Master Index of Archived Threads


No Piniero for you?

Fman99 Jan 20 2010 07:17 PM

SI.com and Ken Rosenthal reporting Joel Piniero to Anaheim, 2 yrs 16 million. If that's the case I will assume that he's just a Dave Duncan scrap-heaper who will suck outside of St. Louis this year (see Weaver, Jeff). But shit, the Mets are running out of choices now. Sheets maybe?

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 20 2010 07:22 PM Re: No Piniero for you?

Fuck all current, former and future St. Fucking Louis Cardinals.

soupcan Jan 20 2010 07:42 PM Re: No Piniero for you?

[quote="John Cougar Lunchbucket":3gr8nas5]Fuck all current, former and future St. Fucking Louis Cardinals.[/quote:3gr8nas5] Ditto Molly.

bmfc1 Jan 20 2010 07:56 PM Re: No Piniero for you?

Does the Mets front office have any clue about assembling a pitching staff? This wasn't that difficult: sign a FA SP and trade for another. Instead, they have done nothing. Santana, Pelfrey, Maine (off an injury), Perez (off stinking), and the same nobodies that permeated into our lives last season. No Piniero, No Marquis--the guy that actually wanted to be a Met! So that means overpaying for fragile Ben Sheets or signing Jon Garland or Jarrod Washburn. I know: their strategy is to get the only guys left after everyone else has signed because those guys will come the cheapest. The only real hope, if you can call it that, is if the Reds have to dump salary and get rid of Harang or Arroyo. It should not have come to this but the Mets FO screwed it up. So let's sit back and enjoy Nelson Figueroa and Pat Misch.

batmagadanleadoff Jan 20 2010 08:00 PM Re: No Piniero for you?

[quote="bmfc1":xe12p5m1] Instead, they have done nothing. Santana, Pelfrey, Maine (off an injury), Perez (off stinking), and the same nobodies that permeated into our lives last season....[/quote:xe12p5m1] Santana's also coming off an injury. You left that out.

Edgy DC Jan 20 2010 08:01 PM Re: No Piniero for you?

Reality is that they mostly didn't permeate our lives. And instead were largely replaced by others.

metirish Jan 20 2010 08:03 PM Re: No Piniero for you?

For that money and years I am surprised it's all he got.Sheets apparently wants between 8 & 12 million coming of a year when he didn't pitch. I think I would rather have signed JP for what he got than pay Sheets anything close to it.

Ashie62 Jan 20 2010 08:11 PM Re: No Piniero for you?

I'm confident Ollie, Maine,Misch & Figgy can help pitch the Mets to a championship.

Valadius Jan 20 2010 08:36 PM Re: No Piniero for you?

[quote="John Cougar Lunchbucket":2k1zlbmj]Fuck all current, former and future St. Fucking Louis Cardinals.[/quote:2k1zlbmj] I'll drink to that.

Benjamin Grimm Jan 20 2010 08:41 PM Re: No Piniero for you?

SteveJRogers Jan 20 2010 08:49 PM Re: No Piniero for you?

seawolf17 Jan 20 2010 09:02 PM Re: No Piniero for you?

[quote="batmagadanleadoff":26ek8mcw][quote="bmfc1":26ek8mcw] Instead, they have done nothing. Santana, Pelfrey, Maine (off an injury), Perez (off stinking), and the same nobodies that permeated into our lives last season....[/quote:26ek8mcw] Santana's also coming off an injury. You left that out.[/quote:26ek8mcw] And Pelfrey's coming off a suck.

Nymr83 Jan 20 2010 11:26 PM Re: No Piniero for you?

No Marquis--the guy that actually wanted to be a Met! So that means overpaying for fragile Ben Sheets or signing Jon Garland or Jarrod Washburn. Marquis is an average pitcher, Sheets is an ace if healthy. Garland is just as good as Marquis, he might even be better at Citi Field because some of his (too many) homers could turn into long outs. Washburn is a pretty similiar guy as well. If you wanted Marquis I can't see why you'd be unhappy with Garland or Washburn, unless you are a graduate of Tottenville High School.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jan 20 2010 11:40 PM Re: No Piniero for you?

I'll take Sheets. Pineiro would have been nice at that price, but hey-- spilled milk. I think Beltran's absence shifts things a bit-- now, there's no point in safe moves, really, because one of the big three is losing significant time. If everything needs to break right for you to contend, might as well up the ante, and the potential value of that "everything," no? I think Sheets AND Bedard are the thing. I think a half-year of a good Sheets is worth 7-8 million... and I think Russ Branyan, if healthy, is the best first-base/corner-OF option left, so pick him or Delgado up. Screw Garland and Barajas. Balls out, ladies and gents.

