he’s not changing his approach any time soon.
Plus, Tatis is better defensively and half the cost.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 7, 2009 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That first part just isn't true
He had a worse year in 2006 than his rookie year of 2005. Then a better year than 2006 in 2007, followed by an awful year in 2008. Even cumulatively in 2009 he improved over 2008, and had a much stronger second half that first half. That is not “declining since his rookie year,” its lots of back and forth variance for a mediocre player in his age 21-25 seasons. And I’m not sure how you can draw conclusive evidence that Tatis is a better defensive RF than Francoeur, being that Tatis has started just 36 games in RF in his career, and zero in 2009, or put another way, zero in CitiField.
Look, I get it, Frenchy don’t walk, it holds him back, I’m not saying he’s a good player. All I’m saying is that this assumption that Pagan is all of a sudden a good player and that Frenchy absolutely isn’t a good player is flawed, and goes beyond objectivity. They’re both mediocre players. Being that Pagan is cheaper, he is the better contract value, but that doesn’t make Francoeur a bad value, just a worse value than Pagan. When the projections come out, I strongly suspect most of them will predict that Francoeur is much closer to a neutral value in terms of money earned vs. production, which is absolutely fine unless you can do better.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Oct 7, 2009 4:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pagan wasn't mediocre this year, though.
He’s not this good. But he did post over 2 WAR in half a season’s worth of playing time. That’s better than what Francouer’s contributed to ANY team for the last 3 years.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 7, 2009 5:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Okay, while technically true, that's still misleading
In 2007, Francoeur was 3.6 WAR in 696 PAs. Pagan was 2.3 WAR this year in 378. Yes, Pagan was slightly more valuable per PA or per game in his age 28 half-season than Frenchy in his age 23 season, but the difference isn’t so large that it would have demanded that Pagan be on the field everyday over Frenchy. Its about a 6-run difference at most if you assume they maintained those rates over 700 total PAs, or a three run difference over a half-season. You can say pretty much the same thing for Frenchy’s Mets season this year, the difference is a bit larger, but still, 9 runs at most over a full season.
Then when you consider that if both are on the roster, at least some of the playing time has to be weighted more heavily for the more productive player (meaning that if Pagan plays better than Francoeur, he’s going to get more playing time than if he plays worse than Francoeur). But if you cut Francoeur, its just Pagan, that’s what you got, whatever Pagan does. Is it going to be .275 / .330 / .400? Or is it going to be .300 / .350 / .480 again? There are a large number of outcomes here for Pagan where Francoeur could have a considerably better season. There are a large number of outcomes where Pagan is better too, perhaps more, but that doesn’t really justify ruling out all the outcomes where Francoeur is better for the sake of $3-4 mil.
Then there’s the fact that Pagan has spent considerable time on the DL in each of the last three seasons. Meanwhile Francoeur has started at least 152 games each of the last four seasons, and perhaps relevantly, perhaps not, played and played productively through a hand injury this year. I get that -1 + -1 = -2, but Francoeur hasn’t been minus since June, is still a 6.1 WAR player for his career of 4.5 seasons, and not yet 26. Angel Pagan has closer to 1.5 seasons of total PAs, spread out due to injury and some bench time, and a career WAR of 3.4. But he’s 28 and 82% of that figure came in his most recent 376 PAs. I just don’t understand why Pagan’s <400 PAs are so much more convincing than Frenchy’s <400 PA’s, which again, is to say I think people are both slightly under-valuing Francoeur, but also overestimating Pagan at least as much.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Oct 7, 2009 7:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Played productively?
Dude had a 0.2 WAR. Listen, I’m willing to give him some leeway and listen to the argument of his defense being worse than it should be and hurting his value, or Pagan’s BABIP being high, but the fact is, Francouer was not as good this past year as Pagan, even if you normalized those margins of error. And I don’t care about Francouer’s 2007. Ollie was pretty decent in 2007. Magglio Ordonez was an 8.9 win player. People need to stop giving him a pass because he’s 25. Many players’ best seasons come before they hit 27.
And don’t give me “people are slightly undervaluing Francouer”, unless by that you’d like to add “on AA” at the end. Because the average Met fan thinks Francouer’s our third best hitter. Yes, above Reyes.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 7, 2009 10:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really, that obviously going to go out of context?
Played productively?
Dude had a 0.2 WAR.
