The Mets Without Jose Reyes
by R_Adragna on May 17, 2009 1:20 PM EDT
Email
PrintWhenever I watch a Mets game on TV and when Jose Reyes is in the line-up, the one phrase that stands out the most from the people calling the games is "As Reyes goes, so do the Mets." For the most part, they are right about that. However, the last three games told something completely different. In those games, Reyes has had to sit out due to a stiff calf while his teammates picked up the slack and won each of those games without him. Most of all, it's not the fact that they won; rather, it's how they won. Successfully aggressive baserunning, contributions from unlikely sources (Alex Cora, for example), Wright hitting for base hits and not the long ball, and those ninth-inning runs, regardless of the situation, are prime factors. Having seen and heard those games, I begun to think that maybe the aforementioned phrase isn't all that it's cracked up to be. Maybe the Mets can go even without Reyes in their line-up.
I'm curious as to how each and every one of you feels about this. If you ask me, even with how the Mets won those previous three contests, I still believe that Reyes can make this team even more dangerous than they already are.
This FanPost was contributed by a member of the community and was not subject to any vetting or approval process. It does not necessarily reflect the opinions, reasoning skills, or attention to grammar and usage rules held by the editors of this site.
53 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
3 games mean...nothing
when you evaluating long term trends. and the bigger reason they’ve won these games is just as much due to Wright and the bottom of the lineup putting up big numbers.
If you remember, the Mets strength has been scoring a lot of runs at the beginning of the games too. That’s at least partially based off Reyes leading things off. They haven’t been as good at that lately. Reyes is a fantastic player and the heart of the Mets. When he gets traded by people underrating him, it will be a sad day for the Mets.
When asked why I was a Mets fan, I responded, "pain is my lifeblood."
Gah...fail post.
At least you aren’t suggesting we should trade Reyes. But I mean, please. Manuel SHOULD put Reyes in the lineup…now.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
We can live without Delgado for a few weeks
I think we’d be in much deeper trouble if the Reyes injury was more serious. Tatis’ replacing him long-term is much better than Cora replacing Reyes long-term.
He’s doing a decent job though in the interim and if Jerry could just find his way to bury him a little deeper in the order, I have no problem giving JR a chance to get healthy. He needs his legs to be 100% to make the kind of impact that he can.
Reyes is legit hurt. The benching scenario is valid for one game not three!
Manuel shouldn’t play him until he is ready to play at full speed.
Obviously.
But supposedly he’s feeling better, and I think he should be utilized by the time we get to LA at least if he’s ready.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
I read he was feeling better also so I'm hoping he can go tonight
It would be good to get his timing before they play the Dodgers
I agree with ya. However, the basis of my post is that, even if Reyes is the most exciting player in the game and makes the Mets exciting to watch in the eyes of the casual fan, I think too many people take this “As Reyes goes, so do the Mets” thing WAY too seriously and believe it to be gospel. Why not “As Wright goes, so do the Mets” or “As Voltron goes, so do the Mets”? Anyone ever consider that?
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!
how about:
As Reyes, Wright, and Voltron go, so go the Mets?
We have the best 3-man core in baseball – losing any of the three of them would be bad for the Mets.
by cjmulrain on May 17, 2009 4:34 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I no longer feel that Reyes is hurt. He was BENCHED.
There is no way possible that Reyes can’t pinch hit last nightt but can play at short tonight. Not buying it all anymore.
benched for 4 games?
sorry, I don’t buy it. And if it really is true, every single person on that coaching staff and front office should be fired for incompetence, and that goes down to the interns.
"I still believe that Reyes can make this team even more dangerous than they already are."
this.
"The definition of edge is going out there and getting a few wins, and then all of a sudden you don’t have to worry about anyone talking about edge anymore," Wright said. "That's a thing in the past. Go ask Omar about that."
by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on May 17, 2009 2:12 PM EDT reply actions
just saying
that i agree with that statement of yours. as well as Alex Cora is playing as a back-up, that is what he is and we’re far better off with Jose in the line-up.
"The definition of edge is going out there and getting a few wins, and then all of a sudden you don’t have to worry about anyone talking about edge anymore," Wright said. "That's a thing in the past. Go ask Omar about that."
by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on May 17, 2009 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions
The good news
is that Cora appears to be competent enough to fill in adequately for Reyes when called on. This doesn’t mean Cora should play especially often, but it means the Mets should be more comfortable resting Reyes more frequently than in past seasons. So, 150 Reyes starts instead of 160.
Agreed
Reyes is perfectly capable of playing every day, and he usually stays healthy. But he doesn’t need to be in the lineup every single day. The Mets have a pretty good backup in Cora, and I’m glad that he’s getting some playing time and taking advantage.
offensively? Yes.
defensively? Oh, god no.
by DevonEdwards on May 17, 2009 4:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Historically isn't today, though.
I feel Reyes is a safer bet defensively going forward than Cora.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
But even based on empirical evidence...
