More photos » by David Zalubowski - AP

Browse more photos »

Some are out watching the "New Moon" premiere and even fewer are at a midnight showing of "The Rocky Horror Picture Show".  With the advent of free agency, we are here to amaze you with astonishing tales of Bengie Molina, courtesy of some of the best blogs around.  Let's do the time warp again:

Bengie NO-Lina: BlueAndOrange

Some Things About Bengie Molina: Tedquarters

Running The Bases - Part 3: The Laggards: Fangraphs

Mo'Lina Mo'Problems or: Why Bengie Molina To The Mets Is A Bad Idea: Amazin' Avenue

Note: I could probably link to about 1000 McCovey Chronicles posts on the subject but I won't.  Just go there and ask about Bengie if you need some guidance.

More photos » by Chris Pizzello - AP

Browse more photos »

The Mets apparently at least feigned interest in Chone Figgins at the GM meetings, but were concerned were he'd "fit" on the team. While that most likely means Castillo is blocking him at second, it's questionable whether Figgins, a third baseman, fits on the Mets at all. He carries the reputation of being "versatile," a label most often given to Mark DeRosa type players who have considerable experience at multiple positions, but hit too well to be bench players. Also, like DeRosa, Chone Figgins seems to be pretty bad at most of those positions:

Often, when discussing versatility, experience gets overrated and skills underrated, because experience is more tangible. After a certain amount of time at a given position, a player can learn how to not embarrass himself, even if he doesn't have the range or the arm to play the position. DeRosa is the classic example. On the defensive spectrum from hardest to easiest to play: C->SS->2B->CF->3B->RF->LF->1B, DeRosa is good at RF and LF, and bad at SS, 2B, 3B, with no experience at C or CF. That's not to say he isn't versatile, there are certainly players who can't play the infield as passably as him, but if you asked most fans who's more versatile defensively: Mark DeRosa or Jose Reyes, they'd probably say DeRosa. If you put the two in either CF, SS, 2B, or 3B, though, I'd bet Reyes would outperform him easily, despite DeRosa's experience.

So when many look at Chone Figgins' fielding stats, they see a bunch of negative numbers and assume a similar situation, perhaps deservedly so. Specifically, there's concern whether Figgins will be a defensive improvement at second, where Castillo's biggest failing has been fielding. However, I'm optimistic that he would be a good defensive second baseman.

First, it's important to remember that you need about three years of UZR data before making a predictive claim about a players fielding performance. His per 150 game numbers for LF, RF, and SS are extremely low, but are the products of maybe 20 starts extrapolated to 150, making them basically meaningless. Just ignore those. The two positions where we have truly significant amounts of data on Figgins, CF and 3B, he's performed averagely and very well, respectively. Weighting his most recent performance and his infield performance more, his +16.7 2009 at 3B is certainly encouraging. Also, for what its worth, the two areas he struggled in playing 2B were errors and doubleplays, according to UZR, both of which are more easily learned than range or instincts. Given that I just encouraged you to disregard meaningless sample sizes, though, slicing the data even more like that is probably bad. In short, I think a +40 defender at 3B this season, according to Dewan's +/-, has a shot to be at least average at 2B, especially when the data doesn't conclusively say otherwise. 

That's not to say I necessarily want the Mets to sign him. Offensively he sprays a ton of linedrives and has great plate discipline, hence the high OBPs. He doesn't have much power (career ISO<.100), but at his best is like a super-Luis Castillo. His total production offensively has been pretty streaky year-to-year, 2009 and 2007 were great, 2008 was bad, but his walk-rate has steadily increased throughout:

I actually agree with ol' Jerry Manuel on this one, Citi Field might suit Chone. The spacious outfields could help buoy his BABIP, and in turn his overall value. 

In leftfield, Figgins is way too risky. One season removed from a .319 wOBA, with a questionable defensive track record, Figgins, the leftfielder, sounds like Daniel Murphy II. Speed doesn't necessarily mean range; if the Mets want range, they should just sign Mike Cameron. Some users have suggested moving Wright to first and Figgins playing third. While that'd probably optimal defensively, the franchise's all-time greatest position player isn't going to be asked to defer, especially when he's a perfectly fine third baseman himself.

Signing Figgins as a second baseman all depends on the price. He won't be a 6-WAR player next year at 2B, but could still be worth $10MM per, on a short term deal. Looking at BPro's baserunning statistics, Figgins' speed projects to be worth about +0.5 WAR. Using his namesake projection system for offense, and a really rough regression of his 2B UZR, that all adds up to ~3 WAR, a $12-$15 value. I'd hesitate to give another long-term contract to a "speed guy" on the wrong side of 30. Looking at comparable players on Baseball-Reference, 3 of the top 5 were retired by age 30. I don't know what that means, but surely nothing good. 

