Master Index of Archived Threads


Shakeup Street

Frayed Knot May 26 2014 03:28 PM

Valverde released - Black to be called (back) up. Wonder if he even left town? I held out little hope for this one from the very beginning. He had played his way off of the Tiggers twice within a year, and the answer to the debate we had about two weeks ago over whom to release, Farnsworth or Valverde, turns out to be: Both! I think this probably would have been done earlier except that the ugly BB/IP numbers that most of the Las Vegas staff is putting up made a likely replacement hard to find. Also, Hudgens out as hitting coach, Lamar Johnson is the replacement. Who? ... Yeah, the name is vaguely familiar but I have virtually no memory of his career. That's what happens with those AL West guys. I tend to think of these moves as more of a 'Don't Just Stand there, DO SOMETHING' kind of deal than they are actual strategy, but 31 runs scored over the last dozen games simply isn't cutting it.

Edgy MD May 26 2014 03:48 PM Re: Shakeup Street

Lamar Johnson = very White Sox-y figure. Very professional-hitter-y.

Ashie62 May 26 2014 04:06 PM Re: Shakeup Street

I misread this as Lance Johnson...

Frayed Knot May 26 2014 06:26 PM Re: Shakeup Street

Ashie62 wrote: I misread this as Lance Johnson... So did I initially.

Edgy MD May 26 2014 06:28 PM Re: Shakeup Street

Now I've got disco Grateful Dead in my head.

Zvon May 26 2014 06:36 PM Re: Shakeup Street

Frayed Knot wrote: I tend to think of these moves as more of a 'Don't Just Stand there, DO SOMETHING' kind of deal than they are actual strategy, but 31 runs scored over the last dozen games simply isn't cutting it. Yup.

G-Fafif May 26 2014 07:05 PM Re: Shakeup Street

Since May 3 in Coors Field, Mets' only games with output of more than 5 runs have been the two in MFYS III. Good idea to bring in a new hitting coach on the eve of the trip to CBP. A little bandboxing never hurts the image of the offense.

Edgy MD May 26 2014 07:26 PM Re: Shakeup Street

Hudgens calls out the boobirds on the way out the door.

John Cougar Lunchbucket May 26 2014 07:44 PM Re: Shakeup Street

Was a little surprised to hear this but I suppose it's Sandy's way of admitting some culpability as Hudgens was quite obviously one of his guys. I'm sure nobody believes the switch over to Lamar Johnson (has a house next door to Chet Lemon in my memory) will really do anything but as said above Offense without having fired Hudgie was rotten too. I suspect if anything strategic it's a last attempt to make a love connection with Chris Young.

metirish May 26 2014 07:54 PM Re: Shakeup Street

Carig on Twitter with quotes form Hudgens acting all pissed about he criticism from the SBY booth Marc Carig ? Hudgens: "... Well what do you want to swing at? It just confounds me. It's just hilarious, really." Marc Carig ? Hudgens: "I just shake my head at the old school guys that have it all figured out. Go up there and swing the bat..." Marc Carig ? Hudgens also referenced criticism of Mets hitting approach by SNY broadcast crew. "I'm glad I don't have to listen to those guys anymore."

Frayed Knot May 26 2014 07:57 PM Re: Shakeup Street

Here's the problem when looking for reasons not to have to carry guys like Farnsworth & Valverde Vic Black - 17 games, all in relief: 17 walks in 18.2 innings pitched in AAA Vegas Joel Carreno - 14 games, 2 starts: 13 walks in 28 innings Josh Edgin - 17 games, all in relief: 11 / 12.2 Erik Goeddel - 17 games, all in relief: 16 / 18.1 Carlos Alvarado - 8 games, 3 starts: 16 / 23.1 Ryan Reid - 13 games, all in relief: 11 / 20 Jeff Walters - 20 games all in relief: [u:3ruy5vpu]31 hits[/u:3ruy5vpu] in 17.1 IP Zack Thornton (acquired in the Ike deal) is looking better: 14 games, 17.1 IP; 2.60 ERA; 1.21 WHIP; 13/4 K/BB as is Miguel Socolovich: 19 games; 25.2 IP; 3.86 ERA; 1.48 WHiP; 25/8 and (36 y/o) Buddy Carlyle: 15 games; 17.1 IP; 1.56 ERA; 1.10 WHIP; 20/5

Nymr83 May 26 2014 08:01 PM Re: Shakeup Street

Hits don't worry me if you are striking people out and not walking people, the babip will even out. The guys with all te walks worry m e, but I would rather see if they can turn it around than keep throwing an older guy who I feel won't out there.

