|
="Edgy DC":10ymb8yd]I don't think it should have been priority number one. The Mets were second in the league in runs scored and sixth in runs yielded. They lost two division races in two years in the final weeks as their bullpens underwent serial failure.
Yeah, not everything that went right last year will go right this year. Not everything that went wrong (and plenty did, offensively) will go wrong, either.[/quote:10ymb8yd]
I haven't posted a single message on the Mets off-season roster revamping yet, but my sentiments were always pretty much in line with Edgy's post.
The Mets have an excellent team. Their best four players are arguably better than any other team's best four. I think that the team has corrected what was, to me, their two biggest problems --the bullpen and Willie Randolph. Like Edgy said, this is a team that wasn't eliminated until the last day of the last two seasons. Luck, rather than talent, may have been the team's worst enemy.
Ideally, I'd like management to acquire an All-Star for every position -- to assemble a team that, on paper, would appear to be flawless. But this is also an unreasonable expectation. Flawless teams are special and thus, rare. I think that this team is good enough to get into the playoffs, as is. And once in the playoffs, anythng goes. Even the powerhouse practically flawless '86 Mets needed a whole lotta luck, maybe even another miracle to bring back that WS trophy.
While the Phillies are a formidable opponent, they're no powerhouse, WS crown notwithstanding. Their slim cumulative two season edge over the Mets isn't enough to proclaim superiority. As I see it, the Mets and Phils are two closely matched opponents, virtually inidistinguishable, talent-wise.
Having Adam Dunn would be nice, though.
|
Edgy DC
Jan 28 2009 08:53 AM
|
|
Yeah, it'd be very nice.
|
smg58
Jan 28 2009 10:49 AM
|
|
="DocTee":2eejdf5c]The need for a bat was/is obvoius and should have been priority number one. The difference between, say, Dunn and Murphy/Tatis is far greater, I think, than that between Putz and, say, Brandon Lyon.[/quote:2eejdf5c]
According to the Fielding Bible, Church's defense in RF was superior, Murphy's glove in left was above average (and far better than most people realize), and Dunn's glove was well below average no matter where he was put. I'm not sure Dunn would give the Mets anything with the bat that he wouldn't take away with the glove, especially in a more spacious park. The same applies to Abreu, and would have applied to Burrell, Ibanez, or Jermaine Dye.
The one noteworthy free agent with a better than average glove for left field is Ty Wigginton. The Mets could use another righthanded bat, and Wigginton had the fifth highest OPS among all regulars against lefthanded pitching last year. He could platoon in left, or start there if he outperforms Murphy, without forcing a guy who hit .312 with an .876 OPS for us to the bench or AAA whether he's hitting well or not. He'd allow Tatis to spell Church or Delgado against some lefties, and otherwise solidify a bench that's presently very short on pop and righthanded balance. And he'd cover the Mets at a variety of positions in case of injury or somebody becoming ineffective. There's your bargain.
Plus, I would argue that the difference between Orlando Hudson and Luis Castillo is greater than the difference between even Manny and Murphy/Tatis. Partly because of defense, but mainly because Murphy really isn't that bad and Castillo really is that bad.
|
A Boy Named Seo
Jan 28 2009 10:55 AM
|
|
="smg58":fkqnfrbx]="DocTee":fkqnfrbx]The need for a bat was/is obvoius and should have been priority number one. The difference between, say, Dunn and Murphy/Tatis is far greater, I think, than that between Putz and, say, Brandon Lyon.[/quote:fkqnfrbx]
According to the Fielding Bible, Church's defense in RF was superior, Murphy's glove in left was above average (and far better than most people realize), and Dunn's glove was well below average no matter where he was put. I'm not sure Dunn would give the Mets anything with the bat that he wouldn't take away with the glove, especially in a more spacious park. The same applies to Abreu, and would have applied to Burrell, Ibanez, or Jermaine Dye.