I believe my quote was
played productively through a hand injury this year
The injury happened in late August. He hit .308 / .339 / .488 in September. He played productively through the injury, just as he did for the other two months he spent in a Mets uni. There is nothing remotely untrue about my claim.
Francouer was not as good this past year as Pagan
In terms of what they gave the Mets offensively, this just isn’t true. The difference is entirely what Francoeur did pre-Mets. Since neither guy had more than 400 PAs for the Mets anyway, the difference is really between what Pagan did last year and what Francoeur did pre-Mets, which is a large difference, but again, you’re comparing an oft-injured 28 year old who made his big league debut at age 24 by posting a .305 wOBA in 187 PAs to a guy in his age 25 season and actually showing tangible signs of improvement (HR/FB increase most notably).
And I don’t care about Francouer’s 2007
Well, your whole point that I was responding to was
That’s better than what Francouer’s contributed to ANY team for the last 3 years.
Seeing as how 2007 was in the last three years, I felt it relevant to discuss in this context
Again, I cannot emphasize more, I do not think Francoeur is a good player. I just don’t think Pagan is anything special either, and the divide in perception between the two on AA is kind of silly according to much of this thread. Who else would I be talking about? The comments section on Metsblog? Do I really need to establish how unseriously I take that place? The whole point is that AA acts all enlightened about stats and player evaluation, but in this case, I feel a good portion of the community has gone way too far. I’m not going to go troll over to Metsblog or some other lame forum, so I can first convince them how their positive perceptions of Francoeur are wrong, just so I can then go “but, hey, he’s not that bad”.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Oct 7, 2009 11:12 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I think when he was talking
about “the past 3 years”
He may have meant cumulatively. Although he had a 3.6 WAR in 2007, he’s had a -1.5 WAR since.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 7, 2009 11:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly.
The 3.6 WAR is fine, if it wasn’t followed by terribleness. And Francouer POST METS was 0.2 WAR….in 70-80 games.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 8, 2009 12:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Incorrect
In his time with the Mets Francoeur was about 1.2 WAR. 1.6 hWAR (hitter WAR) minus 3-4 runs for defense, assuming for half his UZR, since I can’t find a defensive metric that splits up his season by Mets and Braves.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Oct 8, 2009 1:04 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No
His WAR was .4 with the Mets.
He had 6.1 batting RAR, and his total RAR (without defense so RAR-UZR) was 12.9.
The only season he was actually good was in 2007 when he had a 17.1 UZR which was entirely due to a ridiculous number or Arm Runs saved. He hasn’t been a positive range OF since 2006 and I find it entirely unlikey that he ever posts a UZR remotely close to what he did in 2007.
In that 3.7 WAR 2007 he had only 3.9 batting RAR. Just for some perspective in that year his batting RAR ranked around 40th for outfielders in MLB.
If you take aside defense Francoeur has never really been even better than average.
The only way you can serously use 2007 as evidence that Francoeur was a valuable player is if you think he’s going to post a 15+ UZR season again, which in all likelihood isn’t going to happen.
by Balagast on Oct 8, 2009 11:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fine
But that’s an incredibly misleading claim. It doesn’t really tell you anything, it just says that the rate of production Pagan had over the 88 games he played in this year was greater than the rate of production Francoeur had over his previous 474 games. While this may be true, it doesn’t tell us anything of value comparatively. I could just as easily say that Jeff Francoeur’s last 75 games, where he hit .311 / .338 / .498, are more productive than Angel Pagan’s previous 267 games, where he’s hit .280 / .331 / .443. Before this year, Angel Pagan’s total career WAR was 0.6 in 179 games. Why is his last ~80 games so convincing that he’s considerably better than that while Francoeur’s ~80 games has changed nothing? Its an egregious double standard.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Oct 8, 2009 1:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because Francouer really hasn't been that good, even in those last 80ish games.
And according to Fangraphs, he’s only been 0.4 WAR for the Mets.
Link: http://www.fangraphs.com/winss.aspx?team=Mets&pos=all&stats=bat&qual=0&type=6&season=2009&month=0
Where are you getting your WAR figures from?