G-Fafif Jan 21 2010 05:33 AM Re: No Piniero for you?

Clever airbrushing job, Topps, but that's a former Cardinal right there.

Benjamin Grimm Jan 21 2010 06:08 AM Re: No Piniero for you?

Also, Doug Davis, a name we've been hearing a lot but have been mostly ignoring, signed with the Brewers. (One year, $4.5 million.) So who's left? Garland, Sheets, and Smoltz?

soupcan Jan 21 2010 07:39 AM Re: No Piniero for you?

Smoltz? Can you imagine? Glavine and then Smoltz? Ugh. What's next - Chipper Jones at first base for 3 years?

Frayed Knot Jan 21 2010 07:43 AM Re: No Piniero for you?

If Chipper were available right now for 1st base duties I'd be all over him like ... well, like Chipper on a Hooters waitress.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 21 2010 07:48 AM Re: No Piniero for you?

For all the Smarty McSmartypantses in this thread, perhaps it ought to be F all post-1984 Cardinals, even you, Bernard Drinkey. That said I was sort of intrigued by Pineiro and was hoping we'd come away with him at a good price but now he's back on my shit list along with the rest of Missouri and Southern Illinois. "America's Breadbasket" can bite my flabby white ass. Bedard and Sheets are still out there, maybe an incentive-heavy offer to the former gets it done. I'm also reminding myself that I thought from the start we'd go the trade route. Meche, Harang, Arroyo -- some of them have to go.

TransMonk Jan 21 2010 07:53 AM Re: No Piniero for you?

I didn't want Pinero at all anyways. I'm now firmly on the bandwagon for Sheets AND Garland.

Ashie62 Jan 21 2010 09:15 AM Re: No Piniero for you?

16 million for 2 years of Pineiro was too much I guess Ben Sheets? Don't the Mets have enough iffy pitchers?

Centerfield Jan 21 2010 09:18 AM Re: No Piniero for you?

Smoltz? That's like Ben Sheets without the upside.

TransMonk Jan 21 2010 09:25 AM Re: No Piniero for you?

All of the FA options this year (other than Lackey) can be described as "iffy". I had as much trepidation about Pinero being a bad sign as I would Sheets. Sheets provides the most upside "if" he works out. Sheets, if healthy, will most likely not suck...we would just need a contingency if/when Sheets were to go on the DL. I have to think Smoltz would only be a bullpen option.

Benjamin Grimm Jan 21 2010 09:34 AM Re: No Piniero for you?

Yeah, I see Smoltz as a guy "in the mix" rather than as someone who'd be likely to go north from St. Lucie in the starting rotation. The contingencies for Sheets would probably be guys like Niese and Nieve and Stoner, or Perez if one of the above pushes ahead of Oliver during spring training.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jan 21 2010 10:21 AM Re: No Piniero for you?

Ben Sheets at 8 million, if he's healthy, is a huge discount. If he's semi-healthy and gives us 100 innings, well... it's still a relative discount (consider that the team is paying Frankie Walks-a-Lot 11.5M this year for about 70 likely less-effective innings) and, in combination with a Stoner/Nieve/Niese platter, would provide significantly more value for that cash than Garland would for a little less. I repeat: Beltran's absence shifts the goalposts. High-upside risk-- as long as the costs aren't prohibitive-- is the PRUDENT way to go right now with the leftover money. Sheets, Wang, Bedard... si, si and si.

metirish Jan 21 2010 10:26 AM Re: No Piniero for you?

I want to see the conversation between Sheets and Tom Seaver where Tom acts like naming a kid Seaver is the most natural thing in the world and is shocked that more kids are not named so. Tom after a few glasses of wine and that conversation would be even more awesome.

Benjamin Grimm Jan 21 2010 10:36 AM Re: No Piniero for you?

Tom Seaver's reaction to a fellow pitcher naming a kid Seaver would probably be very different than his reaction to a fan on the street giving him the same news.

Centerfield Jan 21 2010 10:42 AM Re: No Piniero for you?

Depends on if that pitcher is a foxhole sort of guy.

smg58 Jan 21 2010 01:19 PM Re: No Piniero for you?

