Sheffield A Met

by Eric Simon on Apr 3, 2009 4:37 PM EDT

The Mets today signed Gary Sheffield with an eye on giving him significant playing time, according to three people involved in the talks.

One person who talked directly to Sheffield said the slugger preferred the Mets over the Phillies because he sees a greater potential for playing time, and wants the heavier workload as a way to showcase for the 2010 season.

Sheffield, released by the Tigers earlier this week, is a free agent at the conclusion of this season. He is expected to arrive in New York tonight and address the media tomorrow.

The deal is contingent on Sheffield passing a physical Saturday, Mets general manager Omar Minaya said.

As we discussed earlier, this deal is low-risk if the Mets play it right. If Sheffield behaves himself, he can provide an adequate bat off the bench as a pinch hitter as well as to spell Daniel Murphy, Ryan Church and, occasionally, Carlos Delgado. His signing probably means the end of Marlon Anderson's career with the Mets, which is also good news.

There are two ways this could be a bad deal for the Mets.

Sheffield actually takes considerable playing time away from Murphy or Church, unless one or the other is playing really poorly and Sheffield is playing really well.
Sheffield broods and pouts about a lack of playing time, becoming a colossal douche and a clubhouse distraction.

The first concern can be tempered by simply sticking to the plan of Murphy in left, Church in right. The second one can be assuaged by releasing Sheffield the minute he outlives his usefulness.

Tweet Comment 28 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

New Stadium

Any ideas on how the new stadium will play as far being hitter or pitcher friendly? Any articles on this that you could point me to? Thanks.
vr, Xei

by Xeifrank on Apr 3, 2009 5:10 PM EDT reply actions

Yea

Try here.

by Eric Simon on Apr 3, 2009 5:15 PM EDT up reply actions

This is scary

“significant playing time”

I thought we were over signing veteran players and letting them start over the future (and quite frankly, the now)?

Also, if we were going after a veteran/former steroid user/possible clubhouse cancer to get “significant playing time,” how about Barry Bonds?

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

by BlackOps on Apr 3, 2009 5:21 PM EDT reply actions

Sheffield

is lots of things, but he’s not generally considered a clubhouse problem from what I understand. He’s a hard worker and good teammate. I guess that could all change if he’s not happy with playing time, but the risk is low. And anything that sends Marlon packing can’t be bad.

by whynot on Apr 3, 2009 6:39 PM EDT up reply actions

I don't know how valid it is

But I’ve definitely heard Sheffield referred to as a clubhouse cancer more than once.

by Gina on Apr 3, 2009 6:44 PM EDT up reply actions

One thing he won't do

He probably can’t accuse the manager of being a racist.

by Reg Dunlop on Apr 3, 2009 7:25 PM EDT up reply actions

Not in Detroit

Sheff’s two-year stint with the Tigers didn’t go as hoped, but from everything I’ve heard or read, he wasn’t a problem in the clubhouse. Did he cause headaches sometimes with his mouth, such as when he made his Joe Torre remarks or spouted conspiracy theories? Yes, those were distractions, but never affected anything on the field.

Bless You Boys

by Ian Casselberry on Apr 3, 2009 7:55 PM EDT up reply actions

Not a clubhouse cancer?

This is a guy who admitted he made mistakes in the field to get traded out of Milwaukee. He once called his manager a racist. I’m cautiously optimistic about this deal (ecstatic about the getting rid of Marlon part), and Sheffield’s history as a major asshole is a big part of that. Hopefully, the fact that the Tigers chose to waive him just before Opening Day (and his 500th home run) sent a message to him.

by BobbyV_Incognito on Apr 4, 2009 12:46 AM EDT up reply actions

this could be ok

i think the story itself, the signing of a vetren OF/bench slugger for the league minimum, is a pretty nothing story, but is getting way more attention because its a big name former star.

neyer poo poos the deal a bit here, but the main thing i took away from it was, so what? what if it was reversed and we already had sheff and then we signed tatis to the league min? no one would care. worst case scenario is we barely notice the decrease in production if sheff gets a disproportionate amount of playing time, because if he does jerk it up in the clubhouse, as eric pointed out, we’d just cut him.

so basically its a meh but could be interesting.

HELLO HELLO MR WILPON. WE WANT THE MANSION NOT THE CONDO.

by kendynamo on Apr 3, 2009 5:27 PM EDT reply actions

The thing with that comparison

is that, if the situation were reversed, I don’t think signing Tatis at the league minimum would create any expectation of “significant” playing time. He’d just be another bat off the bench. Here we have a potential douchelord who is apparently expecting to play.

I hope he hits #500, walks off the field and retires immediately. That’s my best case scenario.

'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 Apr 3, 2009 7:29 PM EDT up reply actions

I should amend myself

The best case scenario is that Sheff realizes his limitations and abilities at this stage in his career, accepts a bench role and contributes to a Champtionship season in Queens.

