Master Index of Archived Threads


Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

bmfc1 Aug 23 2010 10:03 AM

Part I: http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/ ... id=5485760 A rehash. One line stood out: "Ownership blames Minaya for failing to lean harder on the southpaw to accept a demotion."

Fman99 Aug 23 2010 10:14 AM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

It's like watching the Zapruder film, again and again like Oliver Stone does it in "JFK." We get it already.

MFS62 Aug 23 2010 10:15 AM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

Three years ago, Tom Glavine and Paul Lo Duca distributed to their New York Mets teammates bright orange T-shirts bearing a picture of a clown and the slogan, "There Ain't A Big Top Big Enough For This Circus." That was the shocker for me. I don't recall reading anything about that. It should be interesting to see Part II, because Rubin will be telling us what needs to be done to fix the situation. Now we'll get to see the kind of GM he wanted to be. Later

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Aug 23 2010 10:37 AM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

Part II should be the engrossing part. Whether it's engrossing like an imaginative, creative plan expertly laid out or engrossing like a gigantic pile of elephant poop slowly disintegrating, we'll find out.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Aug 23 2010 10:37 AM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

Whatever, Adam. Look if things continue as they've gone the Mets will have won ~10 more games than they did a year ago, pretty good progress all things considered. Sure it's another ~10 games behind where they looked like they might be after the first half of the year but that's why they play them all. And I don't know why the media continues to paint the Mets' offensive woes as if it was some kind of mystery: It was well-known before the year ever began that they'd be challenged at 4 positions (RF, 2B, 1B, C) potentially, and sure enough they were. Add to it Bay's lost year and Beltran's struggles and its no mystery at all. The bullpen has been fine, by the way, even if it wasn't drawn up that way. The MFYs bullpen also doesn't look like they drew it up and has been fine too.

bmfc1 Aug 23 2010 10:55 AM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

Part 1 was like every "out of town" or national broadcast of the Mets as every national or local crew feels compelled to run down the bullet points of misery that we know so well. Wainwright! Collapse! Collapse again! Injuries! Scandal! I hope that Adam offers some new information in the next two parts rather than telling us "bloated, long-term contracts will have a negative impact on the Mets for years to come" and "while the minor league system is improving, things won't change unless ownership changes its philosophy." We know.

Ceetar Aug 23 2010 11:40 AM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: And I don't know why the media continues to paint the Mets' offensive woes as if it was some kind of mystery: It was well-known before the year ever began that they'd be challenged at 4 positions (RF, 2B, 1B, C) potentially, and sure enough they were. Add to it Bay's lost year and Beltran's struggles and its no mystery at all. Nah. For one, this team has been near the top in various offensive categories for years, without much turnover. Last year they even had a really high .AVG. I expected at least this out of 1B, and much much more out of 2B (and if we weren't playing a minor leaguer there, voluntarily, we would get more out of it). I expected a wee bit more out of c, Which was pretty much a disaster last three years. No, I don't see any reason the offense should be this bad. I know Manuel gives away outs with bunts and does inane things, but they should be able to overcome that. It shouldn't be as huge a deal as it is. You can go on and on about "What's Manuel supposed to do?" and "Hitting coaches really don't do much" But neither of them are getting the results they're paid to do or should be expected. It all starts there, on the field. Maximizing the value we have, instead of minimizing it.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Aug 23 2010 12:22 PM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

Yes, Jerry Manuel forced Francoeur, Castillo and Barajas into having years more or less in line with their career averages.

metirish Aug 23 2010 12:31 PM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

Tuesday: Can this team be fixed for 2011? I'm going out on a limb here and I will guess that Rubin will say yes they can be fixed, be no need for the third part otherwise right? He talks about the bullpen and mentions only Kelvim Escobar and Ryota Igarashi,the Escobar deal was stupid but I have faith in Igarshi to come good, plus there have been positives from the pen this season.

Ceetar Aug 23 2010 12:36 PM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Yes, Jerry Manuel forced Francoeur, Castillo and Barajas into having years more or less in line with their career averages. Frenchy is below his career average (which is talent, really..geeze) But we're not talking about a position that was manned by Strawberry. Castillo is having a subpar year, and has been benched, again, despite being the best option. Barajas was a black hole after a while, but hardly worse than Schneider/Santos last year. Castro as a backup gave us a little more in '07/'08, but still. I'm not saying that across the board pretty much everyone is having subpar years, or at best 'par' years as compared to the offense, that was good, on this team in prior years.