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 8, 2009 10:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmm
I was looking at hWAR at statcorner and subtracting half his UZR for defense. It looks like the difference in the figures is that fangraphs seems to be claiming that Frenchy was more than 8 runs below average, which over half a season just doesn’t seem plausible, especially considering he was 1.9 runs above average during his Bravos time this year.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Oct 8, 2009 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Okay
According to both fangraphs and statcorner, in terms of offense alone post-trade, Frenchy was 1.5-2 WAR. When you add defense and adjust for position, according to fangraphs, you have to subtract about a full win from that, which over a half season, and knowing the issues of translating UZR to a new ballpark, especially one as large as CitiField (RF in particular), and that Francoeur had never before been worse than a -4.9 UZR/150 its just hard to imagine him being -7 or -8 over half of a season.
In fact, if you look at Frenchy’s fangraphs page, it seems like even UZR is confused about how to resolve Frenchy’s defense this year. His composite UZR over 154 games is -6.6, a combination of being about +2 in his Braves time and -8.6 during his Mets time. But then for composite UZR/150, he’s rated -3.3 If he was -6.6 on the season in 154 games, how is his UZR/150 on the season -3.3?
The other piece of all this is positional adjustment. You do have to take 7.5 runs away from Francoeur as a positional adjustmet since he’s always been a RF (or 3.25 runs over half a season). You haven’t had to do this so much with Pagan, since he’s played mostly CF (fangraphs positional adjustment for Pagan in 2009 was just -0.3). Now, it seems likely this will cancel itself out for Pagan if he were to become a full time RF, since his RF numbers are way above average, but this is extrapolated from just 24 GS and 287 innings spread out over four seasons. Its pretty inaccurate to use UZR/150 to establish a baseline level of talent in this way due to a combination of sample size and the variance of the origin point of UZR from year to year (explained well in this article).
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Oct 8, 2009 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
A problem that I have with your argument Meddler
is that it’s focused hugely on offense when odds are both of them fail (in terms of, both of them will likely end up with a .320 wOBA). When it comes down to it, Pagan is significantly better in the field, and when the bats fail that’s what will save us (and Mike Pelfrey)
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 8, 2009 4:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also
Pagan has sick numbers as a left fielder too.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 8, 2009 4:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No no! That's my argument exactly!
That they’re both crappy, but positive value offensive players, and that the biggest difference is a handful of defensive runs. If you accept my argument about the defensive difference, that Pagan is not a +10-15 RF and Francoeur is not a -10-15 RF, and its more likely that there’s closer to a 5 run difference in defense than a 20 run difference, it absolutely makes sense to spend another $3-4 mil to double your odds of getting something a bit better than a .320 wOBA on offense. That’s my whole point. That they’re so similar offensively, the difference is almost entirely about defense, and being that neither is a butcher (remember, Francoeur was actually about +2 this year with the Braves in terms of defense, and if you assume the dropoff this year was about UZR’s difficulty with CitiField rather than a change in what Frenchy was doing, then 2008 becomes the outlier, and the only season in which he was actually a below average defender), it becomes very unlikely that you’ll find a more adequate RF situation for under $5 million than Pagan and Francoeur, unless you sign someone like Endy and resolve to consider him for an everyday role. Which if it were up to me, would absolutely be my first choice, but being that its both unrealistic and not on the poll anyway, the next best choice, in my mind, is to keep Frenchy around and let he and Pagan duke it out for playing time all year.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Oct 8, 2009 4:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's a stretch
to say that the UZR was just deflated due to Citifield. Francoeurs range in the outfield has been declining over the past 4 seasons, and he had a negative UZR in 2008 as well. Also keep in mind that Pagan also played Citifield in left and center significantly and somehow his UZR survived. I think Pagan could easily have a 10-15 UZR in right for an entire season, and French will be closer to -10.
Francoeurs RngR over his career has been 6.5, 3.7, -0.8, -7.7, -12.1. He’s gone from good to very bad. In Citifield’s wide dimensions I’m not taking a chance on him.
tually a below average defender), it becomes very unlikely that you’ll find a more adequate RF situation for under $5 million than Pagan and Francoeur, unless you sign someone like Endy and resolve to consider him for an everyday role. Which if it were up to me, would absolutely be my first choice, but being that its both unrealistic and not on the poll anyway
I don’t care about “realism” in terms of “The Mets FO wouldn’t do it.” Also, I’m doing a poll for the bench and that’s where platoon players will be. For example, I want a Tatis/Murphy platoon at first but Tatis will only be on the Bennch poll just to avoid complications. If you want Pagan/Endy, vote for Pagan and then vote for Endy in the bench poll
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 8, 2009 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Some other notes:
Pagan had a 3.1 UZR with the Cubs in just over 200 innings in right.