Frayed Knot May 26 2014 08:08 PM Re: Shakeup Street

Nymr83 wrote: Hits don't worry me if you are striking people out and not walking people, the babip will even out. The guys with all te walks worry m e, but I would rather see if they can turn it around than keep throwing an older guy who I feel won't out there. Maybe, especially since Walters (the only guy where I mentioned hits) isn't striking guys out either (10 in 17 innings). The only good sign is that there are only 2 HRs among those hits. But, still, 2.25 base runners per/inning is a recipe for disaster no matter how you slice it and there'd have to be a shitload of regression to the mean before that line begins to even get close to smelling good.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 26 2014 08:29 PM Re: Shakeup Street

metirish wrote: ?Hudgens also referenced criticism of Mets hitting approach by SNY broadcast crew. "I'm glad I don't have to listen to those guys anymore." So... he was, like, listening to those guys? Like, in-game? Or did he DVR the games, go home, and listen to the guys then?

metirish May 26 2014 08:31 PM Re: Shakeup Street

here it is Meanwhile, Hudgens told Newsday about the critical SNY booth: "I'm glad I don't have to listen to those guys anymore. I just shake my head at the old-school guys that have it all figured out. Go up there and swing the bat. Well what do you want to swing at? It just confounds me. It's just hilarious, really."

SteveJRogers May 27 2014 05:08 AM Re: Shakeup Street

Edgy MD wrote: Hudgens calls out the boobirds on the way out the door. *sigh* Guess the "True New Yorkers" is more than just a stupid social media contest gimmick.

MFS62 May 27 2014 07:50 AM Re: Shakeup Street

Frayed Knot wrote: Hits don't worry me if you are striking people out and not walking people, the babip will even out. The guys with all te walks worry m e, but I would rather see if they can turn it around than keep throwing an older guy who I feel won't out there. Maybe, especially since Walters (the only guy where I mentioned hits) isn't striking guys out either (10 in 17 innings). The only good sign is that there are only 2 HRs among those hits. But, still, 2.25 base runners per/inning is a recipe for disaster no matter how you slice it and there'd have to be a shitload of regression to the mean before that line begins to even get close to smelling good. Ryne Duren was a very effective relief pitcher for the MFYs. He was known for three things: A good fastball. (over 9k per IP) Thick glasses. A famous lack of control (6 BB per IP) He would add to the aura by throwing a warmup pitch to the backstop when he came into a game. Then, he would peer through his glasses, adjusting them frequently. Scared the shit out of the hitters. Not many of them dug in against him. Who knows? Black could be one of those guys. Or, he could be a pitcher who falls behind, has to come in with a fat strike and BAM! We'll see, Later

Edgy MD May 27 2014 07:55 AM Re: Shakeup Street

Relief pitchers in general: [list:13w4prsz][*:13w4prsz]Strike out more people[/*:m:13w4prsz] [*:13w4prsz]Walk more people[/*:m:13w4prsz] [*:13w4prsz]Have much more variance in BAA, but generally hold batters to lower averages.[/*:m:13w4prsz][/list:u:13w4prsz] And that makes sense. When the go-ahead run is on third, you're going to pitch around the hitter a lot more in the seventh or ninth than you would in the third or fifth.

Vic Sage May 27 2014 08:00 AM Re: Shakeup Street

metirish wrote: here it is Meanwhile, Hudgens told Newsday about the critical SNY booth: "I'm glad I don't have to listen to those guys anymore. I just shake my head at the old-school guys that have it all figured out. Go up there and swing the bat. Well what do you want to swing at? It just confounds me. It's just hilarious, really." Actually, i don't disagree with Hudgens on this. I've noticed that, as the losing and non-hitting has mounted (since last season, really), the guys in the booth have all taken to task the hitting philosophy of the team. And that's fine; they're supposed to have opinions and voice them. But the tenor of it has become "these kids today, and their on base percentages; gosh darn it, in my day we tried to drive the run in!" This is coming from good players, like Keith, Ron and Bobby O, who i've come to like as broadcasters generally, and offer insight on other aspects of the game. Of course, if the team was hitting, none of this would be said, but failure breeds blame. I just thought we had a more enlightened set of jocks in our booth. But they sound like good ole boys who've got a problem with them thar statisticals... and whats all this about eevolushin and globil warmin? They are sounding more and more to me like cavemen from a Geiko commercial. The funny thing is (and by funny i mean not funny at all), this criticism is coming from a couple of pitchers who couldn't hit a lick. Darling (in 600 major league at bats) hit .144, with 15 BB and 175k. And he's got a problem with Duda's APPROACH? Ronnie, if you'd taken a few more pitches, you'd have kept yourself in a few more games, helped your team score a few more runs, and would've ended up with a few more wins. so shut up. And Bobby O was even worse! And Keith? Keith is a complete fucking hypocrite on this subject since he had the same kind of hitting approach that he's now excoriating the Mets for promoting. Keith NEVER swung at the first pitch. He'd just spit on it. He'd work the count, and wait for a good pitch to hit. He averaged 80-100 BBs a year and ended with an OBP north of .380. As I recall, he himself was criticized in his own time for sacrificing power to maintain this approach. The difference of course is then he could actually HIT the strike when it came, whereas the clowns wearing the blue and orange today couldn't hit water if they fell out of a boat. I would have hoped an intelligent fellow like Gary Cohen would at least make it interesting by playing devil's advocate, so there was some debate on the issue. But no; he's just a jock sniffer happy to cozy up to whatever view Ron and Keith are spouting at any given moment. So I'm hoping the Mets start hitting, if only to shut the booth up about this.