[/quote:fkqnfrbx]
Really? That's a lot of giving away Dunn would have to do. Looking beyond '09, he really is a pretty good fit. He could play 1 year in LF and slide over to first next year and the Mets could get a better gloving, less strike outing, more right handy guy for '10 in LF. Especially if he could be had for Pat Burrell money or close to it. He just turned 29 fer cryin' out loud.
|
metirish
Jan 28 2009 10:58 AM
|
|
Dunn would need to drop a whole lot of balls to take away from what he would give you on offense , I would take him over Abreu.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Jan 28 2009 11:02 AM
|
|
Abreu is slower than a slug going uphill. Plus, he's got Yankee taint.
Dunn, meanwhile, is not the best fielder, but he'd be playing next to a Gold Glover with a lot of range. If Citi is a hitter's park as they suspect, he'd set the team home run record.
And he could spell Delgado at first. And Delgado isn't exactly Mex around the bag, either -- though not as bad as people say.
I'd take a one-year pact with him in a heartbeat.
|
Frayed Knot
Jan 28 2009 11:08 AM
|
|
Various articles today (Olney & Wash Post) say that both Abreu & Dunn may be willing (read: have no choice) to take one-year deals.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Jan 28 2009 11:09 AM
|
|
I think Dunn is a longer shot than Sheets, Manny and any of the other names talked about.
He's just, the complete opposite of an Omar guy.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 28 2009 11:10 AM
|
|
Hudson's the position player I'd most like to see them get.
Add Hudson and Sheets and I'll be ready to get 2009 underway.
|
batmagadanleadoff
Jan 28 2009 11:13 AM
|
|
="John Cougar Lunchbucket":q4dmjolh]I think Dunn is a longer shot than Sheets, Manny and any of the other names talked about.
He's just, the complete opposite of an Omar guy.[/quote:q4dmjolh]
I agree with you. But is it good or bad to be an "Omar guy"?
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Jan 28 2009 11:15 AM
|
|
Well, I'd hold out more hope for Orlando Hudson, f'rinstance.
|
Ashie62
Jan 28 2009 11:20 AM
|
|
Well..K Rod & Putz are in the house. I just hope Krod's arm is OK
Omar seems to be happy with the OF. I would like to see a power hitting LF but Manny, Dunn, Abreu. Not gonna happen..
|
attgig
Jan 28 2009 12:10 PM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jan 28 2009 12:21 PM
|
|
yeah, I don't understand how he likes the OF that much.
they're saying Dunn for 1 year at 5 mil. How is that not a steal? I was never a huge fan of Dunn cuz of his SO rate, but 1 year 5 mil for 40hr, 100+rbi, >350obp... heck, sign him for 3 years for 15 mil at that price
Omar, for some reason, loves church, and has this idea that after signing a bench full of guys at 2 mil per season, one of them will pan out in LF.
I don't get it.
|
Edgy DC
Jan 28 2009 12:21 PM
|
|
I'm guessing Opposite of an Omar Guy =
<ul><li>not particlurly athletic for a professional athlete;</li>
<li>limited number of skills but impressive showing in the skills he has;</li>
<li>sabermetrically appealing;</li>
<li>American-born whitey;</li>
<li>no history of employment at Omar's previous stops in Montreal or Texas, or his first tenure with the Mets;</li>
<li>a satisfyingly known quantity, rather than droolingly full of not-yet-realized potential;</li>
<li>has a galootey-nickname like "Big Donkey" instead of something exotic and xexy like "El Matador."</li></ul>
|
Nymr83
Jan 28 2009 01:19 PM
|
|
| ]Omar, for some reason, loves church |
his solid production might have something to do with it.
I'm all in favor of Dunn, he'd be replacing the left field platoon, not church.
|
Edgy DC
Jan 28 2009 01:24 PM
|
|
I thought it was the music, meaningful sermons, and the sense of belonging.
|
attgig
Jan 28 2009 01:28 PM
|
|
="Nymr83"]| ]Omar, for some reason, loves church |
his solid production might have something to do with it.
