The Importance Of The 2010 Offseason For The Mets' Offense
With few reasons to keep talking about this train-wreck season, let's peek ahead at 2010 and the long winter in between then and now. First, assuming the Mets skip the offseason, this team of in-house options would emerge next spring. This mediocre squad provides a good baseline for both the payroll and talent Minaya the Mets GM will be building on. (h/t USSMariner for the format)
| Pos | Name | PA/IP | WAR | SAL |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| C | Santos | 500 | 1.0 | 0.4 |
| 1B | Murphy | 600 | 0.5 | 0.4 |
| 2B | Castillo | 500 | 1.5 | 6 |
| SS | Reyes | 600 | 5.0 | 9 |
| 3B | Wright | 650 | 6.5 | 10 |
| LF | Pagan | 500 | 1.5 | 0.8 |
| CF | Beltran | 300 | 3.0 | 18.5 |
| RF | Francoeur | 600 | 0.5 | 3.5 |
| IF | Hernandez | 250 | 0.2 | 0.4 |
| IF | Evans | 200 | 0.5 | 0.4 |
| OF | Reed | 200 | -0.3 | 1 |
| OF | Martinez | 200 | 0.5 | 0.4 |
| SP | Santana | 210 | 4.5 | 21 |
| SP | Pelfrey | 180 | 2.5 | 1.3 |
| SP | Niese | 150 | 2.0 | 0.4 |
| SP | Perez | 150 | 1.0 | 12 |
| SP | Nieve | 100 | 0.5 | 0.4 |
| CL | Rodriguez | 70 | 1.0 | 11.5 |
| RP | Feliciano | 70 | 0.8 | 2.5 |
| RP | Green | 60 | 0.5 | 0.5 |
| RP | Parnell | 60 | 0.5 | 0.4 |
| RP | Stokes | 50 | 0.3 | 0.5 |
| RP | Muniz | 30 | 0.0 | 0.4 |
Using the estimation that a team of replacement-level players would win 50 games, this team would be expected to be in the 80-84 win range, depending on your relative optimism, or lack thereof, regarding Santos and Francoeur. That projection passes the gut check, as it would just be this sub-.500 team plus half a season of Beltran, a healthy Reyes, and something resembling a rotation. Remember, however, that a team can subtract, just as it can add, wins from a team, depending on the complementary talent (see: Hernandez, Livan -1.6 WAR; rest of 2009 Mets).
Sticking just with what they've got, however, the Mets are a .500 team with a $102 million payroll. That leaves ~$20MM to spend, based on the reported 120MM budget. Using the common estimation that each win is worth $4-5MM in today's market, the Mets are in a position to add 4-5 wins, making them a 85-89 win team. While 89 wins would be a dramatic improvement, it would not be a particularly convincing challenge to the Phillies+Cliff Lee. If John Ricco does indeed take over the General Manager duties in the offseason, his charge will to be extract better than market value out his $20 million with a plan for the future.
Focusing just on the hitting side of things, however, the Mets, headed by Ricco or Minaya or whoever, have a unique opportunity to creatively fill some long-term needs. As it stands, the Mets three biggest areas of need will be 1. firstbase, 2. corner outfielder, 3. starting pitcher, 4. catcher. Ignoring those last two for the time-being, the two biggest areas for improvement are typical power positions, where teams usually stick their biggest bats. What the Mets do this offseason could determine the look of the offense (and defense) for the next several years. That being said, here are a few routes the team could pursue:
1. Trade for a superstar about to finish his arbitration years:
Many speculate about the Mets pursuing Carl Crawford this offseason, entering his $10MM option year with the highly efficient, but low-budget Rays. The Rays have motivation to sell: they could use the payroll flexibility, they won't afford Crawford as a free agent, and they have a few in-house replacements ready, namely Matt Joyce and Desmond Jennings. Crawford would fill a number of needs for the Mets. Not only would be an offensive upgrade over Pagan or Francoeur, he'd also add necessary range to the Mets outfield with Beltran's status still up in the air. He figures to be somewhere between 4-5 WAR for the price of 1-2 WAR.
Prince Fielder is a player in an extremely similar situation, despite being as different a ballplayer as possible from Crawford. He too is owed $10MM in 2010, with a very good in-house replacement (Matt Gamel) pounding on the door. While not the face of small market success like the Rays, the Brewers would probably prefer to keep the payroll in the $80MM range and know they won't be able to afford Fielder soon. Despite playing a different position with opposite skillset, Fielder would be a similar upgrade in talent to Crawford (4-5 WAR), and arguably more valuable, as the Mets could the convert Murphy to a premium position or a super-sub.