It appears that Reyes has lost something defensively over the last season and change.
by All Shook Down on May 17, 2009 6:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Maybe
He was definitely down defensively last year, but I feel like he’s done a bit better this year, and when you look at comparable career trends, he hasn’t gotten so bad that he can’t get it back. Jimmy Rollins defense was pretty erratic during the early part of his career, and didn’t really stabilize until his late 20s.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on May 17, 2009 7:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Once again
I’m a Stats guy, but you can’t tell me Alex Cora has been as good, this season, as we would expect Reyes to be. Don’t let the statistics tell you something your eyes know simply isn’t true. That’s almost as bad as Sam telling me that Church is worse defensively than Daniel Murphy. Maybe on paper, but Reyes is a far better defensive player than Cora at short, and nothing you possibly say could convince me otherwise. There have been at least a half-dozen plays the past few games that Cora didn’t make that I’m absolutely sure Reyes would’ve. Stats lie.
by DevonEdwards on May 17, 2009 6:56 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm pretty sure that's not what he said
So far Cora has been bad defensively, but so has Reyes, over their careers they’ve been similar.
Don't trust your eyes with defense.
King of the bling come to lay down the evidence//Not George Bush, L-Millz be da president
do you really trust UZR that much though?
I think as more defensive metrics come out, the ones today are going to be shown to be about as accurate for judging fielders as batting average and RBI are for judging hitters. I just don’t trust them enough to believe that Daniel Murphy is our best fielding outfielder, because, well, he’s not.
Fielding Percentage=RBI
and I never said Daniel Murphy is the best defensive outfielder on our team.
King of the bling come to lay down the evidence//Not George Bush, L-Millz be da president
The problem with resolving defensive stats
Is that there are just so many possible defensive outcomes. With some metrics, it just may be that certain situations have just happened to come up frequently for Murphy but not for Church or Beltran. I mean, how may defensive outcomes actually significantly impact run prevention? Maybe Murphy’s made 20 plays with significant run-prevention value and messed up 5 that drastically hurt run prevention. Church may not have even had 20 opportunities for high-value run prevention. So even if he’s messed up just 2 or 3 plays, a defensive metric will rate him lower simply out of opportunity, which obviously, Church has no control over.
Sample size becomes a completely different monster with defensive stats because there are just so many different incremental possibilities that each denote a completely different situation and yield a completely different level of value.
The real value of the developing defensive metrics is that they’re ridiculously accurate over a large enough sample compared to anything that existed before. Defense is still tremendously undervalued in today’s game, and the defensive metrics can really allow for a new level of precision in team building. But as far as evaluating what a player’s done over the stretch of a month or two, I don’t think they’re particularly useful unless you get a really big number, plus or minus.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on May 18, 2009 12:39 AM EDT up reply actions
I don't disagree with any of that
but I’m pretty sure I saw Sam (it may have been someone else) cite this seasons UZR as evidence that Murphy is really a better fielder than Ryan Church.
I'll admit it's too soon to really say either way
I just want people to get off this “Daniel Murphy: huge defensive liability” talk.
King of the bling come to lay down the evidence//Not George Bush, L-Millz be da president
fair enough
I don’t think he’s a major liability, at least insofar as range is concerned. But I don’t think he’s anywhere near as good as Ryan Church, who is one of the better defensive right fielders I remember the Mets having in recent seasons.
No I know, I was backing you up ;)
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on May 18, 2009 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Cora was probably better 10 years ago
King of the bling come to lay down the evidence//Not George Bush, L-Millz be da president
And it doesn't mean that Cora should've received a $2M contract either
by All Shook Down on May 17, 2009 5:02 PM EDT up reply actions
according to fangraphs
cora’s 0.4 WAR this season has been worth $1.6 million. even if cora regresses and only performs at a league average level, he’ll probably be worth the $2 million.
by englishgrey on May 17, 2009 11:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah but that doesn't factor in the market crash
When guys like Eric Hinske and Craig Counsell are making 2.5 million combined, Cora isn’t worth 2 million, and I actually think Cora’s contract is worth up to 2.5 million.
according to cot's baseball contracts, the base salary is $2 million
with performance bounses of $.25 million if he starts 110, 120, 130 and 140 games. i doubt he’ll start anywhere near 110 games though. so if cora makes $2 million this season, then maybe omar overpaid for him by $0.5 to 0.75 million. if cora continues to play well, then i think he’ll be worth the contract, market crash and all.
by englishgrey on May 17, 2009 11:51 PM EDT up reply actions
But considering all these things...
The market crash, lack of power at the corner OF spots, etc., would you rather have Hinske or Cora for $2M. I’m taking Hinske because he’s more likely to sustain an above-average level of production over the course of a full season. Cora’s 0.4 WAR is buoyed by his .395 wOBA, which is inflated by a .370 BABIP. WAR isn’t a money-in-the-bank counting stat; it fluctuates based on the rate of production throughout the season. (And I’m guessing that the value component on FanGraphs will change at the end of the season, once it is determined how much teams paid per win in 2009.)
