Master Index of Archived Threads


Waive Bay

bmfc1 Sep 14 2011 12:19 PM

Says this column: http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/ ... -jason-bay I didn't know this: ... former Mets GM Omar Minaya gave him a $17 million option for 2014 that vests if he reaches 600 plate appearances in 2013, or 500 PAs in both 2012 and 2013. New GM Sandy Alderson has done a nice job of clearing some salary this season, and it would be a disaster for New York if that option vests. And there's more on the Mets: http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/ ... -prospects I don't usually care what Jim Bowden says, but this part was interesting: ...the bold move they should make this winter besides re-signing Reyes is to try to dangle minor league infielder Wilmer Flores as the centerpiece in a trade for Reds catcher Yasmani Grandal. The Reds already have another promising young catcher in Devin Mesoraco, and Grandal, their 2010 first-round pick, doesn't really have a future in Cincy. Flores is a promising 19-year-old who held his own this year in the Class A Florida State league while being young for the level. Grandal, 22, hit .305/.401/.510 with 31 doubles, 14 home runs while moving quickly from Class A to Triple-A this year. The Mets have had a revolving door behind the plate ever since Paul Lo Duca left, and although Josh Thole is a nice player, he's not a future All-Star like Grandal. Sandy Alderson, the team's vice president and general manager, did a tremendous job in dealing Carlos Beltran at the trade deadline to San Francisco in exchange for the Giants' top pitching prospect, Zack Wheeler. It is this type of trade, as well as perhaps acquiring Grandal, that would make a successful offseason for the Mets and vault them back into contention rather than spending lavishly on free agents as they've done in the recent past. -- Jim Bowden

metirish Sep 14 2011 12:26 PM Re: Waive Bay

Release him and just eat the remaining salary?, even if the organization was flush with money I don't see them doing it, easy to say waive him. Mesoraco must be real good if Bowden is willing to trade away Grandal.

Benjamin Grimm Sep 14 2011 12:26 PM Re: Waive Bay

The vesting of Bay's option can be easily avoided. They'll release him at some point in 2013 before the 2014 option gets a chance to kick in. It's not something to worry about. Upgrading at catcher is certainly something the Mets should consider. I wouldn't be upset at the thought of trading a 19-year-old with no clear position for a 22-year-old catcher who appears to be very close to being ready for the big leagues, especially if he's considered a future All-Star.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Sep 14 2011 12:28 PM Re: Waive Bay

Can't see us parting with Bay unless/until we get another legit RH hitter from somewhere, but then sure, I'm all for it (trade preferably) I'm against linking to ESPN Insider articles.

Ceetar Sep 14 2011 12:29 PM Re: Waive Bay

that's bold? but 'centerpiece'? for a prospect? I'm not sure I'd give a package of prospects for one prospect, even a catching one. Granted, he had an awesome year this year in the minors. But he's only had one year in the minors with 49 games above A. Is that other catcher so awesome that they're so sure that this Grandal guy is extraneous? It's not a horrible idea, of course, Bowden throwing out a random trade scenario doesn't make him any different than the average WFAN caller, even if it makes more sense than most. on Bay, yeah. The option isn't really a big deal. It's easily workable. One DL stint basically puts it to rest, and if he's still sucking, he'll get days off frequently against righties. Plus, no one has any idea what the situation with the team will be in 2014. the 17 million for a slugging RFer (if he sucks, he has 0 shot of getting those PA) might not handicap them at all.

bmfc1 Sep 14 2011 12:32 PM Re: Waive Bay

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I'm against linking to ESPN Insider articles. I know but I thought that it was worth discussing so I included some of the passages.

Edgy DC Sep 14 2011 12:34 PM Re: Waive Bay

We all (save ceetar) twisted our hands for the better part of a year over the potential vesting of Rodriguez's option, but Alderson dodged it. I'll trust him with this one.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Sep 14 2011 12:38 PM Re: Waive Bay