It’s more justified to say that Francoeur’s 2007 was an outlier because of his ridiculous Arm Runs numbers than to say his 2008 numbers are outliers for the reason you said.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 8, 2009 5:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
the next best choice, in my mind, is to keep Frenchy around and let he and Pagan duke it out for playing time all year.
See, that I have no problem with. Frenchy is a better hitter against lefties, Pagan against righties. I have no problem with them either competing for the starting role in ST or being platooned in some capacity.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 8, 2009 6:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I meant
that hitting-wise he hasn’t had nearly as good a year as his rookie season.
in terms of wOBA: In 2005 it was .370, and since it’s been .308, .337, .286 and .313
And defensively, Tatis and Pagan are better. Tatis has had over 780 innings as an outfielder in his career, and all of those innings (pretty much) between 2008 and 2009, and his UZR has better. And it’s pretty much indisputable that Pagan’s better.
Look, I get it, Frenchy don’t walk, it holds him back, I’m not saying he’s a good player. All I’m saying is that this assumption that Pagan is all of a sudden a good player and that Frenchy absolutely isn’t a good player is flawed, and goes beyond objectivity.
I’m really not speaking in those terms. I’m saying Jeff Francoeur has a history over the past 4 years of being a bad hitter for his position. While you do have a point that both Pagan and Francoeur have succeeded at the same sample size at the same time, I’m saying that Pagan A) is a significantly better fielder (VERY SIGNIFICANTLY) so even if he doesn’t hit there’s less downside B) Pagan costs less money and C) Pagan doesn’t have nearly as long a track record at sucking ass at the plate.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 8, 2009 4:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Very well put
I hate to make this comparison, but I see Pagan being very similar to Vicorino in terns or the contribution he can make to the team, and his situation of finally being given a proper chance to play consistently.
by Balagast on Oct 9, 2009 8:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Meddler-
Pagan has a .335 career wOBA. We are not judging his talent on just 400 PA. He has a career 6.5 UZR in the OF (roughly half CF, half corner)
Francoeur has a .317 career wOBA. He have many years of data, we should judge his talent based on with the Mets. Just even look at this year: he had a .313 wOBA. He has a career 6.2 UZR in the OF (with basically all in RF).
Also if a player does well with an injury it most likely means that the injury isn’t affecting him much or that its just SSS. It doesn’t mean the player has actually improved.
How is Francoeur is better? Why not save 3-4 mil, or at least platoon them?
by EtSuKe on Oct 9, 2009 10:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
OK.
I hope you all haven’t confused my role in this as a guy who just wants results that match his. (this isn’t directed specifically at anyone, and I think we may have met a communication breakdown)
In the comments section, just like you all, I’m stating my opinion and arguing it, but in the end the community decides. My goal is only for this poll to accurately reflect the community opinion. In fact, that’s the reason I’m not closing polls after like 30 votes. I want to make sure as many people read them and contribute as possible.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 6:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But this IS a hypothetical.
In this situation, we all have the power to do things like sign Matt Holliday to a 5 year $100 mil deal. Surely we can choose to non-tender Francouer.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 6, 2009 7:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I sorta understand where you're coming from...
but flexibility for flexibility’s sake won’t get us to the playoffs when Frenchy’s drawn 5 walks by June 1st.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 6, 2009 7:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's when I start humming:
“Can you hear the drums, Fernando?”
by deadspy3 on Oct 6, 2009 7:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But April 1st is just as important as September 30th.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 6, 2009 7:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But you're dancing around the point
and that point is that Francoeur is a shitty baseball player who is expensive.
How about we start the GOOD player that will help us WIN (the inherent goal of having a team and playing the game) and sign someone CHEAPER to back up, who could also help us win, such as ENDY CHAVEZ.
Mets + Endy Chavez + more money – Crappy baseball player = :)
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 6:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with the stuff about Endy
But haven’t we already resigned to the fact that this organization never properly evaluated Endy? If they suddenly adopted advanced defensive metrics and realized how valuable he actually was, great, grand, yipee. But is there any evidence that such a revolution is due to occur in the near future?