Gwreck Aug 23 2010 12:44 PM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

Ceetar wrote: Barajas was a black hole after a while, but hardly worse than Schneider/Santos last year. Actually, Barajas was worse than Santos. Not by a ton, but he wasn't an upgrade.

Ceetar Aug 23 2010 12:48 PM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

Gwreck wrote: Ceetar wrote: Barajas was a black hole after a while, but hardly worse than Schneider/Santos last year. Actually, Barajas was worse than Santos. Not by a ton, but he wasn't an upgrade. But Blanco was better. I meant the overall catching situation. I don't know what the statistic breakdown is precisely, and I imagine with Thole being here it's even better, but simply that it's certainly not the downgrade from the catching situation last year to this that's causing the offensive woes.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Aug 23 2010 12:56 PM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

No need to continue mangling the point: For the Mets to have a "good" offense this year they would need for guys like Francouer, Barajas and whoever played first base to be better than average when their history suggested they wouldn't be (and they haven't been). And Castillo even at his best is a limited value kinda guy and he's not at his best this year. Is that such a hard point to grant?

metsmarathon Aug 23 2010 01:00 PM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

i'm curious as to what the prescription for next year will be. aside, i mean, from just plain dumping ollie. will he demand a new closer? a new ace? carl crawford? what will his solutions for second base and right field be? what would he suggest we do with the remainder of our outfield? will the first step be anything other than gutting the front office and the coaching staff, save, perhaps, chip hale? would we keep jose reyes under the rubin plan, or will he attempt merely to drive up readership by throwing him into a volcano for compensatory draft picks?

Ceetar Aug 23 2010 01:05 PM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: No need to continue mangling the point: For the Mets to have a "good" offense this year they would need for guys like Francouer, Barajas and whoever played first base to be better than average when their history suggested they wouldn't be (and they haven't been). And Castillo even at his best is a limited value kinda guy and he's not at his best this year. Is that such a hard point to grant? They've had a good offense for years, even with some spotty players. Bay has really been the big blow imo. And playing Tejada over Castillo, but they'd given up at that point. I still say they shouldn't be performing this badly, and it's on HoJo and Manuel on why an offense that's been marginalized by Bay's concussion and Ike's rookie slump is failing. The step up to next year having a powerful offense again is not a big one. The situation is certainly "fixable" regardless of what Rubin decides to argue in his campaign for GM. Unfortunately the Mets are in a situation where it's very possible "doing nothing" would return their offense to glory, but they can't afford to take that risk given the recent issues. I'm semi-curious to see what Rubin suggests, but I'm not expecting anything innovative.

batmagadanleadoff Aug 23 2010 01:12 PM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

...it's on HoJo and Manuel on why an offense that's been marginalized by Bay's concussion and Ike's rookie slump is failing.

G-Fafif Aug 23 2010 03:00 PM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

[Fill in name of team] hasn't been very good this year. Things have gone wrong. Some of them include [list incidents]. While [team] hoped to be better, it wasn't. Here are some of the players who underperformed. [List players and statistics.] Expectations were not met and sometimes [team] looked silly. What a mess. Rubin (who seems to have gone through his archives, compiled various Contretemps of the Day stories dating back to January and...voila, a pattern!) could have spent the season with any team that has struggled on some level and written the same story. Does any team not in first place or not aggressively challenging for a playoff spot at this stage of the calendar ever look good? And if you don't look good, you look bad, particularly when you can shoehorn colorful or damning incidents into your narrative. Some of this stuff is legit, but a lot of it is "ooh, and another thing!" reaching.

Frayed Knot Aug 23 2010 03:46 PM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

G-Fafif wrote: [Fill in name of team] hasn't been very good this year. Things have gone wrong. Some of them include [list incidents]. While [team] hoped to be better, it wasn't. Here are some of the players who underperformed. [List players and statistics.] Expectations were not met and sometimes [team] looked silly. What a mess. Some of this stuff is legit, but a lot of it is "ooh, and another thing!" reaching. The problem, IMO, is that while this series might be written for ESPN New York it's still being written for ESPN meaning that the causes and, most likely, the solutions are going to be aimed towards a more national audience. It doesn't make the stuff in it wrong necessarily, just a lot more generic than if it were aimed at a local audience who doesn't need the history leading up to this point spelled out for them.

