(Bumped from FanPosts. --Eric)
Hey, my name's Paul. By virtue of living in New York, I encounter many Mets fans. Some are more knowledgeable than others. Some are closet Yankee fans. Other times I hear arguments about the Mets from real Yankees fans. Perhaps annoyed that Pedro Feliciano arrived broken, these Yankees fans have taken it to themselves to utter complete nonsense about the Mets. Today I present to you twenty of the arguments that I have heard this year, courtesy mostly of Dan*, a man so virulently idiotic he once used the argument... well, you'll see it later. It's number two on the list.
(name changed to protect the absolutely clueless)
Why this argument is wrong: It's Jimmy Rollins. I mean first, let's do some math based on the actual statistics. Jimmy Rollins will probably want something in the 3-year/36M range, which is arguably 42 million dollars more than Jimmy Rollins deserves. I mean, this is a man who once won the MVP while leading the league in outs. Outs! His power, which is admittedly pretty nice for a shortstop, will dry up in Citi... aw, hell. Why am I even typing this. It's Jimmy Rollins.
9. RA Dickey is not a major league starter. He's old and not a part of the Mets future.
Why this argument is wrong: And before you think this is just some crazy idea that the completely unenlightened blabber on about, let it be known that Dickey was bashed on LoudMouths by Adam Schein. This argument is almost too dumb to exist. Dickey's actually striking out more batters than last year (5.37 K/9 last year to a 5.80 K/9 this year), while walking about the same amount of batters. He's had a bit more trouble with the longball based on the fact that he's inducing less grounders, but this can be chalked up largely to Dickey using his fastball more and his knuckler less. And by the way, if you're questioning his approach to games these days (throwing the fastball too much), his fastball has actually been worth 14 more runs than his knuckleball this season. Let the man pitch, he knows what he's doing and he's cheap. He's a 2-3 WAR starter, which is more than we can for sure say about...
8. The Mets should non-tender Angel Pagan after the season.
Why this argument is wrong: Angel Pagan has a crazy low UZR this season. He's hitting well below his career norm, most likely due to a .281 BABIP that's about 30 or so points under his career average. He still has a WAR of 0.8 in 105 games. Extrapolating that performance over a 162-game period, it's 1.2. Look, is that good? No. But it's also not abysmal. And on top of that, Pagan's plate discipline stats are actually trending UPWARDS from last year. His line drive percentage stands at 23.7%, up 4% from 2010. His swinging strike rate is down, his IFFB rate is down, his contact percentages are all up. That BABIP and that UZR should not be that low. Look for Pagan to be at least a 3 WAR player if he gets everyday playing time, whether it's from the Mets or some other lucky organization. I just hope Sandy realizes the flukiness of statistics and retains Pagan, since, seriously, non-tendering him is ridiculous. By the way, this argument was trumpeted by Bobby Ojeda, who claimed that Pagan was not a winning player. It was at that moment I decided to regard Bobby O as a nincompoop.
7. The Mets should call up the Two Almost Ready Aces (Harvey and Familia).
Why this argument is wrong: Matt Harvey is 22 years old. He is a potential future ace of the staff. Does it make more sense to start his arbitration clock now, when the games are completely meaningless, or does it make more sense to let him prove himself at the higher levels of the minor leagues first? If you guessed the first one, please move to MetsBlog. Familia seems like he's been around forever, right? Guess what. He's 21. If you think 4 weeks of a 21 year old Jeurys Familia is absolutely critical to this New York Mets team, when instead we could have a really cheap 24-26 year old Jeurys Familia, not only should you get off Amazin' Avenue, you should go to Citi Field, request to speak to Sandy Alderson, and then have him take a copy of the New Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract and pummel you over the head with it until you come to your senses. I mean, haven't the Mets learned their lesson with calling guys up too early? Mejia, anyone? Lastings? F-Mart? You'd think if any fans had sense about this, it would be Mets fans. Have patience. We'll likely see both Matt and Jeurys sometime in 2012. 2013 at the latest.
6. The Mets shouldn't give Jose Reyes Carl Crawford money, so they won't resign him.
Why this argument is wrong: NO ONE is going to give Jose Reyes Carl Crawford money. They'll look at his injury history, his 2010, and realize that he's simply not the kind of player that warrants that kind of contract. Then again, Carl Crawford didn't warrant that type of contract either. Think about how good Beltran was for us, and then think about the fact that he was worth his contract almost exactly. That's how good you have to be to justify getting Carl Crawford money. So I guess this argument is sort of right. Then again, all it takes is for one Theo Epstein to break out the checkbook, hem, haw, and say "Hey, Jose, I know you like that Mets team, but we're offering you 100 million bucks to play on the best team in baseball". Then again, all it takes is for the Mets to resign Reyes is for Sandy to get meet with Theo and say "Hey, Theo, I know you like that Reyes guy, but if you sign him, we're gonna send a chainsaw-wielding Lucas Duda with instructions to murder Dustin Pedroia and Jacoby Ellsbury in their sleep".