Both of these players, and any player similar to them, would have a very high cost in minor league talent, while saving money in terms of short-term value. This route might be best as it accommodates the short-term budgetary concerns with a win-now emphasis. Also, assuming the Mets could expand payroll to sign the player to an extension after 2010, the trade could have additional long-term value in shoring up the lineup for several years. To check the numbers on your own scenario, use this guide of prospect value, fittingly based on a Victor Wang article on why the Twins made out alright in the Santana trade.
Talking specifically about each player, Crawford would probably command the lesser package, due to his older age (29 next year). Fielder, however, is hardly untouchable, and his value is tempered by long-term durability concerns. Neither would likely require Fernando Martinez or Mejia, but Josh Thole and Ike Davis would fill organizational needs of the Rays and Brewers respectively. Another factor to consider in these scenarios is the possibility of the acquired player blocking prospects, so ideally Prince Fielder would make Ike Davis and/or Nick Evans more expendable.
I want the Mets to pursue both of these player this offseason, as a trade makes a lot of sense for each team and it would guard from garbage manning the 1B and LF positions in the future.
2. Promote aggresively from within:
As a completely unrelated strategy, the Mets could allow the impressive upcoming draft class to compete for jobs in Spring Training with little opposition. Fernando Martinez, Ike Davis, and Josh Thole all conveniently fit immediate major-league needs. Each could also be easily platooned with the incumbent at each position:
- RF: Jeff Francoeur career OPSvL: .802. Fernando Martinez (minor league) OPSvR: .815
- 1B: Ike Davis (minor league) OPSvR: 1.009, Nick Evans (minor league) OPSVL: .929
- C: Omir Santos OPSvL (minor league): .623, Josh Thole OPSvR: .751
The Santos/Thole platoon seems pointless as both players have exhibited reverse-splits in their careers, and Thole is a better hitter from than Santos vs. either handed-pitcher. The Francoeur/Martinez has some potential but probably would not last, as the Mets are more interested in each players development as a full-time player.
The Davis/Evans platoon is the most intriguing, and realistic, as each player has demonstrated an extreme platoon split in the high-minors, while neither is ready for full-time duties. The disadvantage to this would be carrying a firstbaseman with a platoon split on the bench everyday and possible stagnation of Davis' development as a full-time player. Given how extreme Ike's split is, however, I wonder if he'll ever outgrow it. The obvious advantages to this platoon would be above-average offensive and defensive production from firstbase for less than $1MM. I'm not the first to suggest it, and it's kind of an inspired idea. I could see the platoon being worth anywhere 2-5 WAR, considering the variability of their offensive and defensive performance. That would be a significant upgrade over Irish Hammer and would allow him to become the Mets' Mark DeRosa, replacing whatever other dreck the Mets would overpay to backup Castillo.
In general, I would prefer all these player to start the year at AAA as a precautionary measure, but I'm considering supporting the idea of the Davans platoon, especially considering the poor 1B free agent class.
3. Offer Delgado Arbitration/Sign stopgaps:
Offering Delgado arbitration could be a good idea*. If he declines, the Mets net a supplementary pick. If he accepts, they get to at least try him out in the spring at marginal cost.
*If they pick up Delgado's option, I quit.
Resigning Delgado, or signing any stop-gap veteran, be it Magglio Ordonez or Russell Branyan, however, has it's own set of risks. If the player doesn't perform due to old age or whatever other factors, the 5-10MM tied to him is a sunk cost and the chance of competing is slim. Besides Matt Holiday or Jason Bay, very few hitters are likely to offer a significant return. I'd take Adam LaRoche or Nick Johnson for the right price, but just spending money on an average firstbaseman does not seem like the most creative way to use a tight budget. While a stop-gap would give the youngsters more time to develop at AAA, I'd prefer the Mets to focus free agent money on very capable high-reward backups this offseason.
4. Realign the outfield:
Beltran to left! It saves his knees and allows the Mets to bring in a defensive specialist CFer to help with the expanses of Citi Field. Nyjer Morgan and Coco Crisp would be on my shortlist. Considering their defensive skill, either could provide 3+ WAR production at a minimal cost. Suddenly outfield is a strength for the Mets, offensively and defensively.
This offseason, the creative solution looks like the best one. If I'm the Mets GM, I'm inquiring on Nyjer Morgan and Prince Fielder right away. Despite what Minaya says, creativity and precision are not exclusive. Perhaps John Ricco will show us that.