G-Fafif Aug 24 2010 09:48 AM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

Part II here. Adam Rubin blows the lid off this thing with two incredible revelations: 1) The Mets owe a lot of money to several fading players for 2011. 2) The Wilpons are in real estate.

Ceetar Aug 24 2010 09:50 AM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

A virtually unreadable (because I'm not an insider) Matt Meyers rebuttal: http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/insider/ ... %3dtwitter [url]http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/insider/columns/story?columnist=meyers_matt&id=5492065&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&action=login&appRedirect=http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/insider/columns/story%3fcolumnist%3dmeyers_matt%26id%3d5492065%26utm_source%3dtwitterfeed%26utm_medium%3dtwitter

Fman99 Aug 24 2010 10:13 AM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

Part II here. Adam Rubin blows the lid off this thing with two incredible revelations: 1) The Mets owe a lot of money to several fading players for 2011. 2) The Wilpons are in real estate. In other news, the sun is big and hot.

Gwreck Aug 24 2010 10:42 AM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

The "rebuttal" is no more illuminating than Rubin's piece. In summary, the "5 reasons the Mets may make the playoffs next year are" 1. They could outperform expectations. If projected as a .500 win team, it's possible they could outperform expectations by 6 or 8 wins and sneak into the playoffs. (See Cardinals, 2006 and their 83 wins). 2. Improvements from Bay, Reyes, Beltran and Davis are possible. 3. 2B and RF aren't contributing and could be replaced with better offense. Replacing Francouer with a combination of Bay/Pagan ABs should be an improvement. He also throws out the Murphy to 2B idea. 4. There are no offensive free agents worth dumping piles of cash on (other than Jayson Werth). This will supposedly control "reckless spending." 5. Jerry will probably be gone.

metsguyinmichigan Aug 24 2010 11:51 AM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

So, If I'm reading Rubin correctly, the Mets are in trouble because they have too many big contracts, and that's bad .... because they won't be able to add any more big contracts? There's only one team that can throw a $10 million plus guy at virtually every position, Adam.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Aug 24 2010 12:14 PM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

Leftovers again? As always-- seemingly-- Megdal's a little more practical (and brief). On the OF: The Mets have another 38 games to evaluate Carlos Beltran. Assuming reasonable rest, he'll end up with around 220-240 plate appearances. If his production stays at current levels-a .665 OPS-he is not a reasonable Plan A for 2011. Not in center field, not in a corner. Given that Jason Bay is a pretty decent bet to rebound from his 2010, and untradeable at any rate, the Mets have to determine whether Beltran can play, and be prepared to eat his contract if he can't. They also have a single outfield position open over the final 38 games to find out if there are alternatives within the organization... A single at-bat for Francoeur is a wasted one. You can make the argument that the Mets should rest Pagan more down the stretch-they now know who he is, and that he should be in the plans for 2011. ... The sooner they find out how any of these alternatives hit major league pitching, and how decently they can field their positions, the better-informed they will be come this winter. On the pen: In short, [in Parnell] the Mets have a closer solution for 2011 who is almost certainly better than anything they could get via free agency or trade. It behooves them to make sure the relatively small number of innings he's thrown for them aren't a statistical blip-something they could know better if they'd started the season with him. On the manager: ... firing Jerry Manuel has always seemed to be beside the point to me. When the Hindenburg crashed, no one worried about changing the man piloting it. It was designed to inspire the cry of "Oh, the humanity!" However, if Jerry Manuel won't play his players to answer the above questions, he probably does need to be jettisoned. And if someone in the organization is the planned skipper-particularly if it is someone without major league managing experience-getting Wally Backman those 38 games now would be a helpful head start on 2011. On that last bit: if you're bringing up the youth, and maybe looking to infuse a little bit of gimmicky life into the squad: Wally for interim manager. He's used to the playing-time-share personnel management, and is more development-minded. If Manuel continues to pull his Tatis-starting, Francoeur-against-righties September act over the next week... why not give the Mets a headstart toward next year, and make the last month into training camp, with a new counselor?