I see no point in making a big commitment to guy who might not be better than what we've already got. Maine, Pelfrey, and Ollie all have one nice year on their resume too, and an average year from any of them isn't much different than an average year from Piniero. (And they're all younger than Piniero too.) A few games of Sheets/Wang/Bedard would be a bigger upgrade than a whole season of Piniero.

Benjamin Grimm Jan 21 2010 01:24 PM Re: No Piniero for you?

Since the Mets seem to have money left in their piggy bank, they might as well go all in on Sheets. Sure, if you guarantee him $9 million or so, you're taking a gamble, but it's for one year (he's surely in no position to demand two or more years) and if it doesn't work out, he'll be coming off the books in time for the next spending season.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jan 21 2010 01:33 PM Re: No Piniero for you?

Exactamundo!

Edgy DC Jan 21 2010 01:44 PM Re: No Piniero for you?

But there's a lot of speculation out there and conflicting reports about that pig.

Frayed Knot Jan 21 2010 01:57 PM Re: No Piniero for you?

[quote="Benjamin Grimm":2k42yjtt]... if you guarantee [Sheets] $9 million or so, you're taking a gamble, but it's for one year (he's surely in no position to demand two or more years)[/quote:2k42yjtt] Except that various reports say that two years is precisely what he's demanding - and at at least $9mil/per. Doesn't mean he'll get it of course, but pitchers who are scheduled to miss an entire year have snagged two year deals in the past. I suspect what he might wind up with is a back-loaded two-year deal where the second year becomes guaranteed if/when he gets past a certain point in year one.

Benjamin Grimm Jan 21 2010 01:57 PM Re: No Piniero for you?

[quote="Edgy DC":3guisgsy]But there's a lot of speculation out there and conflicting reports about that pig.[/quote:3guisgsy] Well we know there's at least the money they were going to give Molina. If they were planning on signing Molina and a pitcher, the sum of those two contracts should easily be enough to sign Sheets. (Figure $6 million for Molina and, conservatively, another $5 million for the pitcher.)

attgig Jan 21 2010 02:01 PM Re: No Piniero for you?

I know he wants a player option for a 2nd year, but I just can't see anyone giving that to him. I'd love to see a ~8 mil contract offer with a club option for a second year at ~12-15 mil (assuming that would be attractive enough for him) + 2-4 mil buyout, making it a 1 year 10-12 if he doesn't pan out and if he does pan out, a 2 year 20-23mil contract. i can't see anyone matching or beating that, but gives us an out if his arm falls apart. too much money? maybe, but with no bengie and no joel, we got money to spend... let's go wilpon, take this case by case basis and shove this one up your....

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jan 21 2010 02:45 PM Re: No Piniero for you?

[quote="Benjamin Grimm":3ibaw3l9][quote="Edgy DC":3ibaw3l9]But there's a lot of speculation out there and conflicting reports about that pig.[/quote:3ibaw3l9] Well we know there's at least the money they were going to give Molina. If they were planning on signing Molina and a pitcher, the sum of those two contracts should easily be enough to sign Sheets. (Figure $6 million for Molina and, conservatively, another $5 million for the pitcher.)[/quote:3ibaw3l9] THEY-- apart from Jeff, maybe-- may not know what they have to spend... there IS no set budget, 'member?

Edgy DC Jan 21 2010 02:48 PM Re: No Piniero for you?

...according to a report.

Benjamin Grimm Jan 21 2010 04:27 PM Re: No Piniero for you?

You act like that's a bad thing. I mean, I'm fortunate enough that I can go month to month without a budget, but I'm also not independently wealthy. So if a discretionary expense comes along, I don't check to see if it's within the budget, but I do consider whether it's worth the expense. The Mets apparently aren't cash-strapped, but they don't want to spend willy-nilly. I don't think that's so crazy.

Frayed Knot Jan 21 2010 05:25 PM Re: No Piniero for you?

I don't either. That whole 'no budget revelation' article not only struck me as a whole lotta nuthin but also as nothing new. Met brass - whether it's the GM or one of the Wilpons - has always said that they're willing to spend if they think the player is worthwhile and, despite the fact that specific limits seem to get picked out of the air by fans and critics, they've never (at least publicly or that I can remember) mentioned a specific number that will not be crossed and, apparently, haven't mentioned one to Omar either. Of course there's a practical limit even if not a set-in-concrete one and I'm sure the lux-tax threshold is something they don't want to cross as then you're spending an extra dollar for every ten you spend (or whatever the specific pcts are).