0 recs |
112 comments
|
Comments
Great post
Great post, as usual. I like the Prince Fielder thing a lot; getting a guy like Fielder also addresses the serious handedness issues the Mets would have going into next year.
Just curious, where are you getting the 50-win number for replacement level baseline? Is that something that the WAR-people have settled on?
by sjohnson125 on Aug 19, 2009 6:16 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Also
where are you getting your WAR projections from? Those could obviously go up or down a lot for anybody on that list.
You don't cheer for the Mets. You drink for the Mets.
by Kevin H on Aug 19, 2009 6:45 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think 0.5 is pretty optimistic for Murphy, honestly.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Aug 19, 2009 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I also like the idea of Fielder,
But I don’t see any way we get him without involving either Holt, Mejia, or Martinez along with Thole and Davis. He’s signed for 10 million this year, and he’s stilll arbitration eligible for a season after that. I think his value is pretty high, the Brewers may have a replacement lined up but that doesn’t decrease Fielders value. His value will be similar to that of Adrian Gonzalez.
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Schmidtxc on Aug 19, 2009 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Excellent post
I would seriously love to have Prince Fielder. And Nyjer Morgan would be a good addition, and wouldn’t be just a good glove no hit guy. I don’t see Omar doing any of this, but Ricco, maybe.
"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 Aug 19, 2009 7:41 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I reject the "win now" premise.
The Mets team needs far too much help to win in 2010.
Pitching: Perez is a failure as a $12MM pitcher, +1 WAR is overly-generous. Niese at +2 is also optimistic, although it’s a pure guess as he doesn’t have the body of work and failure as Ollie. Wagner and Putz come back, so how do you integrate them? Seriously, they got hurt, but why let them go? Keep the bullpen strong, let Parnell compete for a starter spot.
Hitting: Daniel Murphy is 24, three years from hitting his prime, and already he’s being relegated to super-sub. If I were D-Murphy I’d be wearing GFY t-shirts at BP. The guy is playing 1B for the first time and I love the aggression there. Skills can be taught, this guy’s fearlessness can be channeled into a strong positional showing. Super-sub… I laugh. Beltran, done. Just done. Cut, trade, get the knees out of the NL. Delgado, done. Reyes, trade for a farm system. Or boo-hoo, do we want to keep making excuses for a 26 year old? Grow up or get out. Francoeur, keep. Plays his guts out, sets a great example, and the Mets team needs great examples right now for younger talent emerging. Think 1984 Mets, 1985 Mets. No shot at winning in ‘84 but the pieces are in place. Let’s get the pieces in place.
In short, stop trading away the farm system. Hired guns here, in Queens, don’t work out nearly as well with the current managing staff. This isn’t Joe Torre and Mel Stottlemeyer; heck, this isn’t even Valentine and Apodaca. 2010 is not gonna happen, stop tossing away talent to pursue a dream.
by BrightApollo on Aug 19, 2009 8:32 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I can't tell if this is satire
if it is then bravo! Otherwise, huh? You love the aggression of Murphy and gutsiness of Francoeur and want to get rid of Reyes for his non-grown-up-itude? Do you know how baseball games are won and lost? Are you smoking drugs or something?
by dtro on Aug 19, 2009 8:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hope it is satire
Plus, if he rejects the “win-now” premise, what’s with keeping Wagner and Putz? Are we trying to have the most expensive bullpen?
by mnbv on Aug 19, 2009 9:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Subconscious
I think there is a subconscious motivator to his roster decisions. (trying to give him some credit by deeming it subconscious)
by DannyMetsGeek on Aug 19, 2009 9:18 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was thinking that too
but thought it best not to bring up.
by dtro on Aug 19, 2009 9:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess you just like white guys, don't you?
And +2 WAR is perfectly reasonable as a prediction for a mid rotation starter with a high floor but lower ceiling like Niese.
And it’s fine to keep Francouer, who sucks, but let’s trade our perennial All-Star shortstop who’s a year older because we “can’t make excuses for him”? Again, you are the face of subjective “analysis” at its finest.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Aug 19, 2009 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I love Jose Reyes as much as a next guy, but:
A) Two trips doesn’t make him a “perennial All-Star”, and
B) All-Star selection is stupid (see, for example, the fact that Jimmy Rollins has been to more of them than Hanley Ramirez) and a poor way to judge a player’s value.
by JoshNY on Aug 19, 2009 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Reyes
Should most definitely have been a 3-time All-Star and if he stayed healthy this year, a 4-time All-Star in a row.
by DannyMetsGeek on Aug 19, 2009 3:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, sure he SHOULD HAVE BEEN.
