Master Index of Archived Threads


Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

Frayed Knot Jun 03 2010 07:19 AM

No, this isn't about Jim Joyce (ump or writer) or about last night's horrid game. Rather it's about the decade of 'the aughts' which just ended and the idea that if you had the ability to go back and change some move by the Mets during that time what would your choice(s) be. So pick one NY Met move - or pick several and itemize them if you prefer - from the 2000-2009 time frame that you would most want to un-do and, as always, explain why you make that your #1 choice for a mulligan. My only restriction here is that they have to be actual moves that were made (trades, signings, releases, drafts, hirings, firings, etc.) and not speculative stuff that wasn't. So answers like; I would have signed ARod back in 2000 for half of what he eventually signed for ... or: made the rumored X for Y deal that was all over the internet at the time; or: have Beltran smack that Wainwright curve into the gap - are highly speculative wishes if not outright fantasies, not actual events, and therefore ineligible for this exercise.

Edgy DC Jun 03 2010 07:46 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

The 2002 offensive overhaul and the firing of Bobby Valentine when he couldn't make that dog hunt are all one ill blur to me. It's obvious Phillips and Valentine were beyond being on different pages and working from an entirely different book.

Gwreck Jun 03 2010 07:54 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

I would've liked to hire Jim Leyland instead of Willie Randolph following the 2004 season.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jun 03 2010 07:58 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

I think having consummated that Larkin trade could have made the '00 World Series a lot more interesting, but as to moves that were made, the 2002 re-invention was a total failure, with Vaughn, Alomar, Cendno, Burnitz, Estes and D'Amico all rotten, and Valentine somehow getting the blame for it. Of all those moves Cedeno was probably the worst because it was the longest commitment and burdened the team both offensively and defensively and was easiest to peg as a shaky move even as it was made.

metsguyinmichigan Jun 03 2010 08:02 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

I would have established an earlier curfew for relievers in Miami in 2006. Seriously, I would have liked to have kept Heath Bell. The Kazmir trade was, of course, a disaster. But I've long held that it was necessary to show just how screwed up the organization was, and paved the way for the needed changes.

TransMonk Jun 03 2010 08:12 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

I would undo the Mora for Bordick trade. -Mora outperformed Bordick for the remainder of 2000 -Mora could have fit (and contributed offensively) at shortstop (replacing Ordonez) or in the OF in 2001-2003 -Obviously, the juicing thing is bad, but for the sake of this experiment, I'm guessing that we would have traded him before the shit hit the fan -- and possibly sold really high on him

Centerfield Jun 03 2010 08:23 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

Middlebrook for Bay would have been nice to get back, but if I had one, it would be the Kazmir trade. Honorable mention goes to the Castillo contract.

Benjamin Grimm Jun 03 2010 08:38 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

I might consider intentionally walking Yadier Molina. Or better yet, I'd pick through Game 2 of the 2006 NLCS and find some move that might have tipped that game in our favor. (Too lazy to actually do it now, but if I had the power to change the past, then I'd make the effort.) There's a 1999 deal that I'd like to undo, which would have had an impact on the following decade: not trading Jason Isringhausen for Billy Taylor. Keeping Izzie would have potentially spared us Braden Looper and Billy Wagner.

themetfairy Jun 03 2010 08:43 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

Fire Phillips and keep Bobby.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jun 03 2010 08:44 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

In 2005, I'd have traded for Ray Durham at the deadline.

Fman99 Jun 03 2010 09:04 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

The Bordick/Mora swap. What a boondoggle that was.

HahnSolo Jun 03 2010 09:07 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

I'd undo the "we didn't get Hampton signed so let's panic-sign somebody" signing of Kevin Appier.

HahnSolo Jun 03 2010 09:14 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Or better yet, I'd pick through Game 2 of the 2006 NLCS and find some move that might have tipped that game in our favor. (Too lazy to actually do it now, but if I had the power to change the past, then I'd make the effort.) Maybe not bunting LoDuca in the first inning after a leadoff double by Reyes (idiotically giving up an out in an inning we’d eventually score three runs?). Ohh Willie.