Speaking of: Brewers' K-Rod unhappy he's not in closer's mix MILWAUKEE -- He's done his job. He's been a good soldier. But if you think Francisco "K-Rod" Rodriguez is fine with pitching exclusively as a set-up man for first-place Milwaukee, you'd be wrong. "I'm not fine," Rodriguez said Tuesday. "They told me I'd have the opportunity to close some games, and we've had 20-some save opportunities since then and I haven't even had one." John Axford has earned 19 of his 42 saves since K-Rod's arrival. In 24 appearances, Rodriguez has worked only one ninth inning, in what was a 5-1 cruise over St. Louis on Aug. 10. "I'm a little disappointed in that," said Rodriguez, who is 3-0 with a 2.31 ERA for the Brewers. "But that's something that's out of my hands." Rodriguez will be a free agent this winter and figures he will return to closing in 2012. Until then? "Suck it up, pretty much," he said. He apparently has not expressed these feelings of betrayal much to his teammates. No wonder, either, with Axford having converted a club-record 39 consecutive saves. "He's been great," Axford says. "Coming to a new team, it takes a couple of days to adjust, but he jumped in pretty quickly. "He's similar in attitude to the rest of us in the pen. It's a goofy group. Guys like to have fun. But we get serious at game time. That's the way he is, too. By the sixth or seventh inning, he's all business." Initially, when the Brewers acquired Rodriguez, even Axford wasn't sure of what the roles would be -- his own, or K-Rod's. "The biggest thing was, when I found out, I felt I did everything I could to that point to be the closer," Axford said. "But I wasn't going to argue if my role changed. "We got Francisco to help the team. The important part wasn't was I going to close or was he?" For his part, though he's unhappy he's not getting any save opportunities, Rodriguez has enjoyed his teammates and is looking forward to October. "We've still got a couple of series to win to wrap up the division," he says. Ironically, K-Rod could be in line for his first save opportunity Wednesday against Colorado. Brewers manager Ron Roenicke told reporters after Tuesday's 2-1, 11-inning win over the Rockies that, because he used Axford for two innings on Tuesday, Rodriguez will be his closer on Wednesday if a save situation arises.

Ceetar Sep 14 2011 12:41 PM Re: Waive Bay

I'm not looking to defend Bay, because he's been horrible except for some very small samples, but I do think there are signs that he could have an okay year next year too. The ribcage injury early on is one of those things that some guys cite as something that continues to create some hesitency in your swing after you're back. He's been bothered by this sore shoulder a couple of times this season. He sat out yesterday and if I recall, he mentioned it a couple of times this season and at least once was near the end of another one of his hot streaks. It's entirely possible that he's having lingering effects of the concussion last year that he's not aware of. (of course, none of this excuses how bad he was last year) This might be more apporpriate for a Trust in Twelve thread in February. Edgy DC wrote: We all (save ceetar) twisted our hands for the better part of a year over the potential vesting of Rodriguez's option, but Alderson dodged it. I'll trust him with this one. And this one seems even easier to avoid. He'd need to play like 150 games in 2013 and the more he sucks, the more he'll get pinch hit for, the further down in the lineup he'll bat, etc.

Vic Sage Sep 14 2011 12:42 PM Re: Waive Bay

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Can't see us parting with Bay unless/until we get another legit RH hitter from somewhere, but then sure, I'm all for it (trade preferably). Why should we wait until we get "another" legit RH hitter? Bay's presence in (or absence from) our lineup has absolutely nothing to do with filling that need.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Sep 14 2011 12:44 PM Re: Waive Bay

Well, OK, "a" legit RH hitter. The point was, I don't think they'll overthrow Bay if what they have to replace him is Scott Hairston.

Benjamin Grimm Sep 14 2011 12:45 PM Re: Waive Bay

Ceetar wrote: And this one seems even easier to avoid. He'd need to play like 150 games in 2013 and the more he sucks, the more he'll get pinch hit for, the further down in the lineup he'll bat, etc. It's even simpler than that. They can (and likely will) just release him.

Ceetar Sep 14 2011 12:47 PM Re: Waive Bay

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Ceetar wrote: And this one seems even easier to avoid. He'd need to play like 150 games in 2013 and the more he sucks, the more he'll get pinch hit for, the further down in the lineup he'll bat, etc. It's even simpler than that. They can (and likely will) just release him. well, yeah, if he sucks. Could've just released K-Rod too. On the same token, if he's got any value, it'd probably be at least as a lefty masher off the bench, which is something playoff contending teams could usually use. (Whether that's the Mets because a prospect has pushed him out of a starting job, or a trade)

Edgy DC Sep 14 2011 12:49 PM Re: Waive Bay

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Well, OK, "a" legit RH hitter. The point was, I don't think they'll overthrow Bay if what they have to replace him is Scott Hairston. Evans is there too. Evans and Duda in the corners might be an adventure, even with Willie Mays in between 'em. They'd certainly better hit. And hit and hit and hit.

Ashie62 Sep 14 2011 01:36 PM Re: Waive Bay

Edgy DC wrote: John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Well, OK, "a" legit RH hitter. The point was, I don't think they'll overthrow Bay if what they have to replace him is Scott Hairston. Evans is there too. Evans and Duda in the corners might be an adventure, even with Willie Mays in between 'em. They'd certainly better hit. And hit and hit and hit. The A's pulled Corner Josh Willingham off the heap and have gotten 24 HR 90 RBI so far. Bay can be replaced without spending big.. That Flores thing sounds wacky.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Sep 14 2011 02:49 PM Re: Waive Bay

This is 2014, mind you; let's put it this way-- if 3 of Wheeler/Harvey/Mejia/Familia haven't been up and in the majors for a year by then, something will have gone terribly, terribly wrong. There's miles to go before this is an issue, and plenty of time for Bay to build SOME sort of trade value-- or prove himself completely and finally waiveable before then. As for Flores-for-Grandal? I'd do that in a heartbeat. I'm pretty certain the Reds wouldn't-- he's a catcher with a better bat than Flores (who'll be pushed to a corner IF/OF spot before long), who's closer to the majors.