I do, however, enjoy the walking away scenario I wrote above.

by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on Apr 3, 2009 7:56 PM EDT up reply actions

What about

him coming in, beating our Ryan Church quickly for the job, and hitting .294/.380/.530 with 31 HRs, 106 RBIs, and 94 runs scored?

Cuz I’d take that, too.

Not that it’s happening, or anything.

by Caseys Kiss of Death on Apr 3, 2009 9:34 PM EDT up reply actions

Sure

If we’re going a bit unrealistic with the best case scenario, then I guess hitting 1.000/1.000/4.000 over 162 games with, oh, I don’t know, 600 HR, 2400 RBI and 600 runs would be okay. But I’ll settle with competent, unobstructive bench player.

by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on Apr 3, 2009 9:57 PM EDT up reply actions

Haha

I know, I was joking…though see directly below this post for a reasonable possibility (though not a probability) if he could stay healthy.

by Caseys Kiss of Death on Apr 3, 2009 9:59 PM EDT up reply actions

A move back to the NL means his shoddy glove has to play, too

but I’m excited for the upside. If he can stay reasonably healthy, he’s not too drastically removed from the years in which he put up some stellar numbers. I could easily envsion and .850+ OPS in 300 PAs.

by Caseys Kiss of Death on Apr 3, 2009 6:34 PM EDT reply actions

LOL @ "becoming a colossal douche"

Gary Cohen essentially paraphrased that statement earlier in the broadcast.

"One of the nice things about baseball is that there are no rules you can't break." - Jim Bouton

by Prince on Apr 3, 2009 7:08 PM EDT reply actions

All the negatives I hear about Sheff...

come from media types that don’t like him. My thing is, show me the conflict between teammates. That’s when you have a better idea about whether a guy is a jerk. I don’t see any references to that about Sheffield. Invariably, he’s a jerk based on things he said to the media.

Yet, we know that few gatekeepers are more petty and vindictive than baseball writers. If a guy doesn’t care for the media, and has politics they don’t appreciate, then he’s a clubhouse cancer—end of story. (Of course if they like your politics then you’re just “outspoken” like Kurt Schilling.)

A-Rod, Bonds, Manny, Jeff Kent, Milton Bradley are all guys who have bad reputations for one reason or another with the media. But, at least you can point to specific incidents where those guys’ teammates or other players in the league have basically said, “this guy is a jerk.” That’s really not the case with Sheff. I’m not suggesting he’s a prince among men, or that I agree with everything that comes out of his mouth. I’m just saying that I don’t understand what all this “clubhouse cancer” talk is based on. That seems like mostly hype and spin to me. About the only thing I’ve heard that has some merit is him screwing up on purpose to get out of Milwaukee. I’m willing to give a guy a lot of rope who was trying to free himself from Bud Selig’s clutches. Subsequent to that I haven’t heard anything about him being anything other than a pro hitter.

If you wanna tell me his bat has slowed I hear you. If you wanna tell me he may be dissatisfied with playing time I hear that too. Those are legitimate risks. Whether they are offset by the cost and production only time will tell. But it seems to me that the media and some fans are already setting this up to be a self-fulfilling prophesy where they’re going to hyper-scrutinize every utterance and movement so that every two game losing streak will ultimately be because of Sheffield’s attitude.

"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin

by dcrockett17 on Apr 4, 2009 8:38 AM EDT reply actions

Hear Hear

You never hear teammates say he’s a problem and that’s when a guy can wreck a clubhouse. And at 400K it’s a chance worth taking. especially if it sends MA packing.

And wasn’t that Milwaukee incident about 18 years ago when he in his early 20’s?

by whynot on Apr 4, 2009 10:44 AM EDT up reply actions

what writers

agree with Schillings politics?

by cjmulrain on Apr 4, 2009 11:02 AM EDT up reply actions

I'm sure

I’m sure there were a few people that were ticked off in MIL when he botched plays. That’s the only one I can really think of though. Even with Joe Torre, I bet a lot of teammates just kind of thought that was funny and clownish because of the way he said it.

by Mark Himmelstein on Apr 4, 2009 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions

This is a great deal for the Mets. It is only costing them the major league minimum (400k) and Shef should hit his share at the new stadium.

by Nyiles on Apr 4, 2009 8:59 AM EDT reply actions

From fangraphs

this just made me lol.

The Gary Sheffield sweepstakes didn’t last long, as the mercurial slugger signed with the Mets this afternoon. He will reportedly replace Marlon Anderson on the roster, so he’s being given the lowest hurdle to clear in the history of hurdling.

by Gina on Apr 4, 2009 1:24 PM EDT reply actions

He’s 40 years old, hit .225 last season, was almost equally bad against righties and lefties, plays no defense, and is an extremely temperamental former star being asked to play a part-time role for the first time in his career. I guess I get why the Mets would make this move, but I don’t see this ending well.

Lead Writer
Gang Green Nation
SB Nation's Jets Blog
ganggreennation.com

by John B on Apr 4, 2009 4:32 PM EDT reply actions