Edgy MD May 27 2014 08:04 AM Re: Shakeup Street

I think the culture is just washing over these guys. They're popular, but they've got to get with the zeitgeist of contempt or get left behind. Either that, or frustration just makes doubters of us all. I mean, it's natural to distance yourself from a losing formula --- even if it's not the formula at all. When that old skool bullshit rears it's ugly head, Gary can become SUCH a suckup.

Ceetar May 27 2014 08:06 AM Re: Shakeup Street

Vic Sage wrote: So I'm hoping the Mets start hitting, if only to shut the booth up about this. It will never end. At least, not while Duda's here imo. He's become the main target. He can't take a pitch anywhere near the plate without Keith groaning at this point. (This is a guy who both Keith and Ralph absolutely raved about when he first got promoted. They LOVED his swing) And who knows, maybe Duda was TOO patient last year but he was an above average hitter last year and after slumping he's dropped down to an average hitter so far this year. i.e. Not The Problem. Personally I do think they'll start hitting better to at least make this a non-focus. Even just one more actual hitter would go a long way, whether that's Chris Young getting it together, Bobby Abreu taking the proper roll back the clock drugs, someone else, Cesar Puello, den Dekker, Nieuwenhuis or Flores taking SS and actually hitting, or d'Arnaud returning and actually hitting..

John Cougar Lunchbucket May 27 2014 08:18 AM Re: Shakeup Street

I totally agree with everything Hudgens said on the way out, although he is as guilty as the booth guys as over-generalizing the other side's POV. What really troubles me about the whole tenor of the debate around the Mets today is how much of it is rooted in complete misunderstanding -- about the hitting philosophy, about realistic expectations of building a farm, about how many wins is 90, about everything.

Vic Sage May 27 2014 09:04 AM Re: Shakeup Street

i remember when McCarver came along, he was such a breath of fresh air, talking about baseball in an interesting and insightful way that jocks never did. He got irritating and self-aggrandizing toward the end, but for a while i thought we had the best baseball analyst in the biz working Mets games and i was happy about it. Now, not so much.

Frayed Knot May 27 2014 10:46 AM Re: Shakeup Street

Vic Sage wrote: I would have hoped an intelligent fellow like Gary Cohen would at least make it interesting by playing devil's advocate, so there was some debate on the issue. But no; he's just a jock sniffer happy to cozy up to whatever view Ron and Keith are spouting at any given moment. Yeah, don't hold your breath waiting for Gary to bail you out here, he's more anti-Sabermetric than any of them -- not that this is a pure stats-vs-not argument, but he's as likely as anyone to cast a skeptical eye on 'the ways things are done these days' and see a stats-savvy front office as the root of the problem whether it fits in that case or not.

Edgy MD May 27 2014 10:54 AM Re: Shakeup Street

If Keith finds a contrasting viewpoint on anything these days, it's generally from himself having a afterthought.

Vic Sage May 27 2014 11:05 AM Re: Shakeup Street

he's more anti-Sabermetric than any of them -- not that this is a pure stats-vs-not argument, Yes, but it's definitely being cast in that light, setting up the stat-heads as a convenient strawman for them to tear down. I just don't understand why smart baseball players think "work the count and get a good pitch to hit" is some newfangled kind of Sabrmetric boondoggle. And then they misstate the Sabrmetric understanding of strikeouts as "they're not any worse than any kind of outs", so they can sneer at each stranded baserunner and blame OB% for the hitter's inability to move a runner along, or get a guy home from 3rd with less than 2 out.

Ceetar May 27 2014 11:13 AM Re: Shakeup Street

And people forget how hard it is in general. Keith's frequently saying things like "That was a fastball with a lot of plate. That should be over the fence." or "I like it! First-ball fastball hitting!" Notice he never says this when the guy floats the first pitch fastball to LF for an out.

TheOldMole May 27 2014 11:56 AM Re: Shakeup Street

What really troubles me about the whole tenor of the debate around the Mets today is how much of it is rooted in complete misunderstanding -- about the hitting philosophy, about realistic expectations of building a farm, about how many wins is 90, about everything. Wait! I can help with the "how many wins is 90?"

John Cougar Lunchbucket May 27 2014 12:56 PM Re: Shakeup Street

Hudgens to sing to Francessa at 3, then to Kay at 3:30. Sandy supposed to go on with Kay following that. I suppose if you're into intrigue you could ask whether that Hudgens firing was Sandy coming to terms with one of his failings, or perhaps, the "organization" trying to punish Sandy for failing. I could see the latter being true, at least, can see Fred & Jeff vigorously approving the naming of a scapegoat that acknowledges their critics.

Edgy MD May 27 2014 01:11 PM Re: Shakeup Street

Some bloggers seeing Jeffy fingerprints on this that I can't spot.

