Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: PHOTOS: Mike Moser's Dunk Face Is Spectacular

A Simple Request Regarding Niese

Jon Niese makes his return to the major leagues tonight, after dominating AAA since his May demotion to the tune of 71.2 IP, 57 K's, 18 BB's and a 3.01 ERA.  He should never have been sent down, as the Mets Brainstorm likely based their decision on his 5.91 ERA rather than his 5.0 K/BB and 50% GB% (in a small sample of just 10.2 innings pitched).  Why Niese was allowed just 1 poor start while other inferior pitchers were allowed 3 before risk of demotion is perplexing. Regardless, he is back now and my request for the Brainstorm is simple: leave him up for the rest of the season.  Don't be frightened by his inevitable blow-up start(s) - he is certainly the 3rd best, and maybe the 2nd best, starting pitcher on the roster.  Give him 12 starts to finish the season; give him the chance to fail.

Fortunately this is a request I think will be heeded because there just aren't enough active arms in this organization to go around.  John Maine is probably done for the year; ditto Fernando Nieve.  The ideal situation would also include dropping Livan Hernandez from the rotation and a call-up of Nelson Figueroa.  It wouldn't be a drastic, season changing improvement.  However, if given the choice between a 34(?) year-old glorified batting practice pitcher who has lucked his way to a few WINZZ against the Nationals or a 35 year-old AAA All-Star who would likely perform slightly below league average, I'll take the latter.  

Comment 56 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

I'm so thrilled the nickname "Jona-Fin" Niese is up there.

And I agree with all of this. We gave Pelf time to fail, and he emerged as a more than decent pitcher. Niese will probably do that in an even shorter time span.

"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw

by squid92 on Jul 25, 2009 11:45 AM EDT reply actions  

Agreed......what do we have to lose......

OT: at this point…….PLEASE don’t rush Reyes back……….let him heal 100%.

by fxcarden on Jul 25, 2009 12:09 PM EDT up reply actions  

You forgot the italics, Cerrone :-)

Everyone is entitled to be stupid, but Jerry abuses the privilege.

by AnthonyR on Jul 25, 2009 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

Of course

From what I gather, the buzz is … ellipses … mean business.

by mnbv on Jul 25, 2009 1:18 PM EDT up reply actions  

Ha!

From what I can gather. He says that in every single post he makes. What he really means is, from what I could scrounge off of MLBTR in 5 minutes to make this post I will present as my own research….

"It's like the old phrase goes.....The balls in your court now Mr.Church, so you take that ball, you dribble it up the court and....................................... get a layup"
- Keith Hernandez

by nrmax88 on Jul 26, 2009 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions  

I hate to be a contrarian...

(well, actually, I love to be a contrarian, but not usually around here because posters here generally make a lot of sense), but I can’t stand the nickname “Jona-Fin”. It doesn’t sound like it’s an allusion to his nose, it sounds like his name as said by a little kid who hasn’t figured out how to pronounce the “th” sound yet, and as a result it’s not at all intimidating. Therefore, I’m going to call him “The Shark”.

by JoshNY on Jul 25, 2009 5:50 PM EDT up reply actions  

How about

Jona Finesse?

"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw

by squid92 on Jul 25, 2009 6:43 PM EDT up reply actions  

No love for Livan?

I do not quite get it. Yes, he had 3 wins against Nationals, but also the bullpen blew 4 (!) games for him. Yes, he is terrible at times and the wins are meaningless stat around here. But are there really so meaningless? Personally, I am not jumping on that bandwagon entirely. There definitely is some “pitching to the game” aspect with Livan, and I honestly believe that Livan would have won yesterday – while Santana pretty much gave away the game twice after the Mets scored. This is not a knock against Santana, just an appreciation of what Livan brings to the table. Again, the guy could have been 10-5 with a flawless bullpen and these decisions would still not include solid (albeit lucky) outings agains Cards and Yankees, in both of which Livan went 7 innings with 3 runs.

by alexSVK on Jul 25, 2009 1:17 PM EDT reply actions  

No.
Yes, he is terible at times and the wins are meaningless stat around here. But are there really so meaningless?

