Master Index of Archived Threads


We really ought to talk about Carlos Gonzalez

Mex17 Nov 23 2013 10:09 AM

Don't know if Colorado really wants to deal, but if they do, then Murphy/Davis/Syndergaard/Ynoa should be our offer. Word around the campfire is that Murphy and Davis are due about $9 million combined after arbitration. Gonzalez is owed $10.5 million for this coming year, so the deal would be a virtual wash budget-wise. This would be the blockbuster, direction changing, franchise altering, perception improving deal that we need!!!

Frayed Knot Nov 23 2013 10:45 AM Re: We really ought to talk about Carlos Gonzalez

Gonzalez is owed $10.5 million for this coming year, so the deal would be a virtual wash budget-wise. -- And after that the tab goes to $16, then $17, then $20 This would be the blockbuster, direction changing, franchise altering, perception improving deal that we need!!! -- Not sure about all that Franchise Altering/ Direction Changing stuff. You'd improve the OF for sure but at the expense of potentially giving up a front of the rotation pitcher. And making moves for 'perception altering' reasons is a tricky road. Do also take into account the Coors factor: Career Splits = .328/.388/.604//992 H; .269/.324/.450//774 A Still a good hitter away from Denver but nothing resembling the monster he is in it. Murphy was all that far below that OPS (733) this year and was over 800 just two years back (809 in 2011).

Edgy MD Nov 23 2013 10:59 AM Re: We really ought to talk about Carlos Gonzalez

That's a sobering home/road split.

Mex17 Nov 23 2013 11:13 AM Re: We really ought to talk about Carlos Gonzalez

Perception matters a great deal, especially when you are dealing with an angry, revolted, mass of potential paying customers who currently aren't paying. Do this, and the revenue streams start pointing north again (along with number of wins hopefully). That will finance the increasing tab going forward.

Frayed Knot Nov 23 2013 12:02 PM Re: We really ought to talk about Carlos Gonzalez

But perception only goes so far and is more a band-aid than a strategy. You should do trades and signings because they make sense from a baseball sense not because they make for good pr and/or temporarily mollify a mob.

Edgy MD Nov 23 2013 12:26 PM Re: We really ought to talk about Carlos Gonzalez

Yeah, the angry, revolted, mass of potential paying customers who currently aren't paying will be the first to be affronted by sexy moves disguised as good ones.

Benjamin Grimm Nov 23 2013 12:36 PM Re: We really ought to talk about Carlos Gonzalez

I agree. Make moves that lead to winning, and the rest will follow.

batmagadanleadoff Nov 23 2013 12:50 PM Re: We really ought to talk about Carlos Gonzalez

Just win, baby! [fimg=400]http://www.chicagonow.com/chicago-tough/files/2011/07/al-davis.jpg[/fimg]

Mex17 Nov 23 2013 02:31 PM Re: We really ought to talk about Carlos Gonzalez

Although the home/road splits should be considered, I would argue that it makes "baseball sense" to add a 28 year old lefthanded hitter with power and a good OBP who also steals bases and plays Gold Glove defense in leftfield and who is signed for the next four years to the team, particularly when there is a gaping hole in the middle of the lineup and a pretty big outfield to cover. "Cause I got news for ya. . . Chris Young isn't the answer, at least not as a centerpiece to an offseason or a lineup. As far as trades changing the tone (or "perception"), I would direct you to the past acquisitions of Messrs Hernandez, Carter, and Piazza (and take one guess who was opposed behind the scenes on that last one. . .and who insisted upon it and pushed it through). Sometimes it's "sexy" for good reason.

d'Kong76 Nov 23 2013 02:47 PM Re: We really ought to talk about Carlos Gonzalez

Mex17 wrote: I would direct you to the past acquisitions of Messrs Hernandez, Carter, and Piazza And Bonilla, Foster, Samuel, Alomar! The list goes on.

batmagadanleadoff Nov 23 2013 02:52 PM Re: We really ought to talk about Carlos Gonzalez