Ceetar May 27 2014 01:13 PM Re: Shakeup Street Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 27 2014 01:25 PM

Edgy MD wrote: Some bloggers seeing Jeffy fingerprints on this that I can't spot. If your only tool is a hammer, every problem is a nail.

Edgy MD May 27 2014 01:21 PM Re: Shakeup Street

"your" but I hear you. (My only tools are reference books and style manuals.)

John Cougar Lunchbucket May 27 2014 01:57 PM Re: Shakeup Street

Seems as though much was made of the booing and Hernandez comments. Hudgie says he personally didn't like negativity he heard on broadcasts (he watches the hitter hit on video allatime) and said it contributed to negative fan sentiment, which is probably true. On Michael kay interview when asked about Sandy said he could do more if the owners would "let loose the purse strings" and let him do what he could. certain #PurseStrings will be trending soon but about the least surprising thing ever.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 27 2014 05:31 PM Re: Shakeup Street

Frayed Knot wrote: Vic Sage wrote: I would have hoped an intelligent fellow like Gary Cohen would at least make it interesting by playing devil's advocate, so there was some debate on the issue. But no; he's just a jock sniffer happy to cozy up to whatever view Ron and Keith are spouting at any given moment. Yeah, don't hold your breath waiting for Gary to bail you out here, he's more anti-Sabermetric than any of them -- not that this is a pure stats-vs-not argument, but he's as likely as anyone to cast a skeptical eye on 'the ways things are done these days' and see a stats-savvy front office as the root of the problem whether it fits in that case or not. I'd be tempted to chalk up Gary's Saber issues to his being a Baseball-The-Right-Way guy himself-- first from the outside, as a card-collecting kid-- as much as the jock-sniffing, but, well... he calls out quite a few BBTRW tropes/talking points-- Atlanta's "code enforcement," Puig criticism, etc.-- semi-regularly. He's fine with being evenhanded/open-minded, as long as it's not about this particular business.

Edgy MD May 27 2014 05:57 PM Re: Shakeup Street

Talking to Johnson (via tape) right NOW!!!! And philosophically, he sounds exactly like Dave Hudgens. (Did he call Kevin Burkhardt "David"?)

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 27 2014 06:18 PM Re: Shakeup Street

Yes, he does. And, yes, yes, he did. To be fair, white guys mostly do look a little bit alike.

John Cougar Lunchbucket May 28 2014 09:14 AM Re: Shakeup Street

Sure enough Megdal is on the story of "an angry text" followed by "an angry phone call" from Jeff to Sandy during Monday's game, leading to whacking following game. Now, this isn't sourced, and its denied by Sandy, and the Wilpons won't comment.

Edgy MD May 28 2014 10:14 AM Re: Shakeup Street

Howard's got computers, and he's tapping phone lines. The fact that 94 % of fans would have supported the Hudgens move and 138% of fans would have supported the Valverde release, had they been polled after the game, is that mentioned?

batmagadanleadoff May 28 2014 10:28 AM Re: Shakeup Street

Edgy MD wrote: Howard's got computers, and he's tapping phone lines. The fact that 94 % of fans would have supported the Hudgens move and 138% of fans would have supported the Valverde release, had they been polled after the game, is that mentioned? It's about Prince Fredo overruling and undermining Alderson's authority. 94% of the time, I could care less what 94% of Mets fan want.

Edgy MD May 28 2014 10:34 AM Re: Shakeup Street

Well, I certainly care about a culture of hypocrisy. And if Howard whips up another frenzy of populist zeal against the Mets for doing.... exactly what those same irate fans actually wanted them to do, then that's what we have. What did/do you want? Valverde or not Valverde? Hudgens or no Hudgens?

batmagadanleadoff May 28 2014 10:39 AM Re: Shakeup Street Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 28 2014 10:40 AM