I'm all in favor of Dunn, he'd be replacing the left field platoon, not church. |
decent BA/OBP, OPS ~ 800, ~15 hrs a year for a corner outfielder?
that's solid production?
his best year was 07, after which Omar bought him high, and while he was on track to be a good fill-in in RF this past year before he got hurt, by no means was he a starting RF'er in a championship caliber club.
|
Edgy DC
Jan 28 2009 01:48 PM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jan 28 2009 01:48 PM
|
|
Sheesh, before getting hurt, he was .316 / .385 / .469 // .855 in April and .299 / .364 / .612 // .976 in May. Can't ask for much more from a guy.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 28 2009 01:48 PM
|
|
Well, he was very solid before his concussion. Whether he would have sustained it over a full season remains to be seen. And so does whether or not he'll ever be healthy again.
Church is certainly a question mark. He could be really good in 2009, or he could be really mediocre.
If it's the latter, the rest of the lineup probably isn't deep enough to cover for him.
|
Nymr83
Jan 28 2009 02:19 PM
|
|
| ]decent BA/OBP, OPS ~ 800, ~15 hrs a year for a corner outfielder?
that's solid production? |
Career OPS+ 111. Yes that is in fact solid production.
| ]his best year was 07, after which Omar bought him high |
07 was the first time he got to play every day, but his 05 and 06 stats supported 07 as not being a any kind of fluke.
| ]and while he was on track to be a good fill-in in RF this past year before he got hurt, by no means was he a starting RF'er in a championship caliber club |
Ryan Church (29) has a career 111 OPS+ and his in his prime, thus you can expect around that number out of him.
the last 10 champions and their "championship caliber RFer" (with age and OPS+ for the year they won)
2008 PHI (Werth 29 121)
2007 BOS (Drew 31 105)
2006 STL (Encarnacion 30 93)
2005 CHW (Dye 31 118)
2004 BOS (Kapler 28 77)
2003 FLA (Encarnacion 27 97)
2002 ANH (Salmon 33 133)
2001 ARZ (Sanders 33 117)
2000 NYY (O'Neil 37 92)
1999 NYY (O'Neil 36 97)
conclusion: a concussion-free Ryan Church is as good or better than "championship caliber" rightfielders.
|
Ashie62
Jan 28 2009 02:44 PM
|
|
conclusion: a concussion-free Ryan Church is as good or better than "championship caliber" rightfielders.
You have to be kidding..Church concussion or not has not come remotely closed to any of the referenced numbers
You say a concussion free Church IS as good or better...That can't be backed up now. He MAY be as good or better. Personally I doubt. but even just staying healthy is probably good enough.
Yeah Adam Dunn strikes out too much, plays bad D..however.he is a legitimate power threat, comes cheap, and allows Murphy to season up at OF & 2B.
We still have no real read on what Church can do. I have been impressed so far but you can't bank on it...
|
smg58
Jan 28 2009 05:18 PM
|
|
My one real concern about Church is his ability to hit lefthanders. Right now the team has nobody to spell either him or Delgado against a lefty, and if Tatis is starting the only righty on the bench will be the backup catcher. (I suppose Nick Evans has a chance of beating out all the lefty outfielders Minaya has brought in, but I'd much rather see him get full-time AB's at first base in AAA than warm the bench for the Mets.) I would consider another righthanded bat to be an imperative.
Otherwise, like nymr says an OPS+ between 110 and 120 for Church would be perfectly consistent with his numbers for the Nats and his pre-concussion numbers with us last year. That, combined with ++ defense, would make him an asset. I realize the concussion still makes him a question mark, but given the much higher probability of inadequacy we currently have at second base, I'd direct my resources there.
|
MFS62
Jan 28 2009 05:53 PM
|
|
="Edgy DC":22p77pkg] has a galootey-nickname like "Big Donkey" instead of something exotic and sexy like "El Matador."[/quote:22p77pkg]
(I corrected "xexy" for ya'.)
IIRC the first Met to be nicknamed "Big donkey" was Frank Thomas.
LAter
|
Nymr83
Jan 28 2009 06:09 PM
|
|
| ]You have to be kidding..Church concussion or not has not come remotely closed to any of the referenced numbers |
you've proven that you can't read and compare simple 2 and 3 digit numbers. i'm done with you.
|
Edgy DC
Jan 28 2009 06:27 PM
|
|
Must be baseball argot for "big slow slugger."
Tom Seaver welcomes Donn Clendenon to the Mets.