Edgy DC Sep 14 2011 03:06 PM Re: Waive Bay

Funny this becomes an issue when he's in the midst of perhaps his best month as a Met.

Ashie62 Sep 14 2011 08:31 PM Re: Waive Bay

Edgy DC wrote: Funny this becomes an issue when he's in the midst of perhaps his best month as a Met. Its the Amazin Amazin Amazin Mets!

MFS62 Sep 14 2011 09:47 PM Re: Waive Bay

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Ceetar wrote: And this one seems even easier to avoid. He'd need to play like 150 games in 2013 and the more he sucks, the more he'll get pinch hit for, the further down in the lineup he'll bat, etc. It's even simpler than that. They can (and likely will) just release him. If they do and another team signs him, they only have to pay him the major league minumum, with the Mets picking up the balance of his contract. What happens if he reaches the milestone in that other uniform? Are the Mets stuck with the extra year? Or the team that allowed him to reach the milestone? Later

Benjamin Grimm Sep 15 2011 06:50 AM Re: Waive Bay

The new team would be responsible. That's why the Brewers renegotiated with Frankie Rodriguez. Once they acquired him, the $17.5 million for 2012 became their problem, not the Mets'.

metirish Sep 15 2011 07:02 AM Re: Waive Bay

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: This is 2014, mind you; let's put it this way-- if 3 of Wheeler/Harvey/Mejia/Familia haven't been up and in the majors for a year by then, something will have gone terribly, terribly wrong. I want to hold you on this :), well, not you per se but curious to see where these guys will be in 2013/14, of course in the majors doesn't have to mean in the majors with the Mets.

Benjamin Grimm Sep 15 2011 07:08 AM Re: Waive Bay

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: This is 2014, mind you; let's put it this way-- if 3 of Wheeler/Harvey/Mejia/Familia haven't been up and in the majors for a year by then, something will have gone terribly, terribly wrong. I'll be quite happy if we're getting quality from two of the four.

metsguyinmichigan Sep 15 2011 07:45 AM Re: Waive Bay

It would be a much less expensive to bring in the wall in left, as they are talking about, than to release Bay. And bringing in the wall might help him tremendously, no?

Frayed Knot Sep 15 2011 07:57 AM Re: Waive Bay

Can we please stop talking about bringing in walls as if: a) that's Jason Bay's problem b) that it would somehow only benefit our team

Edgy DC Sep 15 2011 08:00 AM Re: Waive Bay

Agreed with FK above. Regarding, as an aside, moving the wall, in Rubin's chat, he described the Mets plan beiing to get rid of the notch in right, and to paint one of those noxious lines eight feet up on the wall in left, "because the wall is structural, and can't be moved." To which anybody who gives it seven seconds of thought would reply, "So, build a second wall two and a half feet in front of that. My uncle Kenny pours concrete and can give them a nice deal."

Ceetar Sep 15 2011 08:13 AM Re: Waive Bay

Edgy DC wrote: Agreed with FK above. Regarding, as an aside, moving the wall, in Rubin's chat, he described the Mets plan beiing to get rid of the notch in right, and to paint one of those noxious lines eight feet up on the wall in left, "because the wall is structural, and can't be moved." To which anybody who gives it seven seconds of thought would reply, "So, build a second wall two and a half feet in front of that. My uncle Kenny pours concrete and can give them a nice deal." The original designs of Citi Field supposedly said the walls could be moved 8 feet. maybe that was scrapped. Randy of the Apple did some photoshopping and came up with very cool ideas for alterations if the case came to be. Obviously, the second smaller wall in front with seats on top in left makes a ton of space, creates more (high priced and in demand) seating, and fixes the 'wall problem'. But it's not like Bay's been flying out to deep left, or hitting it off the wall. He went like two months without a double.