But he wasn’t. “Perennial All-Star” implies that a player is an All-Star year after year after year, which (right or wrong) isn’t true about Reyes.
by JoshNY on Aug 19, 2009 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
To be fair
It’s hard to be a perennial All-Star at 26. But he’s the 2nd or 3rd best SS in baseball and should be respected as such. And Mets fans (not necessarily you) are WAY too eager to get rid of him for some reason.
So I guess I get a little defensive when our little Josie is downgraded by some. Your position is fair.
by DannyMetsGeek on Aug 19, 2009 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep, I agree with you
I’m just saying, “perennial All-Star” is an untrue statement of fact
by JoshNY on Aug 19, 2009 5:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm talking about calibur.
For example, 2 WAR is commonly average for a starting player, 4 WAR is commonly referred to as All-Star level, 6 WAR for MVP, etc.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Aug 19, 2009 5:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I figured that's what you meant
But I decided to be a dick and argue about semantics.
by JoshNY on Aug 19, 2009 5:49 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
major quote
“Francoeur, keep. Plays his guts out, sets a great example, and the Mets team needs great examples right now for younger talent emerging.”
ain't had enough...
by BlackOps on Aug 19, 2009 2:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
great post
these are some creative and reasonable possibilities for making the 2010 team competitive. i like the potential of an ike davis/nick evans platoon, but should the mets rely on unproven minor leagues in the starting lineup again after murphy’s failures this season?
also, i question whether improving the mets’ offense is the team’s top priority. the mets’ starters rank 14/16 in strikeouts, 16/16 in walks allowed, and 7/16 in HRs allowed. subtracting livan and adding niese should help out the rotation, but maine and perez will still be big question marks in 2010, and pelfrey hasn’t shown that he can be much better than league average. adding at least one starting pitcher, if not two, should be a priority for the mets.
by englishgrey on Aug 19, 2009 9:28 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Sam has already ditched Maine
as he was not included in the projection.
by Sokojoe on Aug 19, 2009 10:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maine should be nowhere near
the 2010 rotation.At best he should be in the bullpen
by Jadden Hopkins on Aug 19, 2009 12:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why would that be best?
When he’s healthy, Maine is a good pitcher.
by TheBigStapler on Aug 19, 2009 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Are we sure
He had one good first half of the season and he’s been shaky ever since then. And even before this years injury there were reports that he was considered a high injury risk pitcher under Peterson and needed extra rest/a special schedule. I imagine after two injury plagued years his injury risk has only gotten worse and putting him in the rotation would just result in another injury.
by Gina on Aug 19, 2009 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think he's fine as a starter,
but planning on him being healthy is a terrible plan.
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Schmidtxc on Aug 19, 2009 1:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
word
Suggesting Crawford/Fielder wouldn’t cost Fernando/Mejia is at best wishful thinking and much more likely, bat shit insane.
As for the rest, you read my plan, you know how I feel on the subject matter.
Nolasco’s outing last night probably puts to bed my fantasy of the Mets swooping in at buying low on him with the Marlins at wits end with their enigmatic (BABIP killed) starter.
Anyway, you know where I stand on the matter. I’m less sold on Nyjer, as we don’t really know what’s going on with his UZR, and he’s not much of a hitter. But if we paired him with Reed Johnson, I’d be a lot more amenable to the idea.
Can look into trading for Fred Lewis for a platoon in LF too.
Bringing Delgado back makes the most sense, he represents the best offensive upside on the market for a reasonable price. Makes sense he could come back on a lesser 1 year deal.
I am VEHEMENTLY against trading for 1 year of Crawford or Fielder.
One thing people have to understand is that the current Mets window is likely up. Sad, but true. The most important thing now is to make sure we reload intelligently to put the best possible team around Wright/Reyes. Doing anything that sacrifices that is an awful idea.
by firejerrymanuel on Aug 19, 2009 9:46 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
now that i think about it
I’d spend the entire budget on Matt Holliday, and it wouldn’t be for contending in 2010.
Holliday fits our team so well it’s crazy; he gives us a legitimate COF bat that blocks/costs none of our prospects.
Then we can start working in Davis/Fernando/Thole/Tejada by the middle of 2010, and have a real team.