TS: Donn, guess who the first guy I struck out in the big leagues was?
DC: Who?
TS: You, you big donkey!
DC: Well, you didn't get a virgin. A lot of guys have gotten me. I've gotten a lot of guys also.
|
MFS62
Jan 28 2009 06:50 PM
|
|
LOL!
Guess it must be.
And, I can just hear Donn saying that.
Later
|
Edgy DC
Jan 29 2009 06:58 AM
|
|
Donn, though, was fast as the wind as a young player. He still ran pretty fast for a thumper by the time he reached the Mets.
|
Frayed Knot
Jan 29 2009 07:38 AM
Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Jan 29 2009 08:19 AM
|
|
WARP Speed Captain!
Just for kicks; the 'WARP' projections (Wins above Replacement Player) from BP for 2009 FA LFers:
Manny = 4.3
Dunn = 3.8
Abreu = 3.2
And, yes, WARP does take defense into account as well as hitting.
IOW, Manny's projected 2009 season (using BP's system) would add approx 4-1/2 wins to your team over and above what using a "replacement" player (a readily available waiver pick-up) would bring.
Dunn would add about half a win less, Abreu another half-win less.
They mention that Manny WARP projection is only [u:11e8s8cy]a bit more than half[/u:11e8s8cy] what he provided in 2008 (7.8) but the system takes into account that he's probably unlikely to repeat his stunning 2nd-half rampage and even more unlikely to avoid turning 37.
|
Frayed Knot
Jan 29 2009 07:38 AM
|
|
="Edgy DC":3z4h1v4l]Donn, though, was fast as the wind as a young player. He still ran pretty fast for a thumper by the time he reached the Mets.[/quote:3z4h1v4l]
So you're saying that you'd rather have Donn than Dunn?
|
Edgy DC
Jan 29 2009 07:56 AM
|
|
Hard to vote against Donn, dead though he is, at the present time.
|
Vic Sage
Jan 29 2009 01:30 PM
|
|
smg58: | ]According to the Fielding Bible, Church's defense in RF was superior, Murphy's glove in left was above average (and far better than most people realize), and Dunn's glove was well below average no matter where he was put. I'm not sure Dunn would give the Mets anything with the bat that he wouldn't take away with the glove, especially in a more spacious park. The same applies to Abreu, and would have applied to Burrell, Ibanez, or Jermaine Dye. |
This kind of horsehockey makes my shorts steam. you're worried about corner of defense, when you've got a guy who averages 40hr/100+rbi/100+BB /year?
Get Ollie & Dunn and be done!
|
Nymr83
Jan 31 2009 11:56 PM
|
|
come on Omar, slip it under the radar on superbowl sunday... Adam Dunn is a NYM.
|
SteveJRogers
Feb 01 2009 06:43 AM
|
|
="Nymr83":16qb9hum]come on Omar, slip it under the radar on superbowl sunday... Adam Dunn is a NYM.[/quote:16qb9hum]
That will piss off the "We Want Manny" fanboys!
Then again, they'll probably want Omar to act like the Yankees and say "Hey, why not get both!"
|
Nymr83
Feb 01 2009 09:59 PM
|
|
I'd rather have Dunn than Ramirez given their respective ages and attitudes.
Dunn also has the added ability to play 1B, meaning that at the end of next season we can look to replace Delgado OR shift Dunn to 1B and find an outfielder. If we sign Manny we are locked in to replacing Delgado with a firstbaseman, and options are good to have.
I admit that Ramirez's stats are more impressive and wouldn't fault anyone for preffering him.
|
Number 6
Feb 01 2009 10:32 PM
|
|
The biggest issue regarding Dunn would be the risk in a long-term deal (he's got a healthy dose of the dreaded "old-person skills"). None of the models available like his chances for maintaining his skill-set over the length of a 4-year contract. If he's available for 1 on the cheap though, somebody is getting a bargain.
To me, this still all goes back to Perez. It seems like the Mets are not going to shoot their payroll far beyond $135 million, and if that's the case I'd much rather see them pick up Dunn and a pitcher, preferably Sheets on an incentive-laden "prove-it" contract, for a price possibly a few million more than what they'd pay for Perez. They'd do that without the risk inherent in doling out longer-term deals. If Sheets has a dynamite year - which he is clearly capable of provided he pitches - and meets his incentives, then you're quite possibly getting a positive return on investment anyway.