Benjamin Grimm Sep 15 2011 08:14 AM Re: Waive Bay

Edgy DC wrote: To which anybody who gives it seven seconds of thought would reply, "So, build a second wall two and a half feet in front of that. My uncle Kenny pours concrete and can give them a nice deal." Exactly. It can be a cheap padded free-standing wall like the one they had at Shea. I bet they can get it installed for just a couple of thousand bucks.

metirish Sep 15 2011 08:15 AM Re: Waive Bay

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Edgy DC wrote: To which anybody who gives it seven seconds of thought would reply, "So, build a second wall two and a half feet in front of that. My uncle Kenny pours concrete and can give them a nice deal." Exactly. It can be a cheap padded free-standing wall like the one they had at Shea. I bet they can get it installed for just a couple of thousand bucks. cash money baby, Jeff wastes more on awful haircuts.

smg58 Sep 15 2011 08:25 AM Re: Waive Bay

1. The walls are fine. The Mets' problem is that they can't hit home runs anywhere. 2. In an ideal world, Bay's recent uptick will enable the Mets to get something more than nothing for him. If somebody else sees him as more than a bench player, we should give them a call. Otherwise, since he doesn't deserve the ABs it will take for his option to vest, it should be easy to make sure he doesn't get those ABs. 3. I see Thole as a backup catcher on a good team, and I agree that a good young catcher would be a nice pickup. I'd expect that the Reds would want major-league help, though.

Ashie62 Sep 15 2011 08:45 AM Re: Waive Bay

smg58 wrote: 1. The walls are fine. The Mets' problem is that they can't hit home runs anywhere. 2. In an ideal world, Bay's recent uptick will enable the Mets to get something more than nothing for him. If somebody else sees him as more than a bench player, we should give them a call. Otherwise, since he doesn't deserve the ABs it will take for his option to vest, it should be easy to make sure he doesn't get those ABs. 3. I see Thole as a backup catcher on a good team, and I agree that a good young catcher would be a nice pickup. I'd expect that the Reds would want major-league help, though. I would tend to agree with all three although I would like the Citi dimensions tweaked.. It will take alot more than Wilmer Flores to get that Reds prospect catcher Bowden was taking about.. "Hello, the Mets? You want who? You know he is a catcher with a very very high ceiling, but we might like Matt Harvey." Click.

MFS62 Sep 15 2011 09:01 AM Re: Waive Bay

I remember a few years ago, the WFAN-droids were talking about trading for this great power hitting catching prospect on the Red Sox who was being blocked from the majors because Boston had Varitek. It was Kelly Shopach. Well, he made the majors, has been here awhile, and hasn't exactly lit it up. Prospects are just that - prospects. But you certainly have to try if the price (Flores plus maybe a mid tier prospect) is right. Later

Edgy DC Sep 15 2011 09:03 AM Re: Waive Bay

Yeah, and our prospects are just prospects too. And plenty of prospects become all-stars. And, as Bay showed, plenty of all-stars become also-rans. So please let's not discuss prospects as if they are a monolithic group.

Benjamin Grimm Sep 15 2011 09:10 AM Re: Waive Bay

Yeah, I don't see how Harvey for Grandal would have to be a non-starter. Nobody is a sure-thing. If Grandal is closer to being ready, and plays a hard-to-fill position, and is available, then it should be considered.

Benjamin Grimm Sep 15 2011 09:13 AM Re: Waive Bay

When Darryl Strawberry was called a can't miss, and then he became a star, I (for a while) had more faith than was warranted in the "can't miss" tag. I've long since gotten over that. (Anyone remember Alex Escobar?) If you trade prospect for prospect, it can end up being a great deal, an awful one, or somewhere in between. You shouldn't be overly eager, or overly hesitant, about making such deals.

Edgy DC Sep 15 2011 09:17 AM Re: Waive Bay

Yeah, I think we all know that prospects don't come with guarantees. This thread is all over the place.

attgig Sep 15 2011 09:18 AM Re: Waive Bay

Bay shouldn't go anywhere this winter. if during the season next year, he continues his suckitude, part with him mid season or if he's just ok enough, part with him at the end of the season. heck send him down to AAA a-la Traschel. dropping him now gives us no advantage in any way or form. it would be different if he was blocking a bonafide prospect, but i'd venture to say, offensive & defensive WAR wise, Bay would be better than murphy/evans/duda/anyone else mets have.

metirish Sep 15 2011 09:19 AM Re: Waive Bay

Edgy DC wrote: Yeah, I think we all know that prospects don't come with guarantees. This thread is all over the place. Back on point Jason Bay is terrible.

Ceetar Sep 15 2011 09:20 AM Re: Waive Bay

attgig wrote: but i'd venture to say, offensive & defensive WAR wise, Bay would be better than murphy/evans/duda/anyone else mets have. You mean, Bay would be better than the second best of that list. As the best will likely be playing RF.

Edgy DC Sep 15 2011 09:35 AM Re: Waive Bay

Yeah, one of the bright spots about this season is that we've had four people manage to succeed, more or less, playing first base. Which means a potential dark spot next season is trying to figure out what to do with four firstbasemen.

Ashie62 Sep 15 2011 09:39 AM Re: Waive Bay

How about Ike Davis at 1B for 162 games?