attgig Aug 24 2010 12:19 PM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

Gwreck wrote: The "rebuttal" is no more illuminating than Rubin's piece. In summary, the "5 reasons the Mets may make the playoffs next year are" 1. They could outperform expectations. If projected as a .500 win team, it's possible they could outperform expectations by 6 or 8 wins and sneak into the playoffs. (See Cardinals, 2006 and their 83 wins). 2. Improvements from Bay, Reyes, Beltran and Davis are possible. 3. 2B and RF aren't contributing and could be replaced with better offense. Replacing Francouer with a combination of Bay/Pagan ABs should be an improvement. He also throws out the Murphy to 2B idea. 4. There are no offensive free agents worth dumping piles of cash on (other than Jayson Werth). This will supposedly control "reckless spending." 5. Jerry will probably be gone. if you want to read the whole thing: Jason Bay figures to improve somewhat in 2011. As part of a three-part series over at ESPN New York, Adam Rubin makes a compelling case today that the New York Mets have no hope for 2011. Broadly speaking, Rubin is probably right: New York has a lot of money tied up in a few players, many of whom (Carlos Beltran and Jason Bay) are major question marks. That said, not all hope is lost in Queens. In fact, I can think of at least five good reasons why the Mets could easily make the playoffs next year. 1. They're actually not that terrible this year For all the jokes about how bad the Mets are, they are exactly .500 (62-62). And it's a pretty good bet they will finish this season roughly around that .500 mark. While that's obviously not great for a team with a $126 million payroll, it's still not terrible overall. Coming into this season, ZiPS had the Mets pegged as an 83-win team -- which is also roughly .500. (83 wins means 79 losses.) However, in 100 season simulations done for ESPN The Magazine, the Mets still made the playoffs 23 times. The point is that even a true .500 team makes the playoffs fairly frequently, as it's not uncommon for a team to over-perform its expectations in a few places and pick up a few wins on the margins. Just four years ago, the Los Angeles Dodgers made the playoffs with 88 wins. The 2006 St. Louis Cardinals -- who won the World Series -- won only 83 games. It's not impossible for the Mets, even if their true talent is roughly .500, to squeak out 88 wins with some good fortune and a couple of breakout performances next year. Really, did anyone expect Jon Garland to have a 3.25 ERA this year? No. Crazy things happen. That's what makes baseball interesting. 2. A lot has gone wrong There's no doubt the Mets have had two of the most surprising performances of the 2010 season in R.A. Dickey and Angel Pagan, and even with the most rose-colored of glasses, it's hard to expect those two to be as good in 2011. But for all that has gone right in Queens, a lot more has gone wrong. For starters, Jason Bay has been a disaster and is now concussed. He wouldn't be the first big-ticket free-agent signing who needed a year to adjust to the bright lights of Flushing (see: Beltran, Carlos). Speaking of Beltran, he's given the Mets basically nothing and has been below replacement-level since coming back after the All-Star break. The performance of Jose Reyes has been uneven, and Ike Davis is experiencing his share of growing pains. Prorated through the rest of the season, those four will combine for roughly 8.0 WAR, or wins above replacement level (explained more here); that's 2.0 WAR per player. With bounce-backs and growth, it's not unreasonable to expect those four to combine for 15.0 WAR next year, if not more. That alone would get the Mets from 81 wins to 88 wins. 3. They are carrying a lot of dead weight By giving regular playing time to Jeff Francoeur (.655 OPS), Luis Castillo (.609), Alex Cora (.543) and Ruben Tejada (.467), the Mets have essentially punted two positions, right field and second base. It's hard to win when three spots in your lineup (those two plus pitcher) give you absolutely zero offensive value. (The Cleveland Indians have three guys in their lineup batting under .200, and they're not exactly winning the AL Central.) It's safe to say that Francoeur, who is making $5 million this year, will be non-tendered, and replacing his at-bats with a combination of Bay and Pagan will be a major upgrade. Second base is a bit of a bigger problem since Castillo is still under contract for 2011. However, he's due $6 million, and it's quite possible that he will get bought out. Tejada likely will get the first shot to play everyday -- and though he has yet to show an ability to hit big league pitching, he is only 20 years old and is more likely to improve than regress. Remember, there's also Daniel Murphy, who was in the process of being converted to second base when he injured his knee. If he can even fake it at second, he would certainly hit enough (.741 OPS in 2009) to provide above-replacement production. For the Mets, that's an upgrade. 4. There is no one for them to spend their money on As noted above, the Mets' two biggest needs are second base and right field, but a quick look at the available free agents for 2011 shows there is only one big-name free agent (Jayson Werth) worth spending any money on at either of those spots on the field. That's good for the Mets, because a lot of folks think they don't have much money to spend. The Mets' biggest problem is that they always think they are one quick free-agent fix away from the pennant, and GM Omar Minaya has a knack for always trying to fill last year's hole -- as opposed to looking forward to next year's potential problem. A lack of in-demand free agents at positions of need will prevent reckless spending this offseason. 5. Jerry Manuel will probably be gone The Mets manager seems like a nice guy, but the club is out-managed in pretty much every close game. While not a perfect measurement, a good way of judging a manager's tactical skill is to look at his record in one-run games. This year, the Mets are 17-25 in such contests, while every first-place team in baseball is at least .500. (The Mets were 19-24 in one-run games last year.) While a strong bullpen and a little luck are also factors, anyone who has ever watched a close Mets game can see that Manuel is not exactly a whiz when it comes to playing matchups. For example, he's allowed left-hander Pedro Feliciano to face more righties than lefties this year, even though it's abundantly clear that Feliciano should be strictly a lefty specialist (righties have a .938 OPS against him this year). A good manager is worth two to three wins per year, and bad one can easily cost you that many. Manuel has a club option for next year, and it's unlikely he will return. For the sake of the Mets, that's probably a good thing, and one of the five reasons they might actually compete in 2011. However, that doesn't mean they aren't a flawed organization. Even with these five points of optimism, don't be fooled, they still are.