Other considerations that make me secretly root for the Mets signing Figgins include: he's a fun player to watch, he has a really cool name, his ability to backup Wright, he has Utley Cove power, and most importantly, considerable grission:

More photos » by Lenny Ignelzi - AP

about 1 month ago: Los Angeles Dodgers second baseman Orlando Hudson fires a throw across his body after fielding a slow roller off the bat of San Diego Padres' Everth Cabrera in the third inning of a baseball game Tuesday, Sept. 29, 2009, in San Diego. Hudson got the out at first. (AP Photo/Lenny Ignelzi)

Browse more photos »

Some things never change: the Mets are supposedly eager to move Luis Castillo to make room for free-agent Orlando Hudson. I agree with the urge to trade Castillo, but is Orlando Hudson much of an improvement? More importantly, is that improvement worth its cost? Last season, the Dodgers signed Hudson to a 1-year deal with a $3.4 million base salary, although he made nearly $8 million through incentives. According to Fangraphs, Hudson was worth $13MM (2.9 WAR) in 2009. If the Mets want to get Hudson, they'll almost assuredly not get that kind of bargain. I honestly have no idea what he might command, but ironically the Castillo contract will probably be a good starting point for Hudson's agent. 

Offensively, Hudson projects better than Castillo. His .342 wOBA last season was right in-line with his career totals to that point. Like Castillo, he hits an absurd amount of groundballs, but isn't dependent on infield hits to generate offensive value, because of a decent amount of power. For that reason, his offensive game is much less likely to deteriorate in the coming seasons. Still, it's important not to overstate the difference in their hitting contributions in 2009--0.3 WAR, or 3.3 runs. 

Hudson's biggest perceived advantage over Castillo is fielding ability, which is true, just not in the way most people think. According to UZR, Hudson was -3.3 runs below average, while Castillo was -10.4 runs below average in significantly less playing time. So, Hudson would be a big upgrade, but only in the sense that no one could possibly worse than Castillo out there. I think the divide in perception vs. reality of Hudson's defense comes not just from him being sure-handed and not rangy, but from being rangy to one side. O-Dog has always been much more proficient at going to his glove-hand side (toward firstbase) than to his left for groundballs. So he will make great diving catches, just in one direction. If the Mets plan to go with Murphy at first in 2010, some of Hudson's defensive value might be negated by the far-right side of the infield already being covered by Murphy. Actually, John Dewan's plus/minus system (which is calculated much in the same way as the popular UZR) breaks each infielder's performance by how they hand balls to their left, dead on, and right. To illustrate my point I applied this data to the STATS fielding chart (plus/minus uses BIS), comparing a Hudson/Murphy infield to a Castillo/Murphy infield. There are a lot of disclaimers attached to this graph, foremost that I just eyeballed this using MS Paint, and also all the standard uncertainty associated with using just one season of data. Anyway:

What these charts attempt to illustrate is how overlap with Murphy may mean that Hudson shores up the firstbase-side of the infield but leaves an even bigger hole near second. This probably all means nothing, but James Loney, a decent firstbaseman in his own right, rated worse at getting to balls at his right in 2008 v. 2009.

Plus/Minus, though, actually rated Hudson as +8 (~6 UZR), compared to Castillo, -11 (~-8) in 2009. The system had Hudson as -1 on groundballs and +9 on flyballs (which might suit Johan's IFFB tendencies). Ultimately, I think Hudson would be a big defensive upgrade, but maybe not the savior Mike Pelfrey's been looking for, or any better than average. 

Another big concern with Hudson is durability. He has only played 150 games once in his career, although had he not been benched for Ronnie Belliard last year it would be twice. His injury problems aren't chronic like Castillo's, so they are less worrisome going forward, but the Mets better have a good backup plan if they intend to sign Hudson. I would not be reassured by Hudson+Cora. 

Ultimately, I have no easy answer regarding Hudson. If signing Hudson is the condition under which Castillo gets removed from the lineup, so be it, I'd much rather have him than Castillo. I worry, however, that the Mets will overrate his durability and fielding and lock themselves into another bad contract. They'd be better served looking into the trade market or signing a real defensive stud, like Placido Polanco or Adam Kennedy, to a one-year deal. 

On July 27, 2002, Omar Minaya, then General Manager of the Montreal Expos, traded Lee Steven, Brandon Phillips, Grady Sizemore, and Cliff Lee to Mark Shapiro's Indians for Bartolo Colon and Tim Drew.

