Master Index of Archived Threads


Timeline for Contention

Gwreck Mar 14 2012 11:02 PM

Excerpted from a recent Keith Law article at ESPN: Preseason predictions tend to focus more on the likely contenders than the likely also-rans, as no one gets that worked up over a team that's going to win 70 games, plus or minus five. Even the fans of those teams are usually more concerned about their long-term outlooks, so I've looked at five such clubs to assess how long their fans might have to wait before the teams could reasonably expect to contend. I've looked at future payroll commitments, major league assets, farm systems, ownership status and front office strategies. I also considered the competition in each team's division to assess their chances of earning a playoff spot. So, for example, the New York Mets face a higher standard than the Chicago Cubs or San Diego Padres because the National League East is so tough. (Exclusion of any club isn't a comment on how soon they might become competitive.) ... New York Mets The good news for Mets fans is that the $43 million rathole known as Santana Bay will close after 2013 with a couple of option buyouts, after which, assuming that David Wright has sailed for non-bankrupt shores, they'll have no significant long-term commitments. The bad news, aside from the running farce in the ownership suite is that the new front-office regime's turnaround hasn't had enough time to do more than make sure the ship is facing the right direction. There are a few potential stars in the system in right-handers Zack Wheeler and Matt Harvey, both of whom could debut this year if the rotation has room for them, and outfielder Brandon Nimmo, who's probably a good four years off even if the knee trouble is completely behind him, but those three aren't enough to be the core of a championship club. And, unfortunately, they don't have great assets on the major league roster to trade for prospects. New ownership would help, but otherwise the Mets will have to build through the draft and international markets, which will take several years unless they get an infusion of cash. They will most likely contend next in ... 2016 I like Law's analysis of things because he tends to not sugarcoat anything and takes a critical view. The upside is that he could be underestimating things but I don't think this is an unfair analysis. I know I am fond of suggesting that a farm system rebuild takes 3-5 years (2012 being year two) but now I hope that was just an optimistic projection.

metirish Mar 15 2012 05:48 AM Re: Timeline for Contention

Yeah, I tend to like his stuff. Before reading the bit I thought 2015 as being realistic.

Ceetar Mar 15 2012 05:55 AM Re: Timeline for Contention

Funny, I wrote kind of the opposite post today. (in terms of whether we should be looking to the future or not) He's full of it. and wrong. Too many variables and things he's taking for granted (Wright for instance, payroll staying what it is, new owners helping, none of the prospects he didn't project as good being good)

Edgy MD Mar 15 2012 06:50 AM Re: Timeline for Contention

Coating things in poison is just as much a copout as coating them in sugar.

Ceetar Mar 15 2012 06:53 AM Re: Timeline for Contention

Edgy DC wrote: Coating things in poison is just as much a copout as coating them in sugar. Or we can watch the games, not pretend we know the future, and enjoy baseball?

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Mar 15 2012 06:58 AM Re: Timeline for Contention

Wright would be much-- MUCH-- more movable without that weird semi-no-trade thing in his contract. (Omar Minaya-- the gift that keeps on giving!)

Edgy MD Mar 15 2012 07:08 AM Re: Timeline for Contention

I'm all for an immovable Wright. An an irresistible Duda, while I'm at it.

metirish Mar 15 2012 07:13 AM Re: Timeline for Contention

Ceetar wrote: Edgy DC wrote: Coating things in poison is just as much a copout as coating them in sugar. Or we can watch the games, not pretend we know the future, and enjoy baseball? why have a blog then?

Ceetar Mar 15 2012 07:15 AM Re: Timeline for Contention

metirish wrote: Ceetar wrote: Edgy DC wrote: Coating things in poison is just as much a copout as coating them in sugar. Or we can watch the games, not pretend we know the future, and enjoy baseball? why have a blog then? To talk about the 2012 Mets, not the 2013 ones. Until next year. Law's post is so predictable, he doesn't like the Mets system, he's a minors guy, therefore he doesn't think the Mets will be good soon.