Ceetar Sep 15 2011 09:47 AM Re: Waive Bay

Ashie62 wrote: How about Ike Davis at 1B for 162 games? How about 173 games?

attgig Sep 15 2011 10:01 AM Re: Waive Bay

Ceetar wrote: attgig wrote: but i'd venture to say, offensive & defensive WAR wise, Bay would be better than murphy/evans/duda/anyone else mets have. You mean, Bay would be better than the second best of that list. As the best will likely be playing RF. I don't think any of their defensive 'stats' would offset whatever offense advantage they may get, so, no, I actually mean Bay would be better than any one of the others...even whoever plays RF.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Sep 15 2011 10:21 AM Re: Waive Bay

Benjamin Grimm wrote: LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: This is 2014, mind you; let's put it this way-- if 3 of Wheeler/Harvey/Mejia/Familia haven't been up and in the majors for a year by then, something will have gone terribly, terribly wrong. I'll be quite happy if we're getting quality from two of the four. Oh, I'm pretty sure we'll get SOMETHING from most, if not all; I didn't say that they'd be All-Stars, or good... just major-leaguers.

Edgy DC Sep 15 2011 10:23 AM Re: Waive Bay

Ashie62 wrote: How about Ike Davis at 1B for 162 games? Yes, and if that happy occurrence should come to pass, we still have three others we're trying to squeeze into left, right, second, and third. We're already kind of squeezing one in at catcher. There's a seemingly deliberate conversational obtuseness that's running rampant around these parts, folks.

Frayed Knot Sep 15 2011 10:36 AM Re: Waive Bay

Scouting reports on Yasmani Grandal: From Baseball Prospectus [u:32b8oaeg]Prior to the beginning of this season[/u:32b8oaeg] Yasmani Grandal, C -- DOB: 11/8/88 -- 6-2/215 -- Bats/Throws: S/R Drafted/Signed: First round (15th overall), 2010, University of Miami 2010 Stats: .286/.394/.715 at Rookie (8 G) Best/Worst Tool: Hit/speed - Year in Review: The top college catcher in the draft signed a big-league deal worth more than $3 million. - The Good: Grandal is the rare catcher who has the potential to hit in the middle of the order. He has a big league-ready approach and above-average power for a catcher from both sides of the plate. He's a take-charge type who understands his role as a field general, and works well with pitchers. - The Bad: Grandal will need good secondary skills, as some scouts question his pure hitting ability. He projects as an offense-first catcher who will be no more than average defensively, as he needs to improve his footwork and has troubles with the running game. - Perfect World Projection: Above-average everyday catcher. - Path to the Big Leagues: Grandal will begin hit first full-season assignment at High-A Bakersfield, where he could amass some big numbers. - ETA: 2013 [u:32b8oaeg]From John Sickels last month[/u:32b8oaeg]: Yasmani Grandal, C, Grade B+: .296/.410/.510 with 41 walks, 57 strikeouts in 206 at-bats for High-A Bakersfield, .291/.354/.477 with seven walks, 23 strikeouts in 86 at-bats for Double-A Carolina. Has caught 34% of runners, though passed ball rate is quite high. Overall I'm pleased. That sounds like a very nice prospect. He is behind Cincy's other catching prospect Devin Mesoraco both in terms of readiness (Mesoraco was called up two weeks ago although he's only a few months older) and probably in overall ceiling as well so it makes sense that they may look to move him [Grandal]. At the same time it also makes sense that they'd ask a lot for him and they certainly aren't in the position where they HAVE TO move him and particularly not now.

smg58 Sep 15 2011 01:13 PM Re: Waive Bay

Ceetar wrote: Ashie62 wrote: How about Ike Davis at 1B for 162 games? How about 173 games? Be realistic. It might take 5 games to win the World Series. But yeah, a full year of Ike would be nice.

seawolf17 Sep 15 2011 01:32 PM Re: Waive Bay

Benjamin Grimm wrote: The new team would be responsible. That's why the Brewers renegotiated with Frankie Rodriguez. Once they acquired him, the $17.5 million for 2012 became their problem, not the Mets'. Wrong. If Bay's released, the options are gone. The new contract is the major league minimum (or whatever). If he's TRADED, then the option becomes his new team's problem.

metirish Sep 15 2011 02:14 PM Re: Waive Bay

Options are not guaranteed even though it's a guaranteed contract?

smg58 Sep 15 2011 04:21 PM Re: Waive Bay

Frayed Knot wrote: That sounds like a very nice prospect. He is behind Cincy's other catching prospect Devin Mesoraco both in terms of readiness (Mesoraco was called up two weeks ago although he's only a few months older) and probably in overall ceiling as well so it makes sense that they may look to move him [Grandal]. At the same time it also makes sense that they'd ask a lot for him and they certainly aren't in the position where they HAVE TO move him and particularly not now. There are some red flags with Grandal. 97 Ks in 374 ABs, mostly in high A and AA, does not bode well for a high batting average moving forward. He also has only hit 14 home runs, so his value is not in his power, and an .835 OPS at AA doesn't make him the next Johnny Bench. He's not next year's catcher, and he's not that close to Mesoraco (.855 OPS at AAA, only 5 months older). None of this makes him a bad prospect -- he does draw tons of walks and hits his share of doubles -- but he's not an elite one yet. Is he worth a look? Sure, but there's sure to be an auction for him if the Reds put him on the block, and he's not the kind of guy you go all in for.