That’s my plan. Sign Holliday but punt 2010.
by firejerrymanuel on Aug 19, 2009 9:50 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I find myself flabergasted by how much I like this idea. I think I’d combine it with Sam’s Evans/Davis platoon at 1B. The rotation would be sketchy, the lineup would be stars and scrubs again but so what. If you back into the wild card, great, if not, all you did was cost yourself a 2nd round pick. You still have all the youngins.
by OlStubbleBeard on Aug 19, 2009 10:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd rather see an Evans/Murphy platoon with Davis at 1st full time in AAA
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Schmidtxc on Aug 19, 2009 1:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well I think Evans/Davis would perform better right now
But if we are in essence almost punting, you’re right, why not give Davis more development time.
by OlStubbleBeard on Aug 19, 2009 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just don't want to platoon Davis
Keep him in AAA where he gets to hit lefties. It should be better for him in the long term, and we’d actually have some depth in the case of injuries.
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Schmidtxc on Aug 19, 2009 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Schmidtx
You are quite the hoarder I notice. Keeping everyone down all the time, like Thole and Davis. I bet you shop at Costco. Just kidding, but I like the platoon idea if they are able to go and get a legitimate leftfielder.
by David G on Aug 19, 2009 4:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
In all fairness, the Davis situation is pretty different than Thole.
Davis doesn’t need to be added to the 40 man yet, and we already have a lefty and a righty for the platoon who make very little in the organization. We wouldn’t need to sign anyone in this case.
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Schmidtxc on Aug 19, 2009 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
the window
the mets will still have reyes/wright/santana/beltran next season, and hopefully the team can add some additional talent from this year’s double AA class sometime during 2010 season. the window may be narrowing, but i don’t think it will be closed next year, especially if the front office spends wisely on free agents (which is probably asking a lot).
by englishgrey on Aug 19, 2009 9:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It is not even narrowing...
It is closed for the current (and when I say current I mean opening day) roster of this year. But if the Mets plan is to write off 2010 as a rebuilding season with Wright, Reyes, Santana, Pelfrey, Francouer and possibly Beltran (although I hope he comes back healthy and can be dealt) the Mets simply need to refocus how the roster is built
by pboegel on Aug 19, 2009 10:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
hahahaha
grouping Francoeur in with Wright and Reyes and Santana is funny
by JoshNY on Aug 19, 2009 11:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes
grouping a 25 year old who plays the game with more passion and fervor than anyone on the Mets roster the last 5 years besides Reyes is a really funny idea…ha ha
by pboegel on Aug 19, 2009 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd play with lots of passion too.
Doesn’t mean I deserve to be in the major leagues.
Hint: by me, I’m subtly referring to Jeff Failcouer.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Aug 19, 2009 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fervor and Passion?
What is this based on?
by Gina on Aug 19, 2009 1:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No.
Grouping a player who is bad at baseball with players who are good at baseball is what’s funny.
Show me a fan who prefers a player who sucks at baseball but plays with passion to a player who is awesome at baseball but plays like it’s his job (note: it is his job), and I’ll show you a fan who doesn’t care whether his team wins games or not.
by JoshNY on Aug 19, 2009 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd say it's narrowing because of Santana & Beltran
I don’t think either going to fall off majorly anytime soon but I do think both are old enough, and with Beltran there are enough injury concerns, that it would be in our best interest to build sooner than later.
by Gina on Aug 19, 2009 1:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well
I agree that Crawford or Fielder not costing Martinez or Mejia is a pipe dream.
HOWEVER, there is no reason to assume you are trading for just 1 year of either player. In both instances you are talking about trading prospects for strong players in their prime and frankly one a couple of years away from prime. Trading for guys who are below the age of 29 is not a bad practice and in each case you can make reasonable long term commitments to both. The question is what the value of Crawford in the trade market is…this much I know Fielder is going to cost at least Martinez, Meija and probably Holt and two more A ball prospects. You do not get guys with a 1.000 OPS for Ike Davis and a donut.
by pboegel on Aug 19, 2009 9:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you give Prince Fielder the donut, I think that trade could be arranged.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Aug 19, 2009 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fielder isn't a free agent in a year, he's still got a year of arbitration after his contract expires.
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Schmidtxc on Aug 19, 2009 1:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thing is, you'd actually RE-SIGN Crawford and/or Fielder.
And again, it’s perfectly reasonable that they wouldn’t cost Mejia or Martinez. Cliff Lee didn’t cost Drabek or Taylor, right? So why would we have to trade our best two prospects for someone who’s debatedly worse and has a larger contract?