In 2002, Major League Baseball owned the Expos. The offseason before, the Expos had narrowly avoided contraction, because the Twins, the other team in line for contraction, had another year on their lease of the Metrodome. In a month the league would agree to a new collective bargaining agreement that barred contraction, but at the time it still seemed a possibility. So MLB's proxy GM, Minaya, looked for a player to maybe help the Expos win a Wild Card berth, a parting gift for Montreal. 

One of the many front-office personnel the Expos shed under their reorganization by MLB was Tony LaCava, their farm director. He jumped to the Indians as a cross-checker. When Omar Minaya called Mark Shapiro about Bartolo Colon, Tony LaCava handpicked the prospects the Indians would receive. When the trade was announced, Shapiro, like Bill Smith would be six years later, was denounced as a young GM over his head. It also marked the first time, Minaya got "his guy" in a trade. 

Continue reading this post »

The Mets penciled John Maine into the 2009 rotation despite uncertainty about his health, following bone spur surgery after 2008. Expecting him to return to 2007 form was a stretch but it wasn't unreasonable to think he could provide 140 innings with a ~4.30 FIP.  The various preseason projection systems pegged him around this level of performance.  Like most of the Mets, Maine's season didn't turn out quite as well as hoped.

Continue reading this post »

All right, who's ready for round three? In round one, we took a look at the Mets' first ten rounds and followed it up with a look over the hitters of interest from later rounds. In this, our final look at the 2009 draft debacle, we'll look for potential sleepers from the ranks of the pitchers taken in those same later rounds.

On the whole, the Mets didn't grab a whole lot of pitchers in 2009, taking only 18 after the tenth round. Of those 18, eight didn't sign. Another (Zach Dotson) signed too late to debut this season. And two guys threw so little, I don't have much to say about them at all: 39th rounder Taylor Whitenton and 24th rounder Michael Johnson. So we'll toss them both aside for now. That leaves a class of seven guys to consider. Let's jump right into it.

Continue reading this post »

In his most recent mailbag, Marty Noble suggested the Mets sign free agent outfielder Mike Cameron.  This a smart proposal for a variety of reasons.  Cameron has long been one of the most underrated players in baseball (his career worth is on par with some low-level Hall of Famers) and even at 36 years old he is still a well above average performer.

At the plate, Cameron is most known for his power and strikeouts.  He can be counted on for 20-25 homers, a .200 Iso and 150 strikeouts a year.  He can also draw a walk and a .340 wOBA seems like a fair projection for 2010.  Considering he is one of the best defensive outfielders in the game, Cameron's bat is more than adequate.  Based on UZR and +/-, it appears he's about a +5 defensive center fielder.  Fangraphs WAR had him as a 4 win player in 2008 and 4.3 in 2009.  Being conservative let's say he's a 3-3.5 win player going forward.  He made $10 million in 2009, but given his age and the free agent market, a 1 year deal at about $8 million might be sufficient.  This would, in all likelihood, be a steal of a contract.  One other positive - he is almost universally praised for his clubhouse presence.  

Cameron vs. Carlos Beltran defensively is a toss-up but I'd probably give the slight edge to Cameron right now.  Given Beltran's injury concerns, it would be best to move him to left field if Cameron signed.  An outfield of Cameron-Beltran-Pagan would bring a smile to the faces of Met pitchers, as all 3 are adequate center fielders.  This alignment resembles the Franklin Gutierrez-Endy Chavez-Ichiro triumvirate employed by the Mariners earlier this season.  It would be prudent to find strong defensive outfielders to take advantage of Citi Field's dimensions.

Matt Holliday would be a welcome sight in Flushing next season but recent talk of his potential contract is a bit troubling.  A cheaper, short-term outfield solution might be a better move, and would allow for improvements in the rotation and 1st base.  Cameron returning to the Mets seems unlikely, but hopefully the memory of his last game as a Met in 2005 wouldn't stop him from signing.

via sportsillustrated.cnn.com

Matt at Metsblog noted yesterday that he loses count of the emails he receives from fans clamoring for a manager like Mike Scioscia.  I rarely receive emails from readers, and that's just fine, but I would agree there is a general perception that Scioscia's teams are always hard-working, fundamentally sound overachievers.  This perception likely stems from any number of factors:

• In Scioscia's guest starring role in "Homer At The Bat", a Simpsons episode, Waylon Smithers found him deer hunting.  He then starts working at the Springfield Nuclear Power Plant because of a desire to work a blue collar job.  Baseball fans love a good blue collar personality.
• The Angels consistently make the playoffs.
• Scioscia was a catcher, a field general, a leader of the World Champion 1988 Dodgers.
• The Angels have had success without fielding brand name superstars.  (Vladimir Guerrero comes closest to the "brand name" title; Mark Teixeira played half a season in 2008)

Continue reading this post »