Frayed Knot Sep 15 2011 06:09 PM Re: Waive Bay

No, he's not an elite prospect. On the other hand neither is Wilmer Flores.

Edgy DC Sep 15 2011 06:38 PM Re: Waive Bay

Raise your hands if any of you considered this crunch-a-munch to be the next Johnny Bench. Bench, for what it's worth, bypassed AA. He OPS'd .818 in 98 AAA ganes. (Couldn't draw walks as a teenager. Waddaya gonna do?)

batmagadanleadoff Sep 16 2011 09:09 AM Re: Waive Bay

Frayed Knot wrote: Can we please stop talking about bringing in walls as if: a) that's Jason Bay's problem b) that it would somehow only benefit our team Agreed with FK above. I don't agree with youse guys. I understand your position(s): that if the Citi Field outfield walls are too far and high for the Mets, then they're too far and high for the visitors, too, and that over time, the would be HR's that CF converts into something less -- outs, or some other non-HR hit -- evens out for both sides. I think that there's more at stake here, and that a Met who plays at CF all season, particularly a HR-hitting Met, is likelier to mess up his swing, timing and rhythm than a visiting player who plays, at most, 10 or so CF games a season, but maybe as little as three games. There's more to this than simply comparing the hit tracker data for the Mets and their visiting opponents. The other point I'd make, (and I might have already made it on this forum before. I'm not sure but if I did, apologies for being monotonous, here) is that wealthy teams should build dimensions that are close to neutral, rather than extreme. The Mets, in the long term, will be wealthy again, notwithstanding their current mess. In due time, the Wilpons either get back on their feet again, or sell to an entity that won't be indebted to Picard for hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars. Wealthy teams can use their financial leverage to buy power hitters. HR's are baseball's best offensive weapon and the most efficient way to score. OF fences that are too far undermine a team's ability to hit HR's, while fences close in squander the team's power advantage by facilitating the opponent's ability to counter with HR's of their own. This stuff about building an offense around speed and line drives is a bullshit pipe dream, and I can't believe that internally, Alderson really believes this crap. To the extent that he says otherwise publicly, I believe that Alderson's just covering up for the baseball morons that own this team. It's hard to win consistently without power and HR's. Not impossible. But harder.

Ceetar Sep 16 2011 09:19 AM Re: Waive Bay

Except the data suggests that Citi Field scoring is pretty neutral. Homer unfriendly, but scoring neutral. Couple that with the thought that fly ball to HR ratios may be pretty random, even for good pitchers, and you've got a park that doesn't inhibit scoring, but minimizes the fly ball bad luck when a ball happens to hit a windstream and carry out. Bad pitchers are still going to give up runs, because they'll allow line drives into that much bigger gap, but batters that get under a ball won't automatically have a chance at a 3-run homer even if they didn't hit the pitch squarely. Also, the perception that sluggers wouldn't want to come here, if true, is preferably in my opinion to quality pitchers not wanting to come here.

batmagadanleadoff Sep 16 2011 09:34 AM Re: Waive Bay

Ceetar wrote: Also, the perception that sluggers wouldn't want to come here, if true, is preferably in my opinion to quality pitchers not wanting to come here. I think you're saying that CF's deep dimensions might encourage quality free agent pitchers to play here. If so, this would be one advantage to having deep dimensions. But provided that CF attracts star pitchers. Like a Lincecum-type, for example. If the idea is to get average or slightly above average pitchers on the theory that CF will mask their flaws, well then I'd guess that Jeff Wilpon is calling the shots after all. But on the other hand, a Lincecum might not be as valuable in Citi Field, as compared to pitching in other parks. CF's deep dimensions might somewhat diminish the star pitcher's edge by making it easier for the opposing pitcher to keep up.

Ceetar Sep 16 2011 10:03 AM Re: Waive Bay

Not quite. I'm not talking about getting average pitchers and hoping Citi Field masks their deficiencies. It won't. They might give up less home runs, but they'll give up the same amount (or more) of line drives and runs. But Tim Lincecum should have less damaging fly balls than he would at Yankee Stadium. When a batter hits the ball in the air, there's less of a chance of it carrying out in Citi Field. Citi Field inhibits fly balls from being beneficial, but it's still average/good for line drives. There's always luck involved, but in general well struck balls/line drives are more likely to be hits, and fly balls are more likely to be outs. Good pitchers give up less line drives, and less of their fly balls will end up as home runs. though I'm not convinced players consider the park too hard when they sign. Lee went to Philly and CC went to Yankee Stadium.