MFS62 Mar 15 2012 07:58 AM Re: Timeline for Contention

This is the first I've read that Nimmo has had knee problems. Ah, by the time he reaches the majors, they'll have too many good hitting kids so they might not miss him. I'm saying 2014 to be a contender. (Making other teams sweat about a playoff spot) 2015 and beyond - consistent contenders. (Kicking other teams back down the mountain) Later

TransMonk Mar 15 2012 08:23 AM Re: Timeline for Contention

I'm going with 2015. I really like the young arms in the minors and think that we'll have enough payroll freed up by 2014 to buy some FA offense to go with anyone we have left on the roster. I also think that although it won't be directly his fault, Terry and the other coaches won't survive 2013 and what could be 3 consecutive losing seasons under his management. 2014 will show flashes of things to come under a new skipper and with the young starters coming of age and some offense additions via FA. 2015 will be the time to shine. Of course, I'm not ruling out anything in the next couple of years, and I'll still hope for the best. But in looking at what we've got, and what we could have in the near future, 2015 looks about right to me. Also, I don't agree with Law's assessment that the "toughness" of the NL East is going to effect the timeline.

Ceetar Mar 15 2012 08:40 AM Re: Timeline for Contention

TransMonk wrote: Also, I don't agree with Law's assessment that the "toughness" of the NL East is going to effect the timeline. color it with that he's a prospect guy. Thinks Familia will be a reliever. So Strasburg and Zimmermann and (I don't know their system.) and Harper. and the Braves have a billion high level pitching prospects right now, who I'm sure he's high on. I'm not sure why he, or anyone, thinks the Marlins and Phillies are going to sustain long term sucess.

TransMonk Mar 15 2012 08:50 AM Re: Timeline for Contention

Ceetar wrote: I'm not sure why he, or anyone, thinks the Marlins and Phillies are going to sustain long term sucess. This is mostly what I was referring to. Until the Nats actually put a winner out on the field, I'm doubting their ability to do so. The Braves are always a threat to re-load I suppose...but the way things change in a 3-4 year span makes it tough to say that it will be tougher for the Mets to get to the top of the NL East rather than any other division. If the Mets right the ship and can start putting young quality on the field in a winning fashion, then it really shouldn't matter.

metirish Mar 15 2012 08:54 AM Re: Timeline for Contention

TransMonk wrote: Ceetar wrote: I'm not sure why he, or anyone, thinks the Marlins and Phillies are going to sustain long term sucess. If the Mets right the ship Not that I disagree here but that's a big if right there too.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Mar 15 2012 08:58 AM Re: Timeline for Contention

I understand Law's in a spot where he probably (rightly) feels as though fans of every team feel he's against them, and for all I know he's a swell guy irl, but he still comes off like a know-it-all dick about 90% of the time . The fact that ESPN presumes that attitude is worth putting behind a pay wall contributes my feeling that he's a generally a dick.

Vic Sage Mar 15 2012 09:34 AM Re: Timeline for Contention

I have no use for these Kreskin wannabees; they look at what is and deign to predict what will be. But the universe is chaos, the center will not hold, and great prospects get blown out while undrafted kids become overnight sensations. Management teams are hired and fired. Unforseen trades occur. All-stars just lose it and journeymen become all-stars. franchises move. Fortunes are lost and found. Law's ramblings are all just bullshit, meant only to exchange word counts for cash. You want to give us an assessment of what you think our current roster of minor leaguers each are currently capable of, and offer an opinion as to their range of potential development (barring injury)? knock yourself out. But don't pretend that is any indicator of what a franchise will look like in 3 years. It's just silly. And sillier still is to take any of it seriously.