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Oct 6, 2009 6:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is another instance
in which the point of this poll is confused.
There are only two parts to this poll I want to be realistic:
1) That any parties involved in any transaction would agree to this in real life (outside of Mets management of course)
2) That it fits a realistic budget.
I don’t care what Omar or Jeff or Fred want.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 6:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
you may want to consider Jeff's statement from yesterday....
there are no handcuffs on Omar money wise…..
God help us all.
by fxcarden on Oct 6, 2009 7:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's fine.
But again, this is a hypothetical. I think METSx3 is saying that WE are the GM. So why can’t we evaluate Endy properly? Think of it as the offseason equivalent of a community prospect list on Minor League Ball.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 6, 2009 7:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Man
That list was run damn well last year.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 7:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Again
If I get to handpick someone from that list, it’s going to be Bossman.
ain't had enough...
by BlackOps on Oct 6, 2009 3:58 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Pagan/Francoeur platoon
with Endy Chavez on as outfielder.
Also, Nick Evans is a good choice to platoon with Pagan.
"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"
by firejerrynow on Oct 6, 2009 4:32 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
actually, Chavez instead of Francoeur
because he’ll likely be $3 mil
"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"
by firejerrynow on Oct 6, 2009 4:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
I’m making Endy a bench option
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
great
"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"
by firejerrynow on Oct 6, 2009 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nick Evans is on the team?
Since when?
If there's ever a riot at Citi Field and Oliver Perez was the starter, I started the riot.
by meigs1414 on Oct 6, 2009 4:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think he is the ballboy
"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"
by firejerrynow on Oct 6, 2009 4:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nah that's some guy called
Storks or something
by deadspy3 on Oct 6, 2009 5:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wilpon said there would be money
we’re losing about 32 mil
depending on whether Tatis and Cora and Putz are resigned
so I think adding $35 mil is a bit cheap
"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"
by firejerrynow on Oct 6, 2009 4:41 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I understand that
but also I need to be a bit conservative for this to work. 5 years/100 million for Holliday was a conservative guess as well. The team payroll has gained 33% of its size in the past 3 years, and perhaps the Wilpons, in this financial climate, are trying to cap it for now and wait until toxic assets such as Perez and Rodriguez and even Beltran leave the team, so that they can also work on an extension for Reyes and adapt to any injuries or change in needs.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 4:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rumor also is that they may look to downgrade the payroll
so I needed to kind of make a number that was in between, and a payroll around this year’s is pretty reasonable, IMO.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the relevant question
Is what the Mets should do about RF if they don’t sign Holliday. If they do add Holliday, its hard to imagine another big outfield acquisition, and easy to believe one wouldn’t be necessary. We can argue about who’s better, Pagan or Francoeur, but practically speaking, if they’re both on the team, Fraconeur is going to have a huge edge on the starting gig by virtue of his contract. And this is not necessarily a terrible decision. Pagan is easily the better value contract wise, but its also very easy to overestimate the difference between the two projection-wise. The current PECOTA five year forecast had Francoeur at .277 / .332 / .451 for 2010 and Pagan at .262 / .326 / .398. They both had incredibly similar seasons with the bat during their Mets time. Its easy to write off Francoeur’s .311 / .338 / .498 as a sample size fluke, but that’s in 308 PAs. Pagan hit .306 / .350 / .487 in 376 PAs. They’re nearly identical, and you can talk about Francoeur’s Braves suckage, but then you also have to talk about all of Pagan’s previous limited and pretty mediocre big league career and uninspiring minor league track record. How about the fact that Francoeur had a ..336 BABIP, Pagan .349? Francoeur had a 7.1% HR/FB, Pagan 4.1%? I’m not trying to make a case that Francoeur is a lock to be “better” than Pagan, just pointing out that to assume that there is some kind of certain answer to the question of who will be better in 2010 is kind of a fool’s errand. If I had to guess, I’d go with Pagan based on recent defensive track record, but even that is hardly overwhelming evidence, and when the difference between two players is defense that hovers on either side of average in an outfield corner, you’re about as close to nit picking as you can get without crossing that line.