Rockin' Doc Sep 16 2011 08:52 PM Re: Waive Bay

I'm convinced that virtually the only thing players look at when choosing a contract is the $$$.* *And the quality of the school system, of course.

Ashie62 Sep 16 2011 10:18 PM Re: Waive Bay

Ceetar wrote: Not quite. I'm not talking about getting average pitchers and hoping Citi Field masks their deficiencies. It won't. They might give up less home runs, but they'll give up the same amount (or more) of line drives and runs. But Tim Lincecum should have less damaging fly balls than he would at Yankee Stadium. When a batter hits the ball in the air, there's less of a chance of it carrying out in Citi Field. Citi Field inhibits fly balls from being beneficial, but it's still average/good for line drives. There's always luck involved, but in general well struck balls/line drives are more likely to be hits, and fly balls are more likely to be outs. Good pitchers give up less line drives, and less of their fly balls will end up as home runs. though I'm not convinced players consider the park too hard when they sign. Lee went to Philly and CC went to Yankee Stadium. Then why is Citi considered a pitcher's park?

Ashie62 Sep 16 2011 10:19 PM Re: Waive Bay

Rockin' Doc wrote: I'm convinced that virtually the only thing players look at when choosing a contract is the $$$.* *And the quality of the school system, of course. And then there is that..

batmagadanleadoff Sep 17 2011 04:52 AM Re: Waive Bay

Except the data suggests that Citi Field scoring is pretty neutral. Homer unfriendly, but scoring neutral. Couple that with the thought that fly ball to HR ratios may be pretty random, even for good pitchers, and you've got a park that doesn't inhibit scoring, but minimizes the fly ball bad luck.... I checked out the numbers because I was skeptical about your comment. Large dimensions inhibit scoring. The correlation is almost perfect. (Coors Field, especially pre-humidor was the one exception: the stadium's big playing field was more than offset by the thin air) But back to the numbers. Citi Field reduced run production in every single season of its existence. 2011 Runs Scored (Mets and opponents at Citi Field) 647 runs/75 games = 8.63 runs per game Runs Scored (Mets and opponents, Mets on road) 711 runs/76 games - 9.36 runs per game. 2010 Runs Scored (Mets and opponents at Citi Field) 616 runs/81 games = 7.60 runs per game Runs Scored (Mets and opponents, Mets on road) 692 runs/81 games - 8.54 runs per game. 2009 Runs Scored (Mets and opponents at Citi Field) 693 runs/81 games = 8.56 runs per game Runs Scored (Mets and opponents, Mets on road) 735 runs/81 games - 9.07 runs per game. 2009-2011 --(Three season totals, to date) Runs Scored (Mets and opponents at Citi Field) 8.25 runs per game Runs Scored (Mets and opponents, Mets on road) 8.98 runs per game. ESPN's parks factor page confirms that HR's and scoring in general is suppressed at Citi Field to the point that it's one of the toughest parks in baseball to generate offense. And even if CF's propensity for producing triples offsets, to a degree, HR reduction -- that's an argument to make when discussing overall team scoring. It's not a defense to the idea that individual Mets HR hitters might be screwing up their swings because of the park.

Ashie62 Sep 17 2011 05:30 AM Re: Waive Bay

Mr. Wilpon "Tear down that wall."

Ceetar Sep 17 2011 06:32 AM Re: Waive Bay

[url]http://www.seamheads.com/ballparks/year.php?Year=2010&LgID=All&tab=pf3&sort=Runs1 has it 23rd multi-year: Batting - 97, Pitching - 98 at B-R, where 100 is average. (YSIII is multi-year: Batting - 110, Pitching - 108) ESPN this year has Citi at 0.923. 0.711 for home runs, and 0.955 for hits. 23rd for both. but .955 and 23 are not exactly terrible, and ESPN lists CBP as a just slightly pitcher friendly park so.. [url]http://www.parkfactors.com/NYM has them at 26th with a 90 score for the three-year mark. That's closer to neutral than 11 other places. and i don't know how they break down runs/HR but they seem to factor in weather some how. (I'm sure that's precise and accurate right? It's hard to trust park factors too much, with all the random variation in weather and players in small samples, and even 3 years is still a fairly small sample. It's like judging Pagan's UZR just on 2011.faulty stat. The Mets have struggled at home this year, certainly suppressing the offensive numbers and hurting the park factor. You could make the case that it's because of Citi Field that they're losing, but I just don't see that. It's not like the Mets looked good at so many of these home games and just couldn't muscle it out, nor did the Great Wall of Flushing scare David Wright into making defensive errors.