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Aug 19, 2009 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
resigning them
doesn’t change the fact that you’re only trading for a year of them.
and yes, they would cost mejia/martinez. both teams are ostensibly contenders.
by firejerrymanuel on Aug 19, 2009 12:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fielder is under team control through 2011
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Schmidtxc on Aug 19, 2009 1:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, I think you're wrong.
Especially with the Rays, both Mejia and Martinez are the last positions they need. The Rays would almost certainly ask for Josh Thole, and probably someone like Flores/Marte, etc.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Aug 19, 2009 2:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the rays would ask for quality before they'd ask for need
teams don’t usually draft/trade for prospects based on need. They usually try to compile the BPA and then trade from strengths. I can’t imagine they’d rather have Thole than Martinez/Meija.
by Gina on Aug 19, 2009 2:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess Mejia would still be a target, but I'm saying someone like Niese would not.
And like I said before, if the Indians trade for Lee without giving up their two top prospects, we can do the same with Crawford.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Aug 19, 2009 5:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
that's like saying if the rays can trade for kazmir with victor zambrano
then we should be able to get Michael Bowden with with Tim Redding. And I doubt the rays will target by position. they’ll want our top prospects regardless of where they play. And Marson and Carrasco were pretty close to being top prospects, Marson was but recently lost his prospect status so it’s not like he wasn’t a top “prospect” just not an official prospect and Carrasco was their number 1 last year and still regarded as having a high upside. So it’s not as cut and dry as them just not giving up their top prospects.
by Gina on Aug 19, 2009 5:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But again
Crawford is better than Lee, so I’m not sure why you’re implying that they should cost the same
by JoshNY on Aug 19, 2009 5:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't see where you're getting that Crawford is better than Lee.
In 2009 Lee was estimated to finish with an additional 1.6 WAR with the Phillies after he was traded, with a remaining salary of 2 mil. Then in 2010, he was predicted to perform at about 5.8 WAR at a salary of $8.0 mil. That gives him a trade value of approximately $28.7 mil, which is actually somewhat conservative considering he was worhth 7.3 WAR in 2008 and is on pace to finish at around 7.5 WAR this year. However, assuming the Rays pick up Crawford’s option and shop him in the offseason, he would have 2010 under contract for $10 mil. When combined with a predicted 6.4 WAR (his pace for this season), he has a trade value of $24 mil. However, this may be OPTIMISTIC, as Crawford has already entered his prime (he’s 28), and may not fully replicate this season’s performance. Obviously, both players have tremendous value, but according to BYB’s Trade Value Calculator, we SHOULD be able to give up less for Crawford than the Phils gave up for Lee.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Aug 19, 2009 8:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd say Crawfords better
Because Lee’s had one insane season, one above average one and a dozen of forgettable seasons and is a 31 year old pitcher, which means he’s past his prime. Where as Crawford is 3 years younger and has a much better history of consistently being an all-star worthy player and is just entering his prime. Maybe if you just look at the last two years of WAR data Lee is better but I would take Crawford over him without thinking twice about it all day.
by Gina on Aug 19, 2009 8:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would too.
I’m just saying, it’s not unreasonable at all that they would have similar hauls. That’s the only point I’ve tried to make, and I’ve made a case for it analytically, I think. My only point was that I feel we could acquire Crawford without necessarily trading F! or Mejia.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Aug 20, 2009 12:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it is unreasonable
The Indians knew Lee was a possible fluke and an the wrong side of 30, just like the Rays know Crawford is a perennial all-star candidate just entering his prime. I don’t think there’s any chance the Rays trade him for less than a teams top tier prospects.
by Gina on Aug 20, 2009 12:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think you can say Lee is a fluke now that he's done it for the second year in a row.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Aug 20, 2009 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually it takes more than 2 seasons of data
For a player to perform to his mean. Player can easily have two awesome out of no where seasons and then fall completely off the map.
by Gina on Aug 20, 2009 1:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
lol
the rays would pass up on mejia because of need?
i forgot that old adage, “you can easily have too much pitching.”
by firejerrymanuel on Aug 19, 2009 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Crawford and Fielder are better than Cliff Lee
by JoshNY on Aug 19, 2009 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Our two best prospects aren't Drabek and Taylor either...
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Schmidtxc on Aug 19, 2009 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Unfounded assertion:
If Mejia were the son of a Cy Young Award winner and Drabek were a kid from Santo Domingo with a funny name, Mejia would be considered to be the better prospect.