All that said, I don’t really have a beef with Cora’s presence on the team. And actually, I don’t have a beef with most of the players Minaya and Co. identify as helpful players. Unfortunately, he’s done a poor job of valuing those players properly, leading to the team’s current financial inflexibility.
by All Shook Down on May 18, 2009 5:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Its pretty hard to imagine
The Mets scoring more runs over a 50 or 100 game stretch without Reyes than with him. In three games, anything can happen. Could it be that the Mets have been scoring nine runs per game because Wright and Beltran have been crushing doubles constantly over that stretch?
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on May 17, 2009 2:27 PM EDT reply actions
Even if it's because of a minor injury
I’m glad to see Reyes get some days off. Reyes/Wright/Beltran/Delgado played basically every game last season, something that is unsustainable in the long run. If I’m reading the post correctly, you’re basically saying that in the short run a team is capable of success even without one of it’s 2 or 3 best players. In the long run though, the Mets are a far better team with Reyes than the Coras of the world, to the tune of like ~4 wins.
by James Kannengieser on May 17, 2009 4:21 PM EDT reply actions
Agreed
I said this once already, Reyes’ legs are the two most important appendages on the roster, save Johan Santana’s left arm. Any and all costs should be taken to keep Reyes’s legs healthy. Even if he’s probably okay to play, if its any kind of leg injury, you be as cautious as you possible can about it.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on May 17, 2009 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Basically, James, I’m sick of hearing people treat the adage of “As Reyes goes” like it’s the end-all, be-all about the Mets. As quickly as they are to bring it up, they are just as quick to not acknowledge the jobs well done by other players (Wright, Voltron, or even Santana). It’s as if everything, to those people, is centered around Reyes. Now, I’m not saying it shouldn’t because he is the heart of the team, but for the love of God, but why not give that same recognition to others (the three aforementioned Mets, for example)?
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!
Absolutely
Its a tremendous luxury to have three of the best players in the league. Beltran has been off the charts good this year so far, and for all of Wright’s early “struggles,” he’s gotten ridiculously hot all of a sudden and has a better OPS than his career mark.
And the thing is, its not even just the core, there’s enough offense on the bench to scrap by, too, which is I think the most positive indication. You expect to get great production out of the three headed monster, and while Alex Cora isn’t going to have a .395 wOBA for long, Fernando Tatis is going to have much better stretches than his 1 for 9 in SF this year as well, and when you give guys like Wright and Reyes and Beltran a bit of extra support, they have a chance to just completely go off offensively. And that’s exactly what we’ve seen the last few games.
Even more, aside from putting hitters in the right order, I really like the way Jerry’s handling the lineup considering all the injury problems. He’s gotten Sheffield some PAs, and he’s finally found some holes and been more than adequate. And I have no problem with how he’s handling Murphy and Church. I don’t want Gary Sheffield or Fernando Tatis patrolling RF at AT&T park, or very often at Citi Field. I think he’s putting his position players in the best situations for team success, and for all the complaining I’ve done about him, its nice to finally feel like he’s doing something kinda right.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on May 17, 2009 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions
That's what I feel best about going forward this year.
Despite the fact that we overpaid for Cora, have too many outfielders, probably shouldn’t have traded Endy, shoulda signed Dunn, etc., etc., this bench>>>last year’s bench.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
I agree
That’s what happens when you shed Marlon Anderson and Damion Easley — basically the same can’t field, can kinda hit player with opposite-handedness.
by All Shook Down on May 17, 2009 6:38 PM EDT up reply actions
Good point on the handedness
I think this is what’s impressed me most about Cora’s nice little hot stretch, he’s really stayed in ABs vs tough lefties very well, much better than I expected. But looking at his career numbers now, he actually has generally hit lefties fairly well, at least compared to how well he’s hit righties. He actually has a better career OPS vs LHP.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on May 17, 2009 7:07 PM EDT up reply actions
He's a very professional player.
And all the stuff you said.
by All Shook Down on May 17, 2009 7:25 PM EDT up reply actions
But seriously
Not that he deserved $2M in a market that saw good players going at bargain prices, but I’m glad Cora’s around because he Sham-WOW-ed the aforementioned Easley and Anderson from the Mets’ bench bringing the ability to field three positions competently and it allowed the team to carry an extra bench player.
by All Shook Down on May 17, 2009 7:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Exactly
I mean, his career OPS that’s better vs. LHP is still sub-.700, and I’ve ragged on him a lot so far this year, but he’s done a nice job and definitely seems to have his uses. He does remind me a bit of a lefty Chris Woordward, a guy who can play just about anywhere most likely and eventually give you a gapper, but someone you definitely don’t want playing every day.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on May 17, 2009 11:45 PM EDT up reply actions
I think we can last a few games without him
But I think if we lost any of our big 4 for an extended period of time I’d probably just assume the season was over.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Amazin' Avenue
Related FanShots on Amazin' Avenue
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Five tips for Showtime’s second season of ‘The Franchise,’ featuring the Miami Marlins
- The 10 best things about being a Detroit Tigers fan
- Surprise! A’s finally end the Yoenis Cespedes derby with $36 million deal for Cuban star
- The time Whitney Houston sang to Jim Bowden
- Pitchers and catchers! Mariners get early start in Arizona
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