Yes…that’s why you just said they’re meaningless around here…because they’re not indicative of his true talent…

"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw

by squid92 on Jul 25, 2009 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions  

well,

I think I understand why this community does not put much weight into wins. And, in fact, I agree with that. My point was that that does not mean that the wins are totally meaningless. Because guess what — the number of wins is what decides whether the Mets make the postseason or not. And for 1 million a year, I’ll take a pitcher who in 18 starts averages 6 innings, and leaves 10 games while winning and 6 games while losing (two of which are still relatively within reach).

by alexSVK on Jul 25, 2009 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions  

Wins aren't meaningless.

PITCHER wins are.

"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw

by squid92 on Jul 25, 2009 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions  

What about his start vs the Phills

or the 1st time vs the yanks or the Dodgers.Livan has been lucky this whole season.If the Nats stop swinging at his junk that line up would own him.And if our ace can’t beat Houston what makes you think Livan would have

by Jadden Hopkins on Jul 25, 2009 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

nothing,

also, I was not saying that Livan would have beaten Houston for sure. I was just saying, that – if handed a lead – I trust Livan more than his $1M paycheck suggests. So far, he blew only 4 leads he was given.

by alexSVK on Jul 25, 2009 2:18 PM EDT up reply actions  

Livan has pitched in 8 games that the Mets have won

In those games, the Mets have averaged 6.5 runs scored, well done Livan.

by Sokojoe on Jul 25, 2009 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions  

sure, it's called adverse selection problem...

if you concentrate only on a (favorable) subset of results, you’ll naturally get impressive stats. Yeah, Livan had 6.5 runs scored support, but he also had only 17 ER in 52 IP, i.e. 2.94 ERA. By comparison, Pelfrey in 10 games the Mets won had a run support 5.6 and 22 ER in 65IP, i.e. 3.05 ERA. I’m not entirely sure what you can conclude from this. (Well done, Pelfrey, I guess.)

by alexSVK on Jul 25, 2009 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions  

The point is you cant conclude anything

just as you cant conclude anything from Wins. Through your analysis of wins you can now also say Pelfrey knows how to pitch to a win since they have similar results in win situation. Or this has no correlation and wins is a poor metric for evaluating pitchers which you have shown.

by Sokojoe on Jul 25, 2009 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

poor? Maybe. Entirely worthless? Definitely not.

(I am also not claiming Pelfrey to be worthless like the author claims Livan to be.)

by alexSVK on Jul 25, 2009 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions  

I prefer to use worthwhile stats to evaluate players

rather than using baseless statements like “he pitches to the score” or whatever. This season, Livan has been worth -0.1 WAR, posting a 5.25 tERA. That is not good. It’s replacement level. He’s had his moments I suppose, but it’s tough to be successful when you have the 2nd slowest fastball in the game to Jamie Moyer, only without Moyer’s command. Niese and Figueroa > Livan.

by James Kannengieser on Jul 25, 2009 5:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

fair enough...

but I simply cannot agree with the comment that Livan “has lucked his way to a few WINZZ against the Nationals”, where in fact he was taken away 4 additional wins by the bullpen.

by alexSVK on Jul 25, 2009 5:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

yeah,

and (starting) pitchers have nothing to do with wins, right?

Look, all I’m saying is that I believe there are guys (Livan?) who are pitching differently (better) when their team is up 3-2 in the 6th than when the team is down 3-6. That’s all.

by alexSVK on Jul 25, 2009 1:51 PM EDT reply actions  

Right. Of course.

Because Livan knows that he can be shitty some days, and less shitty on others.

"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw

by squid92 on Jul 25, 2009 2:15 PM EDT up reply actions  

Win loss record for pitchers is the absolute stupidest statistic ever.

"We must win and we must know how to win rather than win because we have statistical people."

by Evan_S on Jul 25, 2009 3:27 PM EDT up reply actions  

Is GWRBI even a stat people use?

Holds are pretty stupid too

"We must win and we must know how to win rather than win because we have statistical people."

by Evan_S on Jul 25, 2009 3:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

We use it

Or, Eric does in the game recaps. Mostly for comedic effect, I believe.