batmagadanleadoff Sep 21 2011 05:50 AM Re: Waive Bay

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Can we please stop talking about bringing in walls as if: a) that's Jason Bay's problem b) that it would somehow only benefit our team Agreed with FK above. I don't agree with youse guys. I understand your position(s): that if the Citi Field outfield walls are too far and high for the Mets, then they're too far and high for the visitors, too, and that over time, the would be HR's that CF converts into something less -- outs, or some other non-HR hit -- evens out for both sides. I think that there's more at stake here, and that a Met who plays at CF all season, particularly a HR-hitting Met, is likelier to mess up his swing, timing and rhythm than a visiting player who plays, at most, 10 or so CF games a season, but maybe as little as three games. There's more to this than simply comparing the hit tracker data for the Mets and their visiting opponents. The other point I'd make, (and I might have already made it on this forum before. I'm not sure but if I did, apologies for being monotonous, here) is that wealthy teams should build dimensions that are close to neutral, rather than extreme. The Mets, in the long term, will be wealthy again, notwithstanding their current mess. In due time, the Wilpons either get back on their feet again, or sell to an entity that won't be indebted to Picard for hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars. Wealthy teams can use their financial leverage to buy power hitters. HR's are baseball's best offensive weapon and the most efficient way to score. OF fences that are too far undermine a team's ability to hit HR's, while fences close in squander the team's power advantage by facilitating the opponent's ability to counter with HR's of their own. This stuff about building an offense around speed and line drives is a bullshit pipe dream, and I can't believe that internally, Alderson really believes this crap. To the extent that he says otherwise publicly, I believe that Alderson's just covering up for the baseball morons that own this team. It's hard to win consistently without power and HR's. Not impossible. But harder. ______________________________ Sandy Alderson is quoted: "Alderson also appeared to acknowledge the psychological impact of playing 82 home games in a cavernous stadium. 'There is some sense that the park is a little more overwhelming to a team that spends half its time there, as opposed to a team that comes in for three games, doesn’t really have to alter an approach or think about it too much, and leaves,' he said". http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/mets/2 ... dimensions

Ceetar Sep 21 2011 06:39 AM Re: Waive Bay

translated: "Bay and Wright, among others, have whined about the walls, and it's in our vested interest to placate them."

Edgy DC Sep 21 2011 07:38 AM Re: Waive Bay

I think, if there are psychological issues, it would behoove the team to adjust their thinking as much as adjust their dimensions. But whatever, move the wall left, right, up, down. Make it out of glass or make it out of Rice Krispies. I don't care that much, but I'd like to see a stronger-minded team, who can turn their park, whatever it's size or shape, into an asset, based on their familiarity. The notion that Jason Bay is failing not because the dimensions are eating up Jason Bay's long flies and turning homers into doubles and deep outs, but eating up his confidence and making him a worse player at home and on the road, is really weak if he's actually insinuating it himself. The idea that CitiField's dimensions made Wright's strikeouts spike? He seriously needs an asswhipping from his batting coach.

Ceetar Sep 21 2011 07:54 AM Re: Waive Bay

Wright's strikeouts are actually back down to his normalish levels since the DL stint. The changes won't make Bay better, or give the Mets a better chance to win. It'll just redesign the box score. Which is fine too.

Edgy DC Sep 21 2011 08:16 AM Re: Waive Bay

Ceetar wrote: Wright's strikeouts are actually back down to his normalish levels since the DL stint. That's sort of beside the point. I was addressing the notion in the abstract and not necessarily asserting it as such.

Ceetar Sep 21 2011 08:27 AM Re: Waive Bay

Edgy DC wrote: Ceetar wrote: Wright's strikeouts are actually back down to his normalish levels since the DL stint. That's sort of beside the point. I was addressing the notion in the abstract and not necessarily asserting it as such. I was agreeing with you, specifically citing evidence that it's probably not the walls causing Wright's spike in Ks. Abstractly, I agree with you. I do find it interesting that the Mets seemingly had a home field advantage the last two years and not so much this year. Collins and Hudgens seem much more stable and able to instill a better approach, but it hasn't neccesarily manifested. I wonder if 2010's much more free swinging, much less work a count attitude let to more balls in play, and more runs as a result. walks, strikeouts, XBH, AVG, OPS, even BABIP and SB are much the same home and away, yet they've scored more runs away and have more singles. Could just be a quirk of luck. I don't see fielding splits. more GIDP at home, maybe more errors as well?

Ashie62 Sep 21 2011 01:20 PM Re: Waive Bay

The Mets need more talent.

Benjamin Grimm Sep 21 2011 01:24 PM Re: Waive Bay

On my lunch hour today, I saw a car with a "Save the Bay" bumper sticker, and I thought of this thread. If only it had been titled "Waive the Bay"