Well, I certainly care about a culture of hypocrisy. And if Howard whips up another frenzy of populist zeal against the Mets for doing.... exactly what those same irate fans actually wanted them to do, then that's what we have. What did/do you want? Valverde or not Valverde? Megdal's piece had nothing to do with Valverde's release. I wasn't clamoring for Hudgens' firing. The end of a hitting coach, and a G.M.'s baseball autonomy By Howard Megdal 8:59 a.m. | May. 27, 2014 It's been a common thing, as the Mets have struggled, for the team's C.O.O. to express displeasure with general manager Sandy Alderson. And sure enough, during Monday's disappointing 5-3 loss at home to the Pirates, Jeff Wilpon sent Alderson an angry text, and followed it up with an angry call. Then, after the game, they had an angry meeting. But at that meeting, according to a knowledgeable source, Wilpon did something new: He overruled his general manager on a baseball matter, ordering him to fire hitting coach Dave Hudgens, a longtime Alderson friend and colleague. Alderson, who has been in the job since 2010, delivered the news to Hudgens shortly afterward, in the presence of manager Terry Collins. When he was asked later by reporters about Hudgens' unceremonious post-game termination, Alderson praised Hudgens' work ethic, and stated the obvious, that the team's "situational hitting is not where we want it to be." Asked for comment on Wilpon's role in the firing, Mets spokesman David Newman referred Capital to Alderson's post-firing comments, which did not address it. This incursion into baseball decisions by Wilpon would seem to indicate that Alderson will have limited latitude as he tries to improve the team despite severe payroll constraints. As Hudgens himself put it during a controversial exit interview Monday, "I have nothing but respect for Sandy and no doubt he will turn things around if he's allowed to." Hudgens continued his media tour on Tuesday, casting further doubt on the idea, hopefully suggested in the past by ownership, that Alderson is free to spend as he pleases. "If they want a winner in that town, I would let the purse strings loose and let Sandy do what he wants to do," Hudgens told Michael Kay during the first of two interviews he conducted on New York radio. The Mets have successfully avoided such tours from ex-employees in the past by tying contract compensation to silence, a common tactic. So it is fascinating to see Hudgens speak out in such a forthright way. It's been no secret for some time now that Alderson is dealing with a far smaller budget than he expected, and was repeatedly promised, each year since taking over. It is also no secret that the budget constantly changes on him, forcing his front office to make decisions on players in a vacuum, not knowing whether money approved for, let's say, Chris Young will be available for another player if they were to pass on Young. This is why the same G.M. who has managed to consistently win trades, with full authority and only a mandate to return the best possible minor league talent, fares far worse on the free agent market against teams with clear financial parameters and the ability to spend. And with the fourth draft of the Alderson era coming in just over a week, some of his early drafts, a baseball area where he's had the ability to do as he pleases, are bearing fruit. Brandon Nimmo, his first pick in 2011, flashed power, strong defense and a plus swing when I saw him this weekend for the St. Lucie Mets. He's likely a few weeks from a promotion to Double-A Binghamton, where another Alderson draftee, catcher Kevin Plawecki, is hitting .331 with power. But who will be making those decisions when the 2014 draft comes around? It's one thing for ownership to decline to give Alderson money it doesn't have. It's quite another, autonomy-wise, to force Alderson to fire baseball personnel. Alderson was not aware of how long he'd be restricted from spending when he took the job back in 2010. He's now in the final year of his contract with the Mets, and may not stick around much longer if even the non-budgetary decisions are no longer his to make. After all, if he couldn't overcome Jeff Wilpon's bright ideas and Fred Wilpon's wallet when he had the discretion to make his own baseball decisions, what chance does he have now? http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/m ... l-autonomy

Edgy MD May 28 2014 10:40 AM Re: Shakeup Street

Yeah, and I added Hudgens. I read the article. I'm not sure on the matter. But I'm reserving judgment on how cowed Alderson is by his boss. Megdal is massively wrong often enough.

batmagadanleadoff May 28 2014 10:42 AM Re: Shakeup Street

Edgy MD wrote: Yeah, and I added Hudgens. I read the article. I'm not sure on the matter. But I'm reserving judgment on how cowed Alderson is by his boss. Megdal is massively wrong often enough. Well, I wasn't clamoring for Hudgens's release. That one was far from my mind.

John Cougar Lunchbucket May 28 2014 10:48 AM Re: Shakeup Street

Rubin has passively re-ignited his Fire Alderson campaign. I'm not going down the line and approving each and every decision he'd made but burning it down now would be about as Wilponian as anything.

batmagadanleadoff May 28 2014 10:56 AM Re: Shakeup Street

If I was in the mood to play fortune-teller and Sherlock Holmes behind the scenes at the Mets, I'd speculate that the Wilpons, rather than fire Alderson, would instead make it uncomfortable enough that Sandy won't want to re-up when his contract expires at the end of this season -- if it comes to an Alderson/Mets divorce. The very idea that the Pons hired someone as established and with as much clout and credibility as Alderson to begin with seems to go against everything I believe about those owners.