Gwreck Aug 24 2010 12:25 PM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

I still don't understand why people think Wally Backman is qualified to manage the New York Mets. Was it the DUI arrest and subsequent guilty plea? The violation of his probation following his DUI conviction? The domestic violence arrest where he broke down the door to his house, threatened to kill his wife, and assaulted a bystander with a baseball bat? (and subsequent guilty plea to a lesser charge)? This is the same Mets team that wants Francisco Rodriguez gone. How could we possibly justify having this person as manager?

Ceetar Aug 24 2010 12:45 PM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

Gwreck wrote: I still don't understand why people think Wally Backman is qualified to manage the New York Mets. Was it the DUI arrest and subsequent guilty plea? The violation of his probation following his DUI conviction? The domestic violence arrest where he broke down the door to his house, threatened to kill his wife, and assaulted a bystander with a baseball bat? (and subsequent guilty plea to a lesser charge)? This is the same Mets team that wants Francisco Rodriguez gone. How could we possibly justify having this person as manager? (I'm not saying he should be, merely that I'm not against it if the Mets do a proper evaluation of all candidates) I want the Mets to choose the manager that will do the best job with the 2011 team. If that guy has off the field baggage in his past, I don't care. I'd prefer he didn't, but "best guy to manage the team" first. I'm not sure what those things have to do with his ability to manage a group of guys to play good baseball. I also don't want Rodriguez gone.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Aug 24 2010 12:46 PM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

I'm not saying he is. (Although I'm not sure that his past* would render him unfit for service, sadly-- from McGraw to Martin to Cox, baseball's got a long tradition of assholes in charge.) I'm saying he makes an interesting caretaker candidate for a last month that's essentially a development/training camp, if Manuel keeps at it with the Frenchy crap. (Plus, you either find out that-- surprise, surprise-- he's amazing at the job, or-- more likely-- that he's not fit, and you shut up those clamoring for his permanent hire.) *I'm no defender of abusers. But from what I've read, "assaulting a bystander with a baseball bat" seems a somewhat unfair characterization of what seems to have occurred that night.