5. Look at David Wright's splits. His OPS is near 1.100 when the Mets win and .600 when the Mets lose this year. He is clearly part of a winning team and the Mets need to spend more money to get more players so Wright can hit and the Mets can win. Or they could trade him to the Yankees cause the Yankees win all the time, making Wright a better player.
Why this argument is wrong: I can't even begin. Thank you, Dan, for adding a chuckle to my day.
4. The Mets are going to be broke! Them and the Dodgers, man. Two franchises crippled by greed and destruction. Or, in the specific case of the Dodgers, a crippling lack of 5 Clayton Kershaws and 11 Matt Kemps.
Why this argument is wrong: The sorry state of these organizations has nothing to do with finances. It has to do with Mr. Ned Colletti and Mr. Omar Minaya, two general managers who were united by the fact that they had some nice teams then later blew them up due to complete mismanagement. Think about it. If the Mets were winning, they'd no doubt be praised for their intestinal fortitude or something like that.
Why this argument is wrong: Hispanic players =/= gritty. Jeez, Dan. Will you ever learn? Maybe when he says "grit", he means defense, as two of the three players he mentioned were good at that. The other player he mentioned provided adequate offense for a catcher through a steady stream of singles. The other thing he means by "gritty" is players that put up between 3.0 and 3.1 fWAR in 2006. In which case, yes. (I'm not sure why he didn't mention Carlos Delgado!!! Perhaps Delgado had more than 65 RBI. Gritters aren't rib-eye steak men. They go for hamburgers.) The Mets could use them some of those. They could also use the 7.9 WAR put up by Carlos Beltran that year. *cries softly*. I might add that Carlos was one of Dan's least favorite players, and the day that Beltran was traded, Dan put up a small poster in his office that said "BELTRAN IS BELT-GONE". This phrase was followed by five exclamation points.
2. If the Mets don't sign Jose Reyes after this year, they should sign Jimmy Rollins to a contract. He's cheaper than Reyes and he's a winner, unlike Rey-ass.
Why this argument is wrong: DID YOU REALLY THINK THAT THIS WOULD BE NUMBER 10? REALLY?! REALLY? I'D RATHER BRING TRADE MATT HARVEY AND ZACK WHEELER FOR JEFF "FUCKING FRENCHY" FRANCOEUR'S SMILE AND PLAY THE SMILE AT SHORTSTOP. I'D RATHER PLAY BRIAN WILSON'S SMILE AT SHORTSTOP. OH AND BONUS "WHY THIS ARGUMENT IS WRONG"
WHY THIS ARGUMENT IS WRONG: If the Mets do not resign Reyes, I will be sad. The only substitute I would accept is if Sandy and the brain trust went to Pittsburgh, dug up the bones of Honus Wagner, cloned Wagner from the bones, inserted several data chips into Honus's brain and aged him 22 years so that he would play exactly like Wagner from 1902. Then we would trade the Honus Clonus for Jose.
1. Justin Turner is the everyday solution at second base for the Mets.
Why this argument is very, very, very, supremely, superbly wrong: Look, I hate to admit it. But we might not resign Jose Reyes due to lack of finances or something. But playing Turner at 2nd base everyday is just something we can't afford to do. When Daniel Murphy returns, Turner might be the 5th best in-house option at 2nd base for the Mets (after Murphy, Tejada, Havens, and Valdespin). He's actually played worse than Angel Pagan this season according to fWAR, and we know exactly what he is. A 1 to 1.5 WAR player who's already who he's going to be. Ruben Tejada, right now, has almost a .370 OBP. He's not going to turn 22 until October. His bat is only going to mature and he could slowly creep up on us as a 3-4 WAR player. Remember, his mediocre-looking UZR is due to his work at SS. His UZR/150 at second is 3.7, a full 18 runs over Turner's UZR/150. Reese Havens, when healthy, can swing the bat. Ditto for Murphy. Valdespin is unproven, yeah. But giving him a shot seems to be better than playing Turner, who made a living off squeaking singles through the hole between first and second. Unsurprisingly, teams have begun to cut this hole off and Turner has become an out machine. The thing about this argument, though, is it's not just wrong. It's dangerous. I have complete faith that Sandy won't non-tender Pagan. I have complete faith that he'll continue to pitch Dickey. If he plays Turner though, it's a complete mistake. And one that's very easy to make.