batmagadanleadoff May 28 2014 11:05 AM Re: Shakeup Street

D'Alessandro: Mets GM Sandy Alderson has thorny issues, and they're related to existing debt loads By Dave D'Alessandro/Star-Ledger Columnist on May 27, 2014 at 11:56 PM, updated May 28, 2014 at 3:03 AM NEW YORK — First things first: No matter how much carping you’ve heard about the Mets this year, it’s always a privilege to come out to the ballpark — especially one that’s built with $900 million in public dollars and named after an insolvent bank that was bailed out with $45 billion in taxpayer-funded TARP money. But the team is losing, and that’s when you see the fur fly: We demand accountability from our team’s custodians, so a few hours after his bullpen gacked up another game, Sandy Alderson did the only logical thing Monday and fired his batting coach. (Your go-to joke being: "Really? The Mets? They have a batting coach?") Then that batting coach went on the chat shows to decry the lack of fan support for this dainty jewel of a team (j’accuse!), and convey that the real problem is ownership clipping the GM’s purse strings. That is obvious to all 15 people sitting in the stands, but it’s the first affirmation you’ve heard from inside Alderson’s circle that the present fiasco cannot change unless ownership green-lights Sandy to spend some of the money that they manage so adroitly. It got weird after that: The general manager doubled back on the chat shows to clean up Dave Hudgens’ parting mess, then he characterized the fans’ anguish as inconsequential to whatever the hell it is they’re doing, and finally he asserted that his team can be frugal and competitive at the same time, though we’ve never seen any proof of this. "We’ve spent $85 million, and we expected a little more at this point in the season than we’ve gotten," Alderson protested before he was contractually obligated to watch the Mets defeated the Pirates at Citi Field Tuesday night. "So I don’t believe payroll is the issue." Frankly, we don’t care. We’re only here to applaud the mounting fan disgust and ask the eternal question: What took so long? We ask because the confluence of deceitful owners, bad baseball, and obscene prices — and the Mets’ annual practice of selling potential instead of actual achievement — is essentially a sucker’s story. It’s a reminder to owners that the chickens have come home to roost in sporting America. And while it’s a shame that nice guys like Hudgens become scapegoats for failing to work miracles with a minor-league lineup, at least he delivered a candid message on his way out the door Tuesday: The fans, irritating as they may be, have been hoodwinked into believing that Alderson has the capital to grow this crumbling baseball business. But Hudgens, like everybody else, knows Sandy’s hands are tied. Yes, even though this franchise has appreciated 500 percent — from the Wilpons’ original purchase price of $391 million, to something north of $2 billion — in just 11 years. Yes, even though they were eighth in revenue among the 30 teams at $265 million last year. Yes, even though they have the ninth-lowest payroll this year. Even though trustee Irving Picard let them off easy by making them pay $162 million to Bernie Madoff’s victims, the Wilpons are still teetering from a crushing debt load. In fact, they were in imminent jeopardy as recently as January, when Bank of America refinanced a $250 million loan that was due at the end of this week. But all that did was buy Fred some time. There are more debt issues that won’t go away, and they’re just as crushing. At the top of the list: The Mets owners took out a loan against its majority stake in SNY. Originally, it was for $450 million, but it’s grown to more than $600 million — and that one is due next year. So maybe you think the Wilpons are just cheap, but Sandy has to sell the narrative that he’s the frugal one. Sure, some teams do more with less. Tampa Bay comes to mind. But comparing teams in different markets is like comparing solar systems. Yes, Alderson has done a fairly lousy job lately. The way he structured his payroll — with four guys taking up more 56 percent of that $85 mil — is intractable. Two of those big-money investments, Chris Young and Curtis Granderson, were hitting a robust .208 combined before last night’s game against the Pirates. The faith he’s shown in Travis d’Arnaud and Ruben Tejada, both Mendoza-Liners, remains mysterious. The decisions he’s made to spackle the holes in the bullpen have been poor. In other words, many of these misdeeds still come back to money. And it still begs the question: Why did we come to the ballpark again? Probably because we’re all awaiting the day for Fred to cash out, and the Mets bring in a new owner who doesn’t manage his business like he hears bloodhounds in the distance. http://www.nj.com/mets/index.ssf/2014/0 ... loads.html

Ceetar May 28 2014 11:22 AM Re: Shakeup Street

You don't fire a hitting coach minutes after a game based on a text and a phone call during that game. And you don't do it via a quick 5 minute meeting. I'm straining to find the conclusion to this tidbit believable.

Edgy MD May 28 2014 11:25 AM Re: Shakeup Street

Yes, but this was an angry text. An angry meeting. So... I don't know what's going on. But if Sandy the marine, with more standing in the game and security in his future than Jeff Wilpon can dream of, got hauled to an arbitrarily called meeting and bullied into making a decision that he was directly opposed to, and then went and executed the decision begrudgingly, with a half a year on his contract, I'd certainly be disappointed in Alderson.

Ceetar May 28 2014 11:26 AM Re: Shakeup Street

Edgy MD wrote: Yes, but this was an angry text. An angry meeting. You misread it. He was actually just playing Angry Birds and making wild demands about the team.

Mets Guy in Michigan May 28 2014 12:17 PM Re: Shakeup Street

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Edgy MD wrote: Yeah, and I added Hudgens. I read the article. I'm not sure on the matter. But I'm reserving judgment on how cowed Alderson is by his boss. Megdal is massively wrong often enough. Well, I wasn't clamoring for Hudgens's release. That one was far from my mind. They had not scored a run in, like, a week. Clearly something wasn't working. It's not a shock to me that a hitting coach was fired when the team hasn't been hitting. I think everyone assumed that Farnsworth and Valverde were merely keeping a seat warm until Black got his stuff together and deGrom and Montero were ready.

Mets Guy in Michigan May 28 2014 12:22 PM Re: Shakeup Street

NEW YORK — First things first: No matter how much carping you’ve heard about the Mets this year, it’s always a privilege to come out to the ballpark — especially one that’s built with $900 million in public dollars and named after an insolvent bank that was bailed out with $45 billion in taxpayer-funded TARP money. I could have, and should have, stopped after this line. That's a awful column. He's more interested in snark than substance.