So, the likeliest scenarios for RF in house, not counting Fernando Martinez, seem to either be to tender Francoeur a contract and give him a head start on the RF competition with Pagan as the likely backup, or to cut Francoeur, hand Pagan the job in December, and have no true in-house backup. Now, the latter option would be fine if the Mets were willing to start evaluating backup outfielders appropriately, but none of the options listed here, aside from perhaps Endy Chavez, would be likely fill this secondary role as well Francoeur or Pagan and cost less than $4 million.
The problem with all this arises if the Mets don’t sign Holliday, or acquire a player of similar talent to play LF. In this case, its hard to imagine either Pagan or Francoeur would be adequate as an everyday outfielder. Upton and Jones could both be solid buys, but nothing spectacular enough to justify tendering Francoeur a contract to play the other outfield spot. Here it would be probably be wiser to save the money in December with an eye at gambling on a spring competition between Pagan and Fernando (maybe have Ike Davis on the periphery too) for the open outfield spot. Then use the extra money to either hope something falls into your lap in January or February or for injecting talent into other areas of the roster.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Oct 6, 2009 5:04 PM EDT reply actions 4 recs
I find it hard to believe
that the Mets finish this off-season without Holliday, Upton, Bay, Granderson, DeRosa, Abreu, Jones or Byrd.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 5:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But also
I think I’m doing something involving a backup plan after this.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 5:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Absolutely
Completely agree with this statement. At least one of those players is very likely to be acquired. But Francoeur and Pagan become much more adequate looking options with the Holliday and Upton. With Bay in particular, I don’t see any reason to keep Francoeur. With Bay the premium should be put on defense either way, and Pagan is much more likely to provide quality defense at a lower cost. With Holliday or Upton, keeping both Francoeur and Pagan makes sense. You have plenty of depth and sufficient quality. With the rest, a second alternative option should be explored and the money spent on Francoeur should be saved in an attempt to generate better value elsewhere.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Oct 6, 2009 5:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree on the "if we have Holliday then keeping French is OK"
I think French still has some trade value to teams that don’t give a crap about anything but HR and BA, and he costs us $3.7 million at least. I’d rather focus that green on improving a position rather than holding back Pagan.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Meh
I mean, if you’re getting good value, trade him for sure, but no one’s in this for Pagan’s feelings. It doesn’t make sense to non-tender Francoeur or trade him for something like Lance Broadway part deux. But even if Pagan is slightly better, he’s not so much better that I’d rather non-tender Frenchy to clear a starting job for Pagan than start Francoeur and have Pagan as a backup.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Oct 6, 2009 6:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
?
According to Fangraphs, Pagan is roughly $11 million better, which, to put it in perspective, is about the difference between BJ Upton in 2007 and BJ Upton this year.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 6:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But
that was this year. Do we have any projections on next year yet?
by deadspy3 on Oct 6, 2009 6:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like I said in the post above
Last year’s PECOTA forecast for 2010 had Pagan at .262 / .326 / .398 and Francoeur at .277 / .332 / .451. Obviously, being on last year’s card, this doesn’t account for what happened this year, where Pagan hit pretty damn close to his 90th percentile projection (.299 / .366 / .468) and Francoeur was closer to his 40th percentile projection (.265 / .318 / .421). They both also had considerably better offensive seasons this year than they had in 2008. So figure that Pagan’s projection is going to increase by a pretty significant margin, and Francoeur’s is going to decrease by a less significant margin. The result’s look like they’ll probably wind up pretty similar to each other.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Oct 6, 2009 7:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is kind of a ridiculous claim
The true claim is that the difference in value between non-context neutral cumulative production production last year was $11 million. Francoeur’s hWAR since he came to the Mets was actually 1.6, and even if you take away 4-5 runs for defense, that’s still greater than 1 WAR, which would make the difference closer to $5 million on the season than $10 million, in terms of what he provided the Mets. How about the fact that Francoeur is still only 25? or to “put it into perspective,” the age that Angel Pagan was when he made his big league debut.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Oct 6, 2009 6:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also.
Money. A lot of money. Money that could go to John Lackey or Roy Halladay or a good 1B.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 6:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
rec'd
what was it that wilpon said last year, “addition through subtraction”?
I can see that this year, regarding Francoeur
"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"
by firejerrynow on Oct 6, 2009 8:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also, didn't anybody listen to Jeff yesterday ?.
He said he wanted more gritty players like Francoeur. In fact, he told Carlin that he wouldn’t mind having 4 or 5 Francoeur types on the team.