MFS62 Jun 03 2010 09:15 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

"Bidding against themselves" for Ollie and Cora. Later

duan Jun 03 2010 09:31 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

I'd have paid the money to A-Rod. Or at least negotiated in an honest endeavour. 10 years for 250 million was a very very very fair deal.

Willets Point Jun 03 2010 09:39 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

Signing Tom Glavine.

Gwreck Jun 03 2010 09:48 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

Willets Point wrote: Signing Tom Glavine. First time or second time?

Benjamin Grimm Jun 03 2010 10:07 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

I can't see how not having Glavine or Appier would have resulted in any additional Mets championships. (In retrospect, though, I'd certainly send a different starter to the mound for the last game of the 2007 season.) Any retroactive changes I'd make would be planned to add at least one more title. Either a World Championship in 2000, a division title in 2001 or 2007 or 2008, or an NL pennant in 2006. (Of course, the hope would be that the 2001, 2006, 2007, or 2008 changes would ultimately lead to a World Series title. Two birds, one stone, and all that.)

Met Hunter Jun 03 2010 10:10 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

I would tell Beltran, on an 0-2 count, protect the plate.

batmagadanleadoff Jun 03 2010 10:23 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jun 03 2010 10:30 AM

Fman99 wrote: The Bordick/Mora swap. What a boondoggle that was. Without thinking this one through thoroughly, Mora/Bordick come's to mind immediately as a transaction I'd wish to undo. Or while we're on shortstops, how about the Mets signing A-Rod after the 2000 season?

Gwreck Jun 03 2010 10:25 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

I would've told Timo to run hard, too but I was pretty sure that's not what the question asked for. I have a hard time believing any one move would have directly led to a title but I certainly can imagine how some would certainly have changed things dramatically (for the good? We can only speculate).

Centerfield Jun 03 2010 10:54 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

The Bordick/Mora trade is probably the only one that might have had a direct effect on a title. Certainly would have reached that 13 hopper hit by Sojo.

Centerfield Jun 03 2010 10:57 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

Can we take a mulligan on a strategy move? I would have had Pratt going on contact in the top of the ninth in Game 1. I love Bobby, but I think he missed that one. If he gets thrown out, we still have 1st and 3rd with two outs, as opposed to 2nd and 3rd playing it safe. Gotta take the risk there to get one. And he would have scored.

duan Jun 03 2010 11:04 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

by the way frayed, I know my post may seem to have broken your rule, but the way I looked at it it didn't. There was a moment, when Phillips & Wilpon decided "we're not going sign A-Rod now lets try and figure out a spin that makes it look like it wasn't about money" to my mind that was the strategy that I wouldn't have done.

Frayed Knot Jun 03 2010 11:15 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

Well, my main aim in setting up the "rules" for this thing was to try and stay away from speculation as much as possible. You, at least, defend the ARod [u:2lictuhg]contract[/u:2lictuhg] in addition to just the idea of signing him which is certainly better from those who would argue that they'd sign him but only at a much friendlier price than he eventually agreed to based on the notion the he was so dying to come here than he'd had given up maybe $100 bucks just for the opportunity. The caveat still is that his coming here wasn't something that was solely controllable by the Mets since we have no way of knowing what his final decision would be, something that leaves you arguing that the biggest mistake of the decade was the team making the rather early decision to stay out of the fray. Personally I'd choose something more concrete than that but yours is a legit entry.

smg58 Jun 03 2010 11:21 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

The Mets needed a righfielder and leadoff hitter after 2000, their manager knew the Japanese game better than anybody in America -- and Steve Phillips allowed somebody else to make the highest bid for Ichiro.

Frayed Knot Jun 03 2010 11:59 AM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

Except that that was a closed bidding process so it was impossible to know how high was high enough and high enough always runs the risk of becoming too high. Valentine thought the world of Kaz Matsui too. That he didn't work out over here was Ichiro certainly did is fact but also only knowable in hindsight.