I’m not saying Drabek isn’t a better prospect, I’m just saying that some evaluators seem to overrate him because of his pedigree.
by JoshNY on Aug 19, 2009 5:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think most of us would rate them as very similar though
http://www.amazinavenue.com/2009/7/25/958375/prospect-smackdown-jenrry-mejia-vs
Martinez is probably a close comparison to Taylor, but it wouldn’t surprise me if scouts had Taylor rated higher.
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Schmidtxc on Aug 19, 2009 5:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
no way
fernando would definitely be given the nod over taylor
by firejerrymanuel on Aug 19, 2009 6:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just compare the two...
http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=taylor010mic
http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=martin005jes
We hear about Martinez all the time, but the two have fairly similar tools. Martinez has a ton of potential, but Taylor has put up performances indicative of his potential. Some people may like Martinez better, but I bet the majority would take Taylor (I’m personally a big believer in Martinez).
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Schmidtxc on Aug 19, 2009 6:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Martinez is also three years younger
and they have the same numbers at triple-A. F! is definitely the better prospect
"We must win and we must know how to win rather than win because we have statistical people."
by Evan_S on Aug 19, 2009 7:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He is younger, but his AAA numbers were in 176 AB's
That’s the only extended stretch of his career when he’s performed to the level of his talent. He has the potential to do all the things that Taylor does, but Taylor has put up that performance for the last two years. Taylor has also been far less injury prone. I think if this question was raised outside of the Mets community, you’d see Taylor win by a resounding margin. I’m actually curious enough about that that I’m going to put up a poll on Minor League Blog tonight to get a neutral persons POV.
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Schmidtxc on Aug 19, 2009 7:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd say Taylor is more ml ready too
His bb/k numbers are well ahead of F-marts, obviously he’s older so F-mart has time to catch up but even though we think he will there’s no guarantee with prospects and value isn’t always based on the highest ceilings. I can certainly understand why a team would rather have Taylor than F-mart in a trade, especially when you factor in the injuries.
by Gina on Aug 19, 2009 7:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's up if you want to vote...
http://www.minorleagueball.com/2009/8/19/995525/fernando-martinez-vs-michael-taylor
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Schmidtxc on Aug 19, 2009 7:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Except F! is 20 as opposed to 23
and is in AAA.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Aug 19, 2009 8:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's not fair.
If you look at the poll we had just a few weeks ago, that asked both fans on the Phillies site and the Mets site which prospect they preferred, Mejia was the winner on both sites pretty decidedly.
And Martinez is as good as Taylor, he’s just in AAA instead of a lower level.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Aug 19, 2009 5:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great piece Sam
I really like to format too.
Also this freudian slip (on purpose?) amused me, the Mets needs are so big their three biggest needs are four
As it stands, the Mets three biggest areas of need will be 1. firstbase, 2. corner outfielder, 3. starting pitcher, 4. catcher.
by Sokojoe on Aug 19, 2009 10:18 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
thirded (is that a word?)
"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 Aug 19, 2009 11:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would love to see Crawford with the Mets as their long term LF.
Fielder ?. meh.
One thing…..with Fielder on the team, I think the bean balls would be limited, because he would charge the other clubhouse, or chase the guy down on the field and sit on him and crush him. That said, I’m not sure he can handle the NY media.
by fxcarden on Aug 19, 2009 11:38 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Based on
What do you assume he could not handle the ny media? and why should players have to handle it, it is the most absurd notion that they need to give some special skin to the ny media who mostly suck at what they do
by pboegel on Aug 19, 2009 12:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
based on seeing him blow up a handful of times
I admit I am just guessing, which is why I worded it with “I’m not sure”.
by fxcarden on Aug 19, 2009 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I still have that video of him ripping Parra's head off.
King of the bling come to lay down the evidence//Not George Bush, L-Millz be da president
by Sam Page on Aug 19, 2009 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
hahahaha
I think Fielder is very good and disagree with your ambivalence about having him on the Mets, but the idea of him sitting on a pitcher who beaned him is really funny.
Of course, he’d have to catch the pitcher first, and unless we’re talking about Old Man Moyer, I don’t think there’s any guarantee he could.
by JoshNY on Aug 19, 2009 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Haven't you seen that pic from Brewers spring training
Where he’s out sprinting the whole team? it’s quite a frightening site.
by Gina on Aug 19, 2009 5:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really?
I have not, but I would like to.
by JoshNY on Aug 19, 2009 5:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
he's had two inside the park HRs
so there’s video of those
by ol Pete on Aug 19, 2009 5:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Speaking as a Brewers fan
I think I can safely say that Fielder would require a bevy of young, quality pitching to be moved, so in other words it sounds like it’s something the Mets can’t really give.