Mex17 wrote: Although the home/road splits should be considered, I would argue that it makes "baseball sense" to add a 28 year old lefthanded hitter with power and a good OBP who also steals bases and plays Gold Glove defense in leftfield and who is signed for the next four years to the team, particularly when there is a gaping hole in the middle of the lineup and a pretty big outfield to cover. "Cause I got news for ya. . . Chris Young isn't the answer, at least not as a centerpiece to an offseason or a lineup. As far as trades changing the tone (or "perception"), I would direct you to the past acquisitions of Messrs Hernandez, Carter, and Piazza (and take one guess who was opposed behind the scenes on that last one. . .and who insisted upon it and pushed it through). Sometimes it's "sexy" for good reason. I'm not hot for Gonzalez, understanding that your acquisition is speculative. Gonzalez is an overrated Coors Effect guy. I'm certainly not against the Mets acquiring 28 year old star players. But the Mets can't afford those guys and Gonzalez ain't one of them, anyway. Look at his lifetime Home/Road splits. Pretty sobering, huh? Adjusting for Citi Field, it's reasonable to believe that as a Met, he might not hit 20 HR's in a season. Getting Keith was a no-brainer. He came cheap. Two very replaceable players and an affordable (even back then) $700K annual salary. The '85 Mets were a contender expected to improve rather than regress. So Carter made a lot of sense. He was baseball's best catcher, offensively and defensively, when the Mets got him.

dinosaur jesus Nov 23 2013 03:45 PM Re: We really ought to talk about Carlos Gonzalez

A total Coors Field creation. A pretty good player, but not an All-Star if he played anywhere else. No way you give up someone with Syndergaard's future to get him.

Frayed Knot Nov 23 2013 04:01 PM Re: We really ought to talk about Carlos Gonzalez

Mex17 wrote: Although the home/road splits should be considered, I would argue that it makes "baseball sense" to add a 28 year old lefthanded hitter with power and a good OBP who also steals bases and plays Gold Glove defense in leftfield and who is signed for the next four years to the team, particularly when there is a gaping hole in the middle of the lineup and a pretty big outfield to cover. Not arguing against adding Gonzalez (or at least considering it) - am disagreeing with your characterization of him as Franchise Changing/Direction Altering, etc., especially as the H/R splits brings him down much closer to average while they'll be paying him $17-20 mil/yr. Would also be wary of the inclusion of Syndergaard. As far as trades changing the tone (or "perception"), I would direct you to the past acquisitions of Messrs Hernandez, Carter, and Piazza (and take one guess who was opposed behind the scenes on that last one. . .and who insisted upon it and pushed it through). Sometimes it's "sexy" for good reason. Carter & Piazza were not just top flight players but top flight catchers and were joining 88 & 90 win teams. They weren't pr moves trying to remake team images, they were baseball additions to teams already competing. Keith, as mentioned, came remarkably cheaply and Cashen himself admitted that he had no idea what Hernandez would bring to the team from a leadership/intangibles standpoint so such things played no part in why he made the trade. Winning builds pr, not the other way around.

Edgy MD Nov 23 2013 04:19 PM Re: We really ought to talk about Carlos Gonzalez

Mex17 wrote: As far as trades changing the tone (or "perception"), I would direct you to the past acquisitions of Messrs Hernandez, Carter, and Piazza (and take one guess who was opposed behind the scenes on that last one. . .and who insisted upon it and pushed it through). I'm guessing Steve J. Rogers on the first. holy chicken on the second.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Nov 23 2013 05:18 PM Re: We really ought to talk about Carlos Gonzalez

Mex17 wrote: As far as trades changing the tone (or "perception"), I would direct you to the past acquisitions of Messrs Hernandez, Carter, and Piazza (and take one guess who was opposed behind the scenes on that last one. . .and who insisted upon it and pushed it through). Keith was nice. So was Gary. But we didn't trade Gooden to get them, nor should Cashen have done so, should that have been required. You splash the pot to get guys when your own wallet is full-to-bursting, and you're on the verge of doing something interesting. We're not there yet, and he isn't the guy. [And, also... come, now, with that stuff at the end.]

Ashie62 Nov 23 2013 09:28 PM Re: We really ought to talk about Carlos Gonzalez

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I agree. Make moves that lead to winning, and the rest will follow. I've been waiting for one for some time now...

Edgy MD Nov 23 2013 09:31 PM Re: We really ought to talk about Carlos Gonzalez

I imagine you've seen one or two.

smg58 Nov 23 2013 09:52 PM Re: We really ought to talk about Carlos Gonzalez

His career OPS+ is 125. Andre Ethier's is 123. Shin-Soo Choo's is 134. Cargo's age and salary still make him very desirable, but there are players of comparable ability available who won't cost anywhere near the same amount in terms of personnel.

batmagadanleadoff Nov 23 2013 11:15 PM Re: We really ought to talk about Carlos Gonzalez

smg58 wrote: His career OPS+ is 125. Andre Ethier's is 123. Shin-Soo Choo's is 134. Cargo's age and salary still make him very desirable, but there are players of comparable ability available who won't cost anywhere near the same amount in terms of personnel. What's his career road OPS+? It's gotta be below average, it would seem. Would multiplying his lifetime OPS+ by his lifetime road tOPS+ give us an estimate? (125 x .76 = 95)