Ceetar Aug 24 2010 12:51 PM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: I'm saying he makes an interesting caretaker candidate for a last month that's essentially a development/training camp, if Manuel keeps at it with the Frenchy crap. (Plus, you either find out that-- surprise, surprise-- he's amazing at the job, or-- more likely-- that he's not fit, and you shut up those clamoring for his permanent hire. Too innovative for the Mets I think. You'd have to be clear with Wally that he won't bet getting the job, but merely continuing the work he was doing in Brooklyn with some of the rookies. But is there really that much value in that 3-4 weeks? I'd rather they actually go through the interviewing process now, and give the 2011 guy those 3 weeks. So he can learn David Wright's favorite slump busting technique, and just in general notice some bad habits or good habits and such things that he can think about in the offseason.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Aug 24 2010 02:21 PM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

I prefer Waldstein's take the team at this point to Rubin's For Mets, Wild Card Is, Who Stays? By DAVID WALDSTEIN Only 38 games remain in the regular season, and the Mets are eight games back in the National League wild-card standings. The end is fast approaching. A playoff appearance is a distant fantasy but mathematically possible, which is why no decisions have been made regarding major changes. Manager Jerry Manuel and General Manager Omar Minaya are expected to survive until the end of the season. But the question is: what constitutes the end of the season? Once the Mets are mathematically eliminated from the postseason, they could be dismissed at that point. Last October, Jeff Wilpon, the Mets’ chief operating officer, said Manuel and Minaya must “step up” their job performances, and leading the Mets to the playoffs seemed to be the minimum goal that Wilpon was seeking. It was thought that Manuel and Minaya would have the full season to accomplish that feat, but if the Mets are eliminated early, they will have failed. Few give Manuel, who is in the final year of his contract, even a remote chance to retain his job if the Mets continue to slog along at .500, and most of his coaching staff would probably go, too. Minaya’s situation is less clear. Fred Wilpon, the Mets’ chairman, is a great admirer of Minaya’s, and a decision to let him go would not be taken lightly. Minaya, who has two years left on his contract, did build a team that was a game from reaching the World Series in 2006. More recently, he has helped develop a group of promising young players, and he was responsible for acquiring Johan Santana, the best player on the team. But Minaya has also done something the Wilpons will not overlook. He has burdened them with unwieldy contracts — especially those of Oliver Perez and Luis Castillo — and the Wilpons have shown that their patience runs thin on general managers who squander their money. The former general manager Steve Phillips was a master of survival until he wasted millions in 2001 and 2002 on Mo Vaughn, Jeromy Burnitz, Roger Cedeno and even Roberto Alomar and was fired in 2003. When Fred Wilpon was asked Aug. 5 if Minaya would return next season, he responded, “Is the sun going to come up tomorrow?” It sounded like a strong endorsement, but Wilpon was caught off guard and his response was rhetorical, so the true meaning was somewhat hard to decipher. Finding inspiring replacements for Manuel and Minaya is also an issue. Many assume that Wally Backman, the fiery manager of the Class A Brooklyn Cyclones, would be next in line to manage the team. Finding a new general manager would be difficult, but there are available candidates, like Kevin Towers, the former Padres general manager who is now an adviser to Yankees General Manager Brian Cashman. In the meantime, the Mets’ ownership group continues to evaluate the team in the waning weeks of the season, and there cannot be much to like about what it sees of a team mired in fourth place in the N.L. East. The coaching staff appears to be at a complete loss, fans are fuming and some players are showing signs of disaffection and publicly wondering what direction the team is headed. The Mets were playing good baseball in June, and the consensus was that they had a strong mix of tough, personable veterans and eager young kids. Two months later, the positive energy has dissipated into a toxic gloom, making an upheaval more likely. The four players who were earlier credited with giving the Mets strong leadership — Jason Bay, Rod Barajas, Alex Cora and Jeff Francoeur — are gone, injured or have diminished roles. Bay is probably out for the season with a concussion, Barajas was claimed off waivers by the Los Angeles Dodgers, Cora was cut earlier this month and Francoeur has become a part-time player. When the Mets cut Cora, called up Fernando Martinez and made Ruben Tejada the everyday second baseman, David Wright said the moves sent “mixed signals” about the team’s intentions the rest of the season. Since then, Martinez was sent back to Class AAA Buffalo, causing only more confusion. Meanwhile, Manuel has not used Perez since Aug. 1 and Castillo mopes around the clubhouse, detached from his teammates. The Mets are at odds with their millionaire closer, Francisco Rodriguez, and would happily trade Carlos Beltran, if they could find someone to take him and his $18.5 million contract, and look to the future. That future is fast approaching, perhaps as soon as the mathematical end.