Vic Sage Jun 03 2010 01:29 PM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

oh, sure, ya got yer obvious boners: - Mora / Bordick - Bay / Middlebrook - Kazmir / Zambrano - Bell & Ring / Adkins & BJohnson, AND - Lindstrom / J.Vargas and a couple of bad signings, like Cedeno, Appier, Castillo, and Ollie P (and eventually F-Rod) and a couple of under-the-radar slip ups, like - Nelson Cruz / J.Velandia - waiving Scutaro - Wheeler / Seuss - losing J.Flores (rule 5) But lets not forget the impact of some of our 1st round drafts, including: - 04: Humber over either Jared Weaver, Jeff Niemann, Billy Butler, Phil Hughes - 07: Ed Kunz over Jordan Zimmerman But of all the moves, the one i'd want the Mulligan on is the `00 draft, where we took Billy Traber over Adam Wainwright. Just think if we not only had a pitcher of Wainwright's caliber in our organization (instead of a guy with hardly any major league career), but imagine if he was NOT on the mound that fateful day in St. Louis, when Beltran watched that curveball break over the middle of the plate for strike 3. PLUS, Traber was part of the package we sent to Cleveland for Roberto Alomar, who was a disgrace in the Orange & Blue. Yeah, all things considered, that move had the worst overall long-term and short-term consequences, and even affected our post-season run when we were favored to go all the way.

Gwreck Jun 03 2010 01:32 PM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

Vic Sage wrote: oh, sure, ya got yer obvious boners: - Bay / Middlebrook I maintain that the vast majority of the complaining over this trade is pure revisionist history, and that calling it an "obvious boner" is woefully incorrect.

Vic Sage Jun 03 2010 01:48 PM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

All we're talking about in this thread is revisionist history, about which move would we want to undo. Certainly, the Bay/Middlebrook deal, in retrospect, was a bone-headed trade of youth for age in desperate and failed attempt to stay in the race, during the Steve Phillips `02 implosion.

Benjamin Grimm Jun 03 2010 02:08 PM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

Yes, my impression is that we're definitely allowed to use hindsight in this discussion.

Valadius Jun 03 2010 02:24 PM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

I believe that if we had the ability to undo the Kazmir-Zambrano trade, we would have won the 2006 World Series.

duan Jun 03 2010 02:50 PM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

Vic Sage wrote: All we're talking about in this thread is revisionist history, about which move would we want to undo. Certainly, the Bay/Middlebrook deal, in retrospect, was a bone-headed trade of youth for age in desperate and failed attempt to stay in the race, during the Steve Phillips `02 implosion. let us be clear about this, Jason Bay bounced around plenty - he and our lunatic 12th bullpen arm - were traded to the Pirates for a 2 month rental of Brian Giles, but long before that we'd acquired him from Montreal along with someone else for Lou Collier (hey JCL was that our mulligan?) Middlebrook wasn't *old* for a pitcher, he was 3 years older then Bay, he was decent enough that the Padres wanted him back off us after we got him off them.

Gwreck Jun 03 2010 06:43 PM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

Vic Sage wrote: All we're talking about in this thread is revisionist history, about which move would we want to undo. Certainly, the Bay/Middlebrook deal, in retrospect, was a bone-headed trade of youth for age in desperate and failed attempt to stay in the race, during the Steve Phillips `02 implosion. I object to the (frequent, not necessarily all by you) characterization of this deal as an obvious mistake because that certainly didn't become clear until several years later.

Ashie62 Jun 03 2010 07:01 PM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

Zambrano-Kazmir. Even if Kazmir never won an MLB game in his career

seawolf17 Jun 03 2010 07:33 PM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: In 2005, I'd have traded for Ray Durham at the deadline. Saw that one coming a mile away. You people do not listen to the rules, do you? I'd say Kazmir/Zambrano, but Mora/Bordick is a good one too. Unmentioned as of yet: the Kaz Matsui signing. Screwed up Reyes for a while, and Matsui turned out to be largely a bust.

Nymr83 Jun 03 2010 08:03 PM Re: Take a Mulligan - an off-day contemplation

I dont remember there being anything "obvious" about Bay/Middlebrook at the time, and with 20/20 hindsight thats the trade you undo. I don't like the Perez signing, but i'll add an unconventional choice here: to protect the franchise's massive investment, and keep it on the field, I make Piazza the 1st baseman starting with Zeile's departure followig the '01 season. Ok, that might not be my first choice, but its at least food for thought in the "what if" machine