"He's definitely mixing it into his repertoire. That's French for 'repertoire' " - Keith Hernandez

by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on Jul 25, 2009 4:12 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

Well its certainly not for its informative value

"We must win and we must know how to win rather than win because we have statistical people."

by Evan_S on Jul 25, 2009 4:30 PM EDT up reply actions  

It was popular in the 80s

Eric’s use is tongue-in-cheek. Hockey still uses GWG though.

by Sokojoe on Jul 25, 2009 4:42 PM EDT up reply actions  

The point of a personal statistic in sports

Is to identify the quality of a player. A stat like W-L just doesn’t do that effectively, since its based on so many extraneous factors, and only subjectively defines a pitcher’s quality from start to start based on what the rest of the team managed to accomplish. Its the same reason ERA is a flawed statistic, because it tells you lots of things the pitcher has no control over. Its about a lot more than the pitcher-batter relationship, as opposed to stats like GB%, K%, and tRA, which are products and component products of the pitcher-batter relationship exclusively.

"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet

What a fool I was to defy him"

-HST

by Mark Himmelstein on Jul 25, 2009 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions  

sure, and I understand this pretty well.

The difference is, that while most of you guys seem to claim that W-L is totally worthless, my point is that – as any stat – it does give some information. Also, while being a mathematician (or maybe because of it?), I’m not entirely sold on the impeccability of stats like GB%, K% and tRA. Why? Because of the assumption that these percentages (for a given pitcher) are stationary, i.e. situation-independent. I simply do not buy this assumption. Or, I admit, maybe I just have not studied the concept enough.

by alexSVK on Jul 25, 2009 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions  

Win Loss tells you the result of the game not how well a pitcher pitched.

Alan Embree came into a game this year, picked off a runner to end the inning before throwing a pitched, got pinch hit for next inning, and got the win. He got a win without throwing a pitch, brilliant stat.

K% and GB% tell you exactly what they claim to, the percentage of strike outs and ground balls a pitcher gets. That result is completely dependent on the pitchers ability when given a large enough sample size. It is definite, there is no way to say, if pitcher A was on another team in another ballpark the results would be different, that is what a pitcher is capable of. In the rules of the win loss record statistic, a pitcher can start 33 games in a year, go 9 innings, give up one run and only one run every single game and go 0-33. Pedro Martinez once pitched a perfect game through 9 innings, his team didn’t score until the tenth. Sure he won the game, but it was entirely possible he could have lost that game in the tenth or received a no decision. The number of wins a pitcher has is not indicative of a pitchers performance. Look at Steve Trachsel in 05, he was terrible but won 15 games because the run support the Mets gave him. By looking at K%, BB%, GB%, etc, you find out the pitchers abilities independent of teams performance.

"We must win and we must know how to win rather than win because we have statistical people."

by Evan_S on Jul 25, 2009 4:43 PM EDT up reply actions  

Again, you're basically right

(and if you read all my comments carefully, you would understand that I understand your points entirely), but I have few reservations:
1) the discussion here is about starting pitcher’s, not reliever’s W-L record, which I agree does not make any sense. (I do not even agree with the way it is done.)
2) K% and GB% are not state and situation dependent. If I understand it correctly, the assumption is that, indepedent of the score of the game and situation on the bases, the pitcher delivers certain results with the same distribution of probability. I do not buy this assumption and claim that the probability distribution is dependent of the current state of the game.

by alexSVK on Jul 25, 2009 4:57 PM EDT up reply actions  

Can you explain why you don't buy that assumption?

"We must win and we must know how to win rather than win because we have statistical people."

by Evan_S on Jul 25, 2009 5:31 PM EDT up reply actions  

...

so you think that each pitcher pitches exactly the same way independent on whether the score is 5-0, 3-2 or 2-6? Do you think the probability of striking out opposing hitter is the same independent of the score? Do you really believe that the pitcher’s approach is the same? Because if yes, it effectively means that there’s absolutely no tactical or psychological aspect to pitching.