G-Fafif Aug 24 2010 02:59 PM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

The Mets were playing good baseball in June, and the consensus was that they had a strong mix of tough, personable veterans and eager young kids. Two months later, the positive energy has dissipated into a toxic gloom, making an upheaval more likely. The four players who were earlier credited with giving the Mets strong leadership — Jason Bay, Rod Barajas, Alex Cora and Jeff Francoeur — are gone, injured or have diminished roles. Bay is probably out for the season with a concussion, Barajas was claimed off waivers by the Los Angeles Dodgers, Cora was cut earlier this month and Francoeur has become a part-time player. Perhaps it's just Timesean caution, but the conditional phrase "credited with giving the Mets strong leadership" (as opposed to simply saying they provided that strong leadership) strikes me as interesting. Though it's out of fashion to admire those qualities (without snarking it up over OPS, et al), they sure look good IF everything else is going well...like if there's "good baseball in June". As ever, unknowable debate whether positive energy contributes to winning games or winning games is what creates positive energy. When the Mets were going well, Ike Davis was complimented regularly on looking like he belonged, how he was no raw rook, but the veterans liked him. Now that he and his team are slumping, I notice a sudden uptick in "Ike has his own ideas on hitting and doesn't necessarily want to take advice" observation. Ike's one golden sombrero away from "Know your place, rook." Not that there aren't deep-seated issues with this organization, but one gets the feeling that if the ball bounced a little friendlier once every few weeks and the Mets were, say, three games out right now, we'd be reading stories about the incredible intestinal fortitude everybody from the Wilpons on down ("making do in a stressful environment") have shown, clear to Luis Castillo's calming influence and Oliver Perez's graceful acceptance of a diminished role

Zvon Aug 24 2010 03:30 PM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

When the Mets cut Cora, called up Fernando Martinez and made Ruben Tejada the everyday second baseman, David Wright said the moves sent “mixed signals” about the team’s intentions the rest of the season. Since then, Martinez was sent back to Class AAA Buffalo, causing only more confusion. This concerns me right now more than anything. The organization should at least be clear on this. Are they looking foward to next season or are they still working on bettering their standing this season. It is possible at this point to tread up the middle of that decision (might even be wise) but it's not fair to fans. Because, if there is still hope in eyes of management, we want them to be fielding the best possible lineup whenever possible. Even Manuel is confusing things now. He says we are still fighting for this season, but then he's giving Tejada this extended look which screams "MY PRIORITY IS THE FUTURE". Which is it ? Come-on. I'm willing to get on the same page if they can decide what page we are on.

metirish Aug 24 2010 04:26 PM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

I thought Sherman had some interesting thoughts today http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/mets/les ... T5NuhnzUQL http://www.nypost.com/p/blogs/hardball/ ... na0V9zbVWO

bmfc1 Aug 25 2010 09:11 AM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

Part 3 is out and it's as illuminating as parts 1 and 2: http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/colu ... id=5494308

metirish Aug 25 2010 09:47 AM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

the sun will come up tomorrow. This has become this years " meaningful games in September" for Fred. It's so fucking stupid the way this has been latched on to.

MFS62 Aug 25 2010 09:49 AM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

Full of "whats" and totally barren on "hows". It would be nice to see at least one reporter (I hope it's Waldstein) write a real plan on how they would go about fixing the problems they identify. Its one thing to talk about the heavy contracts of Perez and Castillo. Don't any of them have "resources" who might tell them which other teams might want them, and for what/ who? Instead of listing the candidates for GM, who would they recommend? Why? (The closest I've seen is some writers mentioning that Towers built a contender with limited financial resources. Would he be the best choice in terms of the overall responsibilities of a GM?) Rubin "wanted to be a GM" according to Minaya. OK, Sparky, tell us what you'd do. Later

Edgy DC Aug 25 2010 10:39 AM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

My, but aren't folks racing to the autopsy room?

HahnSolo Oct 19 2010 10:34 AM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

Adam Rubin chatting RIGHT NOW: [url]http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chats

metirish Oct 19 2010 10:51 AM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

He looks suspiciously like Rob Neyer

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Oct 19 2010 11:01 AM Re: Adam Rubin's 3 part series on the "Mess"

See: column on the right. The Iron Sheik and a few of his Rock'n, Wrestl'n buddies have asked a few direction-of-the-franchise-type questions.