Brewers Baseball and other assorted nonsense (mostly the assorted nonsense) at my blog, What's a Tararrel?
by Lefti on Aug 19, 2009 11:45 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Speaking as a Mets fan
you probably don’t know the Mets farm system, or that they have a bevy of young, quality pitching.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Aug 19, 2009 12:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We definitely have young, quality pitchers
but I’m not sure we have a bevy of them.
by TheBigStapler on Aug 19, 2009 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Would you say
we have a plethora of pinatas?
You don't cheer for the Mets. You drink for the Mets.
by Kevin H on Aug 19, 2009 12:57 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
How much is a bevy?
Because while we may not have whatever a bevy is, we have enough to acquire Prince Fielder, because we have at least 5 very solid pitching prospects.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Aug 19, 2009 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd disagree
I’d say we have two high risk high reward guys and some safe low-risk back of the rotation type guys. Which I don’t think would be enough to get Fielder alone.
by Gina on Aug 19, 2009 2:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But we wouldn't JUST trade pitching prospects.
The Brewers might ask for someone like Havens, or Thole, etc.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Aug 19, 2009 5:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Okay, fair enough
I just figured based on this season, that between the pitchers you’ve been playing and the griping about the farm system, that you probably didn’t have much.
I suppose I should’ve added “nearly major league ready” as a qualifier, ‘cause the Brewers aren’t really in rebuilding mode, although they will almost certainly trade Hardy for pitching this offseason.
Brewers Baseball and other assorted nonsense (mostly the assorted nonsense) at my blog, What's a Tararrel?
by Lefti on Aug 19, 2009 1:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
how about two average young pitchers for one rickie weeks?
King of the bling come to lay down the evidence//Not George Bush, L-Millz be da president
by Sam Page on Aug 19, 2009 1:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ugh I love Weeks
But the guy just can’t stay healthy, is he really someone we want to trade for.
by Gina on Aug 19, 2009 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's more fair.
And in terms of nearly major league ready, we have Niese, but I don’t think trading him makes sense. Holt may be a possibility though.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Aug 19, 2009 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Niese only has one leg right now.
Let’s not forget that.
by fxcarden on Aug 19, 2009 2:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Carroll says he should be fine by April.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Aug 19, 2009 5:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think we have a few interesting arms
Definitely not a bevy of young quality pitchers. And not enough to pull off a major trade without crippling our depth, and considering the rotation needs nearly as much work as the offense I don’t think that’s something we can afford.
by Gina on Aug 19, 2009 1:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I find it funny that in a year where the Mets were supposed to take a step forward
They took 10 steps back and numerous questions about the team were created.
Gary Thorne=Simply the Best!
by The American Mr.Hockey on Aug 19, 2009 11:55 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
who thought they were gonna take a step forward?
I mean, I’m a pretty optimistic fan, but my hopes for this season were pretty much that the Mets would stay about the same and the Phillies would regress
by cjmulrain on Aug 19, 2009 12:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
DAVANS '10!
That’s been my rallying cry the past month or so. If we can’t trade for Fielder, that’s probably our best option. As much as I hate to do this, trading Thole and others for Crawford is probably the best move we can make…unfortunately, this probably means Omheart Grittos is our starter next year.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
by squid92 on Aug 19, 2009 12:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
nuther brewcrew fan perspective
The team is bouncing around their payroll limit, but they aren’t hurting. They’re selling a lot of tickets, sponsorships are up and the tv deal got rejiggered. I’d guess that Cameron, Kendall and Hardy are all off the books after this year. After next year, the Suppan anchor is cut loose.
I’d guess that they view Fielder as not that expensive considering his production and the excitement for the team he generates. My view, which admittedly means nothing, is that they can keep him this year and next, pay him for his last arby year and sell him at the trade deadline in that year and get a better return than the one speculated here.
by ol Pete on Aug 19, 2009 3:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Several posts regarding Nyjer Morgan
He’s not a free agent, right? Why would Nats trade him, he’s a keeper.
by David G on Aug 19, 2009 4:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think they'd trade him...
just based on the fact that their rebuilding right now. Morgan is 28 and his success is largely based on his speed, which will likely start to decline soon. he could be useful, but is likely not going to be around when they become competitive.
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Schmidtxc on Aug 19, 2009 4:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 



