We can argue all we want, but Jeff pays the bills, and he said so…..so there.
(the last part was sarcasm, btw).
by fxcarden on Oct 6, 2009 5:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm waiting for someone to MS Paint
five rocks into a Citi Field shot… please?
by deadspy3 on Oct 6, 2009 6:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Francoeur has been worth negative $6.6 mil the last two years
His batting over his career is 29.8 runs below average. Pagan’s batting has been 2.5 runs above average over is career.
by EtSuKe on Oct 6, 2009 8:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
As Meddler said, if we sign Holliday
we are going to have Francoeur, period. In fact, seeing as Wilpon likes him so much, we’re going to have Francoeur, probably, period. So that’s probably 2 dead bats, assuming whoever catchers is deffesnive only, plus the pitcher, and most possibly a mediocre first baseman. We might sign Holliday, if he wants to leave St Louis, whcih I don’t think he will. Maybe we can swap Perez for Bradley.
"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"
by firejerrynow on Oct 6, 2009 8:17 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Perez for Bradley
would be a dream, but the Cubs also have an interest in winning.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 8:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Perez is a winner
He won 15 games last year
and he’s mature, unlike Bradley
"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"
by firejerrynow on Oct 6, 2009 8:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the whole point of dumping Bradley
is to get rid of as much of his salary as they can, clear the position and possibly bolster their farm. I don’t think with all the FA options at pitcher they have any interest in Perez.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 8:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
true, I was just hoping
that the Cubs would be as dumb as us
"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"
by firejerrynow on Oct 6, 2009 8:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
How about Abreu?
He made $5 mil this year; and is better than Frenchy Rock
"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"
by firejerrynow on Oct 6, 2009 8:24 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Put it under other, if you want
although I do believe he’ll cost more — he only ended up that low due to a terrible market. I think he’ll be looking for a pretty long term commitment as well. He’s done with this one year crap.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 8:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
but he is old
The market is still not high;
"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"
by firejerrynow on Oct 6, 2009 8:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
True
optimistically he becomes a serious option if you’re willing to spend the dough
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 8:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Off topic:
what a freaking game the Twins are playing.
holy crap.
by fxcarden on Oct 6, 2009 9:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah but they keep Mets-ing it up
when the have the opportunity to win
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 9:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
wait
you watched that game and came away comparing the Twins to the Mets? When was the last time you watched the Mets, 1999?
"[The Giants] beat us down. We were beat by a grown-man team, a team we want to be like one day. They came in here and took it to us. Out-manned us, out-gunned us. ... It wasn't even close." - Raheem Morris, 9/27/09
by cjmulrain on Oct 6, 2009 10:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You see
I wrote that DURING the game
I was thinking about how they came back to tie it up, then let up a run, then tied it up, then the winning run got thrown out at the plate, then they got into another jam.
The only difference is they won in the end
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 6, 2009 10:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Detroit Tigers...
talk about a collapse……3 up with 4 to play, and lose the tiebreaker in extra innings.
by fxcarden on Oct 6, 2009 9:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Can we officially not talk about the 07/08 Mets anymore?
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 6, 2009 10:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
want a reminder:
read through this thread
"[The Giants] beat us down. We were beat by a grown-man team, a team we want to be like one day. They came in here and took it to us. Out-manned us, out-gunned us. ... It wasn't even close." - Raheem Morris, 9/27/09
by cjmulrain on Oct 6, 2009 10:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow
The gamethreads over at Bless You Boys racked up 4500 comments or so tonight. Have we ever come even remotely close to that in any given gamethread?
"He's definitely mixing it into his repertoire. That's French for 'repertoire' " - Keith Hernandez
by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on Oct 6, 2009 10:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What might have been. Oh, what might have been.
by TheBigStapler on Oct 7, 2009 9:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I read about 30 comments and then I read this:
Creed is an awesome band…
most of todays bands play a style of music that Creed made popular. Like em’ or not they are a huge part of music history. Plus Mark Tremonti is an amazing guitarist.
So I stopped.
by TheBigStapler on Oct 7, 2009 9:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Almost as good as Nickelback.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 7, 2009 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
having your team suffer an epic collapse
makes you say crazy things. Come on, I’m sure someone on this board claimed that….no, you’re right. I can’t even think of a crappier band right now, so I’m gonna have to say that’s just bad taste.
