If I were the Wilpons...

by sagecoll on Apr 4, 2010 1:17 AM EDT

With a title like that, it's tough for this post not to sound embellished. I will try to be as clear and neutral as I present this but I am not perfect.

As far as 2010 is concerned. I have thrown in the towel. It's not really a matter of statistical nitpicking or exaggerated pessimism, there's just simply no way I can envision the Mets return to prominence with the current system we have in the front office. There are patterns within the organization that are simply unacceptable when building a respectable franchise that must be stopped.

For Example

1) Limited Allocation of Funds towards the draft....combined with poor player management at the minor league levels: (http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/draft/?p=1763) That table is simply unacceptable. The in the front office seems to be that the majority of home grown talent will either come from Latin America or a handful of late draft picks. If you look at the rosters of the World Series teams this year you will notice that the majority of their players are coming from within. I'm not sticking a fork in guys like FMart and Mejia but when you're just relying on hope and prayer, a change is in order. (http://www.minorleagueball.com/2009/10/26/1101719/comparing-the-phillies-and-the)

2) Absence of Sophisticated Statistical Assessment in Player Evaluation: Let's face it...the teams at the top right now are all engineered by stat oriented guys: Andrew Friedman, Theo Epstein, Brian Cashman. if the Mets are going to be one of those teams on the way up they're going to need one of two things: A ridiculous amount of luck or a a new stat-oriented guy in charge. I've heard John Ricco is a numbers guy (though I'm weary about promoting from within) and there are plenty of others out there who would qualify (I really like Thad Levine from the Rangers). Compare a guy like Friedman (http://www.draysbay.com/2009/11/16/1157546/tampa-bay-rays-gm-andrew-friedman) to Omar. Someone clearly has an idea what's going on...and someone else doesn't.

I think that's a good place to stop and take criticism/questions. Please do so politely and constructively.

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.

Tweet Comment 9 comments | 1 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Good write up.

If I were the Wilpons, I would’ve cleaned house this past offseason. That’s the easy answer but here it’s correct. When the General Manager can only focus on one player at a time it makes his job more difficult. Also, if the Mets start off poorly this season, the vultures are gonna circle in the same way they did in 2008 with Willie Randolph. The players are gonna inevitably have to answer unnecessary questions about their manager’s job security and as a result their jobs will become more difficult.
I’m not sure as to who would replace Omar should he get fired, but the “every person can affect on-field decisions” has to stop. All it does is create anarchy and something disastrous can happen as a result. I would recommend actually going overslot on draft picks, but it seems ownership is strongly opposed to it.

Sunny days ahead? Probably not.

by Brian. on Apr 4, 2010 1:52 AM EDT reply actions

I would agree

with the overslot idea. I don’t know why we don’t because the draft clearly favors high revenue teams, and when you don’t take advantage of that there’s something wrong.

When it comes to who will lead the team back to where it should be. I really like the way Jack Z has turned Seattle around and I think there are many executives in the game that can do that. Whoever it is, I think should be given complete control and should have a substantial background with modern statistics and player evaluation. I brought up Levine and Ricco though there are plenty others. Dan Jennings, who is with the Marlins right now, also seems like a very good candidate

by sagecoll on Apr 4, 2010 3:05 AM EDT reply actions

Baseball talent is difficult to find and identify in a sea of mediocrity.

The Wilpons are doing as much as possible, under the circumstances.

by 1969met on Apr 6, 2010 9:29 AM EDT reply actions

i'm not sure i agree

when you have the second largest bankroll in the majors, and by far the largest in the NL, and yet you’ve been as bad as we’ve been for an entire decade I don’t see how you can blame anyone but the owners. One bad gm hire is one thing, 3 in a row is an entirely other thing. Has this organization had any type of clear concrete direction in the last 10 years?

in billionaire russian playboys we trust.

by Gina on Apr 6, 2010 1:18 PM EDT up reply actions

To be fair

The Mets haven’t been “bad” for an entire decade; there have been some damn good teams over the last 10 years. I agree with you, however, that the team doesn’t appear to have any concrete direction — it all seems fairly higgeldy-piggeldy as far as roster construction goes.

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

by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on Apr 6, 2010 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions

Well I agree they've had good teams

but I mean bad mostly as no real direction. And I guess to me I’d put some of the 88-89 win teams in the bad category not because they were actually bad, but because it took incredibly bad decision making and roster construction to only produce an 88 win team out of the core we had. I mean if you just looked at the 2006-2008 production of Wright/Reyes/Beltran, and Santana in 08, the total payroll, and how much was allocated to those 4 without knowing the rest of the team construction would you expect 2 of those teams to have won <90 game.

in billionaire russian playboys we trust.

by Gina on Apr 6, 2010 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions

Throwing random 40-year-olds into starting roles is a direction, isn't it?

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

by Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright on Apr 6, 2010 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions

The Twins

We were just discussing them in another thread. They are not as stat-oriented as the other top teams. Their results per dollar spent likely measures up fairly well.

by wobatus on Apr 6, 2010 4:03 PM EDT reply actions

yeah but they weren't stat oriented because they couldn't afford to do both

so rather than doing both half-a**dley they poured all of their resources into one, and I already brought up some of the ways it puts them at a major disadvantage, basically having no real information to go off of for FA’s or trades because they focus almost entirely in organization, but anyway now that they have a bigger budget they’re putting money into statistical research too.

in billionaire russian playboys we trust.

by Gina on Apr 6, 2010 4:34 PM EDT up reply actions