Frayed Knot Mar 15 2012 10:36 AM Re: Timeline for Contention

What Vic said. I understand why these guys do things like this, but their accuracy is iffy at best for the same reason that most political forecasts are a waste of breath, because they all assume that the current trend is going to continue to be the trend for the foreseeable future. Just three-plus years ago during the euphoria following Obama's victory, James Carville proclaimed the result showed liberalism to be "the dominant political philosophy for the next 40 years". Then, just thirty-eight years short of that boast being fulfilled, conventional wisdom held that it wasn't a matter of if, merely of which Republican would send Barack into the loser's lounge of one-term failures and carry of full Republican Congress with him. Sixteen months after that Republigasm of 2010 ... ummm, not so much.

metsguyinmichigan Mar 15 2012 10:41 AM Re: Timeline for Contention

His sense if the Mets were relying only on the farm system. The financial mess can't go on forever. We're a big market team that signs big players. We don't need nine homegrown players. It's nice to have a bunch. But the team has always been able to sign a big player, or trade for one. One the finances are straightened out, or there is new management, we can go back to being a big-market club and sign some big players to fill the holes. I'm optimistic that we won't suck this year, and will be in the hunt as soon as next year. Last year's team was riddled with injuries, and they still were only a few bullpen meltdowns away from finishing above .500.

Edgy MD Mar 15 2012 10:43 AM Re: Timeline for Contention

I want nine homegrown players. Homebred, if possible, descended from a long line of former Mets.

Vic Sage Mar 15 2012 11:38 AM Re: Timeline for Contention

Eugenics programs are notoriously tricky, as we've learned from both history and fiction. Fascism aside, one problem is illustrated by the undoubtedly apocryphal story of Marilyn Monroe suggesting to Einstein that they have a baby, because a child with her looks and his mind would be special, and he responded, "but what if the child has my looks and your brains?" So, I could see the Mets trying to breed a catcher, using DNA from Grote and Piazza. But with our luck, he'd end up hitting like Jerry and throwing like Mike.

Ceetar Mar 15 2012 11:47 AM Re: Timeline for Contention

metsguyinmichigan wrote: His sense if the Mets were relying only on the farm system. The financial mess can't go on forever. We're a big market team that signs big players. We don't need nine homegrown players. It's nice to have a bunch. But the team has always been able to sign a big player, or trade for one. One the finances are straightened out, or there is new management, we can go back to being a big-market club and sign some big players to fill the holes. I'm optimistic that we won't suck this year, and will be in the hunt as soon as next year. Last year's team was riddled with injuries, and they still were only a few bullpen meltdowns away from finishing above .500. even if they don't, the Mets will still spend what they make, and they'll make money. Particularly with that 'nice not quite a core' with no weighty contracts. so where's the other 40-50 million dollars getting spent?

smg58 Mar 15 2012 11:56 AM Re: Timeline for Contention

It's tough to look too far ahead. We have a number of good prospects who look to be ready by 2014, plus a lot of payroll will free up by then, but how the prospects pan out and what the Mets do with the money are things we can't project. How did we all do on guessing which free agents went where this offseason? Lots can happen. Even next year's expectations will depend on unforseeable things that will happen this year. And as for this year, I'm keeping my expectations tempered, but I sure as hell wouldn't mind being wrong.

G-Fafif Mar 15 2012 12:57 PM Re: Timeline for Contention Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Mar 16 2012 05:32 AM

Vic Sage wrote: So, I could see the Mets trying to breed a catcher, using DNA from Grote and Piazza. But with our luck, he'd end up hitting like Jerry and throwing like Mike. And would hold an untenably ornery press conference to deny that he has two dads.

Gwreck Mar 15 2012 03:29 PM Re: Timeline for Contention

To bring this back on topic: Nobody likes hearing that their favorite team is no good. That doesn't make Law wrong. I think his comment about the Mets' finances to be less thoughtful than his analysis of their prospects (where, as noted above, his expertise lies). I also think his analysis didn't go far enough into considering the Mets' potential opponents, and I would've liked to hear more about where Washington and Atlanta project to be in two years. Philadelphia's win total may finally start trending the other way but Washington's has to be trending upwards one would think.

Edgy MD Mar 15 2012 05:00 PM Re: Timeline for Contention

I don't think it's wrong. I don't think it's right. I think he's tiresomely snarky and not particularly insightful. He looks closely at minor league systems and probably has a good idea which guys have a better chance of flourishing than others. Beyond that, eyewash.