"[The Giants] beat us down. We were beat by a grown-man team, a team we want to be like one day. They came in here and took it to us. Out-manned us, out-gunned us. ... It wasn't even close." - Raheem Morris, 9/27/09
by cjmulrain on Oct 7, 2009 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That Comment : Music Taste/Knowledge :: Joe Morgan : Sabermetrics
by Balagast on Oct 7, 2009 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, to be fair
he’s right if ‘crappy’ is a style.
by BobbyV_Incognito on Oct 7, 2009 6:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Due to how close
Pagan and French are I am not closing the poll just yet.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 7, 2009 3:43 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Hey
In your intro to the post you said:
You have just collectively sign Matt Holliday to a 5-year, $100 million deal.
Is that what everyone thinks it will take to get him ?.
Beltran makes 18 million, right ?.
by fxcarden on Oct 7, 2009 7:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Matt Holliday
has Scott Boras, and I’m sure at least 2 or 3 more teams will make serious bids to get him. Plus if it means anything Holliday is getting fewer years.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 7, 2009 7:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Beltran has Boras, too.
Hey, if we can convince Francoeur to switch agents ( I don’t who he has ), we can have the All-Boras outfield.
How awesome would that be ?.
by fxcarden on Oct 7, 2009 7:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Idk
All I can say has the market has changed a bit since Beltran was signed.
i.e. Tex, Sabathia, Burnett
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 7, 2009 9:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I voted for Francoeur,
not because I want him there, but I feel like it will happen regardless. Omar and Jerry seem to love what he brings to the table (whatever that is), and I’m sure that he’ll be starting in right next year regardless of the logic against the move. While LF, C, 1B, and the pitching staff should lead to some interesting stories this winter, I doubt we’ll hear any legit talk of Jeff’s replacement this winter. Hopefully either Jeff learns to take pitches or F! forces him onto the bench.
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Schmidtxc on Oct 7, 2009 9:16 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't get this
The point of this whole thing isn’t to change the managments mind it’s to see what we WOULD do if we held the reigns.
If you want Francoeur, put Francoeur. If you want Bradley, put Bradley. It’s simple.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 7, 2009 10:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd love to have just about any other RF in baseball,
but Frenchy will be the guy. To me it makes sense to focus on what we would do to improve the areas we may actually address, rather than one that likely won’t be discussed internally.
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Schmidtxc on Oct 8, 2009 5:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE WHAT YOU WANT, not the FO.
Jeez, guys. Am I the only one who understood the directions?
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Oct 7, 2009 10:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I understood
and voted for Pagan
"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"
by firejerrynow on Oct 8, 2009 6:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
In this case, we've discussed the matter quite in depth over the last few months.
Most people have made their Francoeur opinions known, and it always ignites quite the pissing contest. I understand having this discussion with Ollie, who regrettably will probably be unmoveable. Francoeur is just rehashing the same argument that we’ve been having here for the latter portion of the season.
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Schmidtxc on Oct 8, 2009 5:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think I'm going to call this one soon
I’m waiting till 7 or 8 o clock tonight, but after 87 votes Pagan has a healthy 11% lead and has been winning pretty much this whole time.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 8, 2009 3:41 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Please do....
then, I can vote for trading Francoeur to the BJ’s in the Halladay deal.
.sarcasm.
by fxcarden on Oct 8, 2009 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey guys, we're set fr 2010 !
Francoeur in right, and this guy in left…..
by fxcarden on Oct 9, 2009 1:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
DeWayne Wise declared free agency
I’m definitely not saying he should be the starting RF or even on the team at all but he’s an interesting candidate for a 4th spot. Of course, he has a pathetic career wOBA of .278. But his defense also earned 79.6 UZR/150 in RF, 21.4 UZR/150 in CF last year, good enough to outweigh his dismal offensive line to the tune of .6 WAR in just 84 games.
He’s also known, of course, for robbing that home run to preserve Buehrle’s perfect game.
What do you guys think?
by TheBigStapler on Oct 9, 2009 1:28 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
as long as he is younger and more athletic....
than the rock.
by fxcarden on Oct 9, 2009 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bench option I guess
I look at these polls more as just for the sake of having these players on the team at this point, not necessariy if you start them.
by METSMETSMETS on Oct 9, 2009 8:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 



