I like Church a lot, but you just can't count on him to stay on the field. Right now, left field is stitched together with wishes and dreams. It's nice that we have 3 huge producers and 1 with potential, but that might not mean much if our offense is significantly below league-average in the other 4 lineup slots.
|
Nymr83
Feb 02 2009 12:21 AM
|
|
="Number 6":2lro33xa]The biggest issue regarding Dunn would be the risk in a long-term deal (he's got a healthy dose of the dreaded "old-person skills"). None of the models available like his chances for maintaining his skill-set over the length of a 4-year contract. If he's available for 1 on the cheap though, somebody is getting a bargain.
To me, this still all goes back to Perez. It seems like the Mets are not going to shoot their payroll far beyond $135 million, and if that's the case I'd much rather see them pick up Dunn and a pitcher, preferably Sheets on an incentive-laden "prove-it" contract, for a price possibly a few million more than what they'd pay for Perez. They'd do that without the risk inherent in doling out longer-term deals. If Sheets has a dynamite year - which he is clearly capable of provided he pitches - and meets his incentives, then you're quite possibly getting a positive return on investment anyway.
I like Church a lot, but you just can't count on him to stay on the field. Right now, left field is stitched together with wishes and dreams. It's nice that we have 3 huge producers and 1 with potential, but that might not mean much if our offense is significantly below league-average in the other 4 lineup slots.[/quote:2lro33xa]
"3 huge producers" is a bit optimistic as well.
heres what i would consider a reasonable range of OPS+ numbers from our projected lineup, though of course you're free to disagree:
SS Reyes (100-120)
RF Church (100-135)
3B Wright (130-155)
CF Beltran (120-140)
1B Delgado (100-140)
LF Tatis/Murphy (90-120 from the LF spot combined)
2B Castillo (75-95)
C Schneider/Castro (75-95 from the spot)
obviously thats alot of range, but i think only 2 guys (Wright, Beltran) are capable of having a truly huge year, while 3 more (Delgado, Reyes, Church) are at least likely to be a positive force in the lineup. But you've got LF which is really a wild guess at this point, and C and 2B where you can pretty much expect a drag on the lineup.
I realize that C is pretty much unaddressable at this point (look whose out there), but LF could be very easily addressed with players who would hit in the top 5 of any lineup (Ramirez, Dunn, Abreu) and 2B could at least be made into a great defensive strength with better offensive production than Castillo (Hudson)
|
Number 6
Feb 02 2009 01:09 AM
|
|
Yeah, the word "huge" was a bad choice, for several reasons.
My fear is that we get significantly less from RF when we're playing back-ups due to injury, and I think we can reasonably expect less than the range you project for LF. Personally, I'd be surprised if the OPS+ we get from our LF platoon, as currently cast, approaches 100. Combine that with 2 other slots which I think you have pretty accurately down as offensive black holes, and it could get ugly. Yeah, it's a bad-case scenario, but I'd argue it's at least as likely as other probable outcomes. Even if we assume that Delgado, Wright, Reyes and Beltran are nearer to the upper bound of your ranges, can we expect that production to carry what could be some pretty hideous drag?
Meanwhile, Dunn has averaged an OPS+ of 133 for the past 5 seasons. If it winds up being true that his price could come down to 1 year and $7 million or so, that's value, and it keeps us from needing to bank on the improbable.
|
batmagadanleadoff
Feb 02 2009 01:57 AM
|
|
It would be nice to acquire Manny's next two seasons without having to pay for the two after that. But Manny and Dunn want long term deals. And if the price for either of those two drops low enough, then the Mets advantage in being one of baseball's wealthiest teams might be squandered, because at some point, even the Royals will put in a bid.
|
Nymr83
Feb 02 2009 02:47 AM
|
|
Whatever the economic situation, the Mets can outbid the Royals (or any other hypothetic bidder.) If the Mets are truly at a point where they can't offer 2 years 20 million (assuming they wanted to) then the Royals sure can't offer 2 years and 20 million either.