I really do not know, I just have hard time believing it. However, if there’s a study pointing to this conclusion, please let me know. I admit I have not studied this subject enough.

by alexSVK on Jul 25, 2009 5:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

I do

By your logic, a pitcher doesn’t want to strikeout a player as much when up 10-0 as opposed to 3-2. A player plays his hardest no matter what the score. The tactical aspects come up pitch to pitch. Which pitch will he swing at? How can I throw him off balance on here? What should I throw to set up my out pitch? Is he a free swinger? A patient hitter? They are always trying to get the batter out. There is no way a pitcher is thinking, “We’re up 13-2, I’m not gonna worry about striking him out, he gets a hit, who cares?” The only time something like that may come up is if the pitcher is erratic. If a team is up by 12 in the 5th, you don’t want to start walking everyone so you’re more likely to throw something they can hit. But that in itself is an indicator of a pitcher’s ability. The same with runners on first and third, one out. Obviously you don’t want to give up a hit or a deep fly ball, but a pitcher with extreme fly ball tendencies will probably give up the fly ball because that his how he pitches. A pitcher with ground ball tendencies will more likely get the double play. The ultimate goal of every pitcher-batter account is for the pitcher to get the batter out. A pitcher cannot will himself to strikeouts or ground outs based on situation, it will happen regardless of the situation because that is their skill.

"We must win and we must know how to win rather than win because we have statistical people."

by Evan_S on Jul 25, 2009 5:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'm not really sure what the point of these comments is

No statistic is flawless, I’m sure all would agree. The best we can do is find the most useful stats for judging player performance and predicting future performance. Stats like W-L record and RBI are highly dependent on factors outside a player’s control and are not good for this. Stats like K%, BB%, GB% are.

by James Kannengieser on Jul 25, 2009 5:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

OK, I admit that this discussion got carried away...

although I posted my last comment only because Evan_S explicitly asked for it.

I guess initially I reacted because I did not like your comment that Livan “has lucked his way to a few WINZZ against the Nationals”. Given that Livan could have had 10 wins by now, this comment seemed unfair to me.

by alexSVK on Jul 25, 2009 6:07 PM EDT up reply actions  

There are probably lots of pitchers who

“could” have 10 wins if they played on a team with a strong offense, defense, and bullpen.

The point is, in the case of saying “if the offense, defense, and bullpen are strong,” W-L record becomes more a question of number of innings a pitcher throws than his actual quality. Just look at Steve Trachsel’s 2006. All he was good for was taking the game to the 5th inning. He did very little else that was all that helpful. And yet he won 15 games. Tom Glavine, who actually pitched pretty well that year and threw a similar total number of innings, also won 15 games. The following year, with a very similar offensive/defensive/bullpen unit, John Maine and Oliver Perez both also threw a similar number of innings to Trachs in 2006 and also won the same number of games, despite pitching quite a bit better as well.

"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet

What a fool I was to defy him"

-HST

by Mark Himmelstein on Jul 25, 2009 6:39 PM EDT up reply actions  

If I happened to pitch ten games in which the Mets scored lots of runs,

I might have 10 wins too. Doesn’t mean I’m a good pitcher.

"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw

by squid92 on Jul 25, 2009 6:44 PM EDT up reply actions  

Situational dependence or lackthereof isn't the point though

The point is you have a set of data, and you analyze it. You can always get more precise, and you try to, but you’re dealing with so many numbers that if you can eliminate a level of precision or imprecision as gratuitous or unnecessary, you take advantage.

The problem with situational dependence is that some people talk about it like its the holy grail of statistical analysis, which couldn’t be further from the truth. On the micro scale of game theory, the situational element is important, very important. It effects various levels and elements of realtime decision making and reaction. The goal of statistical analysis is that you want to understand how those realtime situations correlate to various particular outcomes. What a stat like GB% tells you that a particular outcome is likely from all situations that fall into the set: [Pitcher X faces a batter]. Could we be more precise and ask questions about if that pitcher is any more likely to generate a groundball, say, with a runner at first and one out? Sure, but the amount of extra info you get by asking that question will tell us relative to just asking “what is a pitchers GB%” is much smaller than the difference between asking “what is a pitchers GB%?” and “What is a pitchers W-L record?” And generally the questions “What is a pitchers GB%?” and “What is a pitchers GB% with a runner on first and one out?” will have virtually the same answer if you let the sample size get big enough. This is because most pitchers would usually like to get groundballs anyway. Unless Ichiro circa 2001 is at the plate, a groundball is usually a favorable outcome. So perhaps the more variant and interesting question to ask is: “What is a Pitcher X’s GB% in situations where a groundball is not a favorable outcome?”