Edgy MD May 28 2014 12:38 PM Re: Shakeup Street

Not that these things are ever clear, but wasn't $900 million the total cost of the park, not the public share?

batmagadanleadoff May 28 2014 03:36 PM Re: Shakeup Street

Mets axe hitting coach Dave Hudgens, but team’s problems go beyond that After dropping their ninth game in their last 12, the Mets cleaned house on Monday. Not only did they jettison reliever Jose Valverde, who had blown a 3-1 lead by allowing four runs in their 5-3 loss to the Pirates, but they also fired Dave Hudgens, their hitting coach since 2011. The merits of the Valverde move were clear given the pitcher’s performance, but the same can’t be said for that of Hudgens. Like so many hitting coaches before him, he’s a convenient scapegoat for the team’s larger problems. Hudgens took the fall for an offense that has scored just 2.67 runs per game over the span of that 12-game slide, never topping five runs, and that has conspicuously struggled to put runs on the board at Citi Field during his tenure. Since the start of the 2011 season, they’re near the bottom of the majors in home scoring while ranking near the top in road scoring, producing the widest differential of the 30 teams. Here’s the bottom five in the latter category: Tm Home RPG Home Rank Road RPG Road Rank Dif Rank Mets 3.58 27 4.58 5 -1.00 30 Giants 3.48 29 4.47 9 -0.99 29 Mariners 3.39 30 4.09 18 -0.70 28 Dodgers 3.67 26 4.34 13 -0.67 27 Angels 4.20 19 4.80 1 -0.60 26 During that span, the Mets have played to a .421 winning percentage at home compared to a .502 mark on the road. That 81-point discrepancy is the largest in the majors and one of only two that’s even in the red; the Twins, at -.008 (.398 to .407, beware the rounding) are the other. The Mets’ underperformance at home has been even more pronounced thus far this season. They’re 11-17 at Citi Field, scoring just 3.07 runs per game (dead last), compared to 11-11 on the road at 4.95 runs per game (fifth-best) for a whopping ?1.88 runs per game differential (also dead last). Meanwhile, the team’s run prevention at home (4.27 per game since 2011) has more closely resembled that on the road (4.48 per game), such that the discrepancy can’t be chalked up entirely to the ballpark. Compare their offense and that of their opponents at home and on the road: Team AVG/OBP/SLG Home OPS+ AVG/OBP/SLG Road OPS+ Mets .222/.299/.333 75 .252/.322/.378 102 Opponents .242/.321/.382 103 .261/.324/.418 104 Once you adjust for ballpark, the Mets’ opponents have been similarly productive at home and on the road, but the Mets’ utter awfulness at home sticks out like a sore thumb. Basically, they’ve been as productive as a team of Eric Youngs Jr. (career 77 OPS+) at Citi while being a hair above average everywhere else. Looking more closely at the impact of Citi Field, Baseball-Reference.com single-year batting park factors since 2011 are 98, 95, 94 and 92. Note that when it comes to using park factors for ERA+ or OPS+ or WAR, multi-year factors are generally preferable because of sample-size issues. Still, what stands out during that four-season run is that scoring at Citi is actually down since the team moved the fences in between the 2011 and ’12 seasons, by 11 or 12 feet in some spots; at the same time, they shortened the walls from 16 feet to eight. And while more homers have been hit at Citi Field since the fences were moved in (1.44 per game from 2009-11, 1.88 from 2011-14), it hasn’t worked to the Mets’ advantage: The team has been outhomered by 0.4 per game since the change. So the Mets have failed to produce at home. Some of that may be chalked up to a lack of talent; neither Eric Young Jr. (.220/.315/.305) nor Chris Young (.202/.287/.349) merit everyday play, but the two are fourth and eighth on the team in terms of plate appearances despite vying for time in the same outfield. Youngsters Travis d’Arnaud (.196/.274/.314) and Ruben Tejada (.195/.311/.230) are below the Mendoza Line, and the latter has more or less lost his job to Wilmer Flores, who’s just 9-for-39 without an extra-base hit thus far. Only four regulars have hit at league average or better (OPS+ of at least 100): Daniel Murphy (.309/.356/.422, 121 OPS+), Juan Lagares (.290/.336/.435, 118 OPS+), David Wright (.305/.348/.405, 115 OPS+) and Lucas Duda (.236/.310/.400, 101 OPS+) with Curtis Granderson (.212/.318/.376, 98) closing in thanks to a strong May (.938 OPS) on the heels of a dreadful April (.468 OPS). Lagares has been a particularly pleasant surprise given his offensive woes last year, but his 30/8 strikeout-to-walk ratio suggests regression ahead. Duda, despite beating out the since-traded Ike Davis for the first base job, is still underperforming considerably relative to major league first basemen (121 OPS+), so it’s really only three positions where the Mets are gaining an offensive advantage. Hudgens isn’t to blame for that, at least not primarily. General manager Sandy Alderson — who’s been at the helm since October 2010 — is the one who assembled this team, but he’s been hamstrung by pitiful payrolls in the wake of the Mets’ ongoing financial crisis, leading to stopgap solutions at some positions; as the Phillies showed last year, going two Youngs is a poor substitute for a youth movement. Even with the pricey additions of Granderson (four years, $60 million) and Bartolo Colon (two years, $20 million), the team’s $85.5 million payroll ranks 23rd in the majors according to Cot’s Contracts, down 