Right now the Mets have an advantage because there are at least 3 reasonable hitting alternatives out there (Ramirez, Dunn, and Abreu) and it is very unlikely that all 3 of those players find a 3rd year somewhere, the Mets should be able to get one of them, even if its not their first choice, for 2 years.
Theres also the pitchers that are still out there... Perez and Sheets are getting nothing right now from what i can tell of the rumor mill, its time the Mets made a "who can jump first" offer to the both of them.
It really looks like the bargains are there to be had and now is the time to lock them in for a smart GM. A few teams will be patting themselves on the back next offseason when prices are higher and they've got these guys at cheaper rates for another year.
|
Frayed Knot
Feb 02 2009 07:09 AM
|
|
And if all else fails ... Get Wiggy With It!!!
|
batmagadanleadoff
Feb 02 2009 09:32 AM
|
|
="Nymr83":2s7x82mb]Whatever the economic situation, the Mets can outbid the Royals (or any other hypothetic bidder.) If the Mets are truly at a point where they can't offer 2 years 20 million...[/quote:2s7x82mb]
This'll probably fall into that vast category of things I believe are true but can't prove, but if Manny can't get more than a two year $20M deal, I'd be very suspicious of a lot of other things besides the economy.
And if a team's offering Manny $10M a year, then it can hardly be said that his price has dropped to $7M.
|
metirish
Feb 02 2009 09:37 AM
|
|
Hasn't Manny already turned down more than that from the Dodgers way back in FA , 2 years and $45 million IIRC.
|
batmagadanleadoff
Feb 02 2009 10:15 AM
|
|
="metirish":e0gp3ri2]Hasn't Manny already turned down more than that from the Dodgers way back in FA , 2 years and $45 million IIRC.[/quote:e0gp3ri2]
Probably. We were only "what iffing" on Manny's price.
|
Frayed Knot
Feb 02 2009 10:21 AM
|
|
="metirish":3ko8tdnw]Hasn't Manny already turned down more than that from the Dodgers way back in FA , 2 years and $45 million IIRC.[/quote:3ko8tdnw]
Yes, LA put that deal out there early on and is waiting for a counter-offer from Boras but hasn't heard anything. And word leaked out the other day that Manny supposedly let it slip via his buddy A. Pujols that he hasn't received an offer other than that one. The Giants showed some brief interest and continue to stick their nose in every once in a while but that now seems to be more in making sure the Dodgers don't get him cheaply than it is in snagging him for themselves.
Presumably that same Dodger offer is still on the table although they might just reduce it themselves. Meanwhile Boras is still talking about wanting 4 years.
|
Frayed Knot
Feb 02 2009 08:35 PM
|
|
From Jayson Stark - espn.com:
A two-year, $45 million offer three months ago didn't get it done. So on Monday, the Los Angeles Dodgers made a new offer to Manny Ramirez -- for one year and $25 million, according to a major league source.
Dodgers GM Ned Colletti confirmed to ESPN.com that he met with Ramirez's agent, Scott Boras, on Monday and presented the new offer in person.
Colletti declined to confirm any details of the offer. But the offer was confirmed by another source with knowledge of the discussions. It's believed that Ramirez and Boras were given a 48-hour deadline to accept the offer.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Feb 02 2009 09:00 PM
|
|
They stole my idea!
|
metsguyinmichigan
Feb 02 2009 09:35 PM
|
|
That's more than the entire Marlins payroll.
|
Number 6
Feb 02 2009 11:31 PM
|
|
Of course, he could be referring to talks that happened a while ago, were not substantial, or are dead due to the Perez signing and/or Castillo, but Hudson is still name-dropping the Mets.
http://mlb.mlb.com/media/video.jsp?mid=200902023793126
|
Frayed Knot
Feb 03 2009 06:46 AM
|
|
Manny/Boras turn down the Dodger proposal ... and the beat goes on.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Feb 03 2009 07:34 AM
|
|
Report this morning that the White Sox have offered Abreu one year, $8 million.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Feb 03 2009 07:45 AM
|
|
Take it, Bobby.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