In the end, the point is you can get all the same information that W-L provides you from other statistical sources and so much more, so it becomes a fairly useless stat, at least in terms of analysis.

"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet

What a fool I was to defy him"

-HST

by Mark Himmelstein on Jul 25, 2009 6:31 PM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

thanks,

I think I can now identify the source of our dispute.

And generally the questions "What is a pitchers GB%?" and "What is a pitchers GB% with a runner on first and one out?" will have virtually the same answer if you let the sample size get big enough.

Assuming you’re right here, then there’s no more dispute. However, I simply have hard time believing the quote. (While admitting I might be wrong.)

by alexSVK on Jul 25, 2009 6:47 PM EDT up reply actions  

Even still

The above example is a fixed situation. A “W” is not derived from a fixed situation, its derived from a series of fluid circumstances. Because of this, its really impossible to get anything more than a vague sense than a true indication of quality.

But yeah, I understand what you’re saying, and it does seem somewhat counter intuitive, but I think you’re overestimating the degree of control pitcher and batter have. The possible outcomes are always the same, so the question the pitcher’s asking himself isn’t “what’s my best chance of getting a groundball” when a runner’s on first with one out. Its “well if I throw my changeup, he might roll it over to second or pop it up, but this guy uppercuts so I bet he’s more likely to either swing and miss OR hit a ball in the air, so what if I throw my two seamer? Nah, this guy hits ropes off low 90s fastballs like mine. If I throw a curve, I think I have a better than average chance of getting a groundball, but if I hang it, its probably going to leave the park.” What if there’s also a runner on third, too? Still fits the condition, and now a groundball is a slightly less favorable outcome, because a defensive gaffe becomes a run scoring play now. You can infinitely regress precision, or you can figure out what the most effective and efficient methods of using your time are to generate the most information you can with the data available.

"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet

What a fool I was to defy him"

-HST

by Mark Himmelstein on Jul 25, 2009 7:02 PM EDT up reply actions  

Wins

It is not impossible (rather, it seems probable) that some pitchers are better at protecting a lead than others. This trait is a desireable one. The number of wins a pitcher has doesn’t quite tell us that exactly or directly, but it may provide a rough estimation.

“Wins” aren’t a great stat and they don’t tell the full story, but its not a worthless number either. I consider it as a rough compilation of a few traits of a pitcher. Is he consistently pitching deep enough to get wins, is he protecting leads, is he allowing an amount of runs that is insurmountable. Of course we can get these answers elsewhere, but W’s are shiny and fast. A pitcher that wins 15+ games usually isn’t just getting by on luck.

by njk237 on Jul 25, 2009 4:30 PM EDT reply actions  

But its more of a correlation than a stat.

"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw

by squid92 on Jul 25, 2009 4:49 PM EDT up reply actions  

i buy that

i agree. my point was that its not unreasonable to take pitchers that are 15-7 and beleive them to be better than guys who are 7-15. on the whole, they are. wins are a sloppy and easy way to generalize about pitchers. its not perfect, and people that are as serious about baseball and evaluating teams and players as we are don’t have a whole lot of use for it, but it isn’t “worthless”.

by njk237 on Jul 25, 2009 6:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

Drop Livin for Nelson, are you crazy?

by Jersey Mike on Jul 26, 2009 1:45 AM EDT reply actions  

Umm...no....

"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw

by squid92 on Jul 26, 2009 1:57 AM EDT up reply actions  

Something I should've posted before

How the hell is Livan only 34? It seems like he’s been around for 25 years. I know he’s not actually 34, more like 40, but still it just seems like he been around forever.