8.8 percent from last year despite playing in the majors’ largest market. Via Alderson’s directive, Hudgens has preached a doctrine of plate discipline founded on hitters’ rates of bases per out (BPO), a crude metric that is the organization’s attempt to emphasize and reward selectivity. If that philosophy has helped, it’s only up to a point; via FanGraphs, the team is swinging at 29.0 percent of pitches outside the zone and 44.7 percent of all pitches, both NL lows, while their 8.0 percent unintentional walk rate ranks second in the league and their 3.86 pitches per plate appearance third. The problem comes when they make contact; where they’re eighth in the league in on-base percentage (.309), they’re 12th in batting average (.237) and last in slugging percentage (.352), and it’s fair to wonder if a more aggressive approach — or at least a less rigid one, tailored more to the individual hitters’ skills — would bear greater fruit. Hudgens was vocal about where the blame in the organization lay after after being notified of his dismissal. Via Newsday‘s Marc Carig: Did Hudgens believe he got a fair shake? “It depends on who you’re talking about, from who,” Hudgens told Newsday Monday night in a phone interview, just a few hours after his dismissal. “From Sandy, from the front office, from the players, from [manager] Terry [Collins], from the other coaches, yeah, absolutely.” He omitted team ownership. Hudgens and Alderson have ties dating to their time with the Athletics organization…. [He] defended the team’s patient hitting approach, which has been bashed by broadcaster Keith Hernandez. “The naysayers, the guys who disapprove of us, the guys who I listen to on TV all the time, those guys that know everything about the game, I’m just amazed at it,” Hudgens said. “What’s wrong with getting a good pitch to hit? Somebody, please punch a hole in that for me. I just shake my head at the old-school guys that have it all figured out. Go up there and swing the bat. Well, what do you want to swing at? It just confounds me. It’s just hilarious, really.” Via MLB.com’s Anthony DiComo, Hudgens felt the team’s problems at home owed to putting too much pressure on themselves: “I really just think guys tried to hard at home. I think the fans are really tough on the guys at home… “You can see it in the statistics. The fly ball rates went up, the swing and miss rates went up at home. I think we were first in the league in runs scored on the road, so I think guys were relaxed on the road. They could just go out and play the game, don’t worry about anything. Then at home, they’re trying to do so much. … When you look at the numbers inside the numbers, and you see exit velocity rates going down at home, you see fly ball rates going up, you see swing-and-miss rates going up, you see chase rates going up a little bit — although we’re best in the league in not chasing pitches out of the zone — I think those things, it just means guys trying to do too much, trying to hard.” To replace Hudgens, the Mets have promoted minor league hitting instructor Lamar Johnson, a former major league first baseman (1974-82) who has worked in the organization as a roving hitting instructor and minor league hitting coordinator since 2005, giving him ties to many of the team’s homegrown players such as Duda, Flores, Lagares, Murphy and Tejada. It’s possible that hearing a similar philosophy from a different voice will help Mets hitters find their groove, particularly at home, but as with all coaching changes, it’s difficult to discern where the responsibility will lay for that. Johnson could well reap the benefit of the team’s home/road splits converging as the team plays more to its true talent level. In the end, Hudgens’ firing reeks of expediency and scapegoating, an effort to find a simple solution to a complex problem by presenting a scalp to the public. Short of firing owners Fred Wilpon and Saul Katz so that Alderson can spend at a market-appropriate level, the cycle will continue, with Collins next in line. http://mlb.si.com/2014/05/27/new-york-m ... e-hudgens/

John Cougar Lunchbucket May 29 2014 07:48 AM Re: Shakeup Street

Here's Roobie on the Megdalism: The Mets labeled the report that Jeff Wilpon ordered the firing of Dave Hudgens “substantively inaccurate.” Substantively, of course, means a considerable amount. In reality, Sandy Alderson, as would be predicted, acknowledged some ownership input in that decision. “What I try to do is evaluate what’s going on on the field and make the appropriate judgments, and that’s my responsibility,” Alderson told John DeMarzo in the Post. “I talk to ownership from time to time. I talk to Fred. I talk to Jeff, and I have a sense of what they’re thinking or what their frustrations may be. But, ultimately, I have to make a baseball decision, I guess, and that’s what this was.”

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr May 29 2014 09:09 AM Re: Shakeup Street

But, ultimately, I have to make a baseball decision, I guess, and that’s what this was.” This part, along with the weird locution, struck me as odd... like he's trying to circle around to the point he realizes he should make.

Edgy MD May 29 2014 09:15 AM Re: Shakeup Street

"I mean, I considered making a Yahtzee decision, and was really tempted by the idea of treating this as a Dungeons & Dragons decision, but ultimately had to accept that the world I was hired into unfortunately isn't ready for that."

Edgy MD Jun 02 2014 