"We must win and we must know how to win rather than win because we have statistical people."

by Evan_S on Jul 26, 2009 2:12 AM EDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Ricky-roma-300x224_small
Sabermetrics and Me: Drowning in Objectivity
Mets002_small
2012 AA Prospects List #3

Recent FanPosts

Ctm-logo_small
My dirty little secret: I was once a Yankees fan
Mets002_small
2012 AA Prospects List #5
X-wing_small
BrooksBaseball Player Cards: An Amazing Resource For Mets Fans Who Are Curious About How Pitchers Pitch In The Major Leagues
Mets002_small
2012 AA Prospects List #4
Small
Sandy Alderson, @MetsGM, and getting ready for Spring Training
Mets002_small
2012 AA Prospects List #1 (edit: and apparently #2)
Small
Two New York Players of OBP Yore
Small
Thoughts on 2012

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recommended FanShots

Judging by the comments to Matt Callan’s ode to 1986 Mets: A Year To Remember from a few weeks back, the video has a devoted Mets fan following. Despite being too young to remember anything about that season, it has a special place in my fandom as well. It was part of a two video rotation (Ghostbusters being the other) which ran almost daily on my television for a few years in the early 90s. And it remained a once-in-awhile watch through high school and college. 

Unsurprisingly, the physical tape deteriorated over time, and the screen jumps and sound skips made for a less than optimal viewing experience. With sale of the video discontinued, my brother converted it to DVD and gave it to me for Christmas in 2010. See the picture above for the box and DVD. He even created a scene selection function which can be accessed from the main menu. "Get Metsmerized!" plays on loops on the menu screen. It is my favorite Christmas gift ever and is still nice to throw on for a watch.

"How'd we do it? Mirrors!"
I was flipping through some of my parents' photo albums this afternoon in search of one particular shot of the sign my older sister made for Mets Banner Day back in the late eighties. Though I didn't find that one — I'll post it when I eventually track it down, and I can assure you that it's Keith-themed — but I did stumble upon this wonderful photo of my younger sister's stuffed animal menagerie spread out in front of a glorious rainbow-festooned Mets pennant, also from the late eighties.

She works for the HRC now and was particularly delighted to be reminded of this photo.

(click to embiggen)
Now that banner day is back, hopefully this years will look a little like this. I know it's not great, but i don't pretend to be a professional. embiggen!

Recent FanShots

Okay, there is no way this is Sandy Alderson
Ike & Duda fantasy stocks rising
Sabermetrics! Fantasy League is live.
What if the Mets Never Traded for Johan Santana? | Patrick Flood
[O]f the $136.7M the Mets spent on players in 2011, $72.8M was given to...
Witness claims that the Wilpons knew about Madoff
Two Mets Minor Leaguers -- Including Former 2nd Rounder -- Suspended 50 Games
Sandy Alderson on Twitter!
Binghamton Mets Baseball - Online Clearance Sale
Mets Revoke Megdal's Credentials

+ New FanShot All FanShots >

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Ricky-roma-300x224_small
Sabermetrics and Me: Drowning in Objectivity
Mets002_small
2012 AA Prospects List #3

Recent FanPosts

Ctm-logo_small
My dirty little secret: I was once a Yankees fan
Mets002_small
2012 AA Prospects List #5
X-wing_small
BrooksBaseball Player Cards: An Amazing Resource For Mets Fans Who Are Curious About How Pitchers Pitch In The Major Leagues
Mets002_small
2012 AA Prospects List #4
Small
Sandy Alderson, @MetsGM, and getting ready for Spring Training
Mets002_small
2012 AA Prospects List #1 (edit: and apparently #2)
Small
Two New York Players of OBP Yore
Small
Thoughts on 2012

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


THE BIG GUY

Aa_avatar_small Eric Simon

THE INCREDIBLES

Blackfish2_small Alex Nelson

Endy_small Rob Castellano

Img_1262_small Matthew Artus

Kanye_pekka_small Sam Page

Best_infield_ever_small James Kannengieser

Metsstitches_small Eno Sarris

48900_1085732804_4466_n_small Chris McShane

Lg_rocker_ap_small Matthew Callan

Billy_and_daddy_4th_of_july_small Bill Petti

THE NEWS GURUS

Mrmet_small Steve Schreiber

3_small Stephen Schmidt

159714144_040c6c1501_small Pack Bringley

124967042_crop_340x234_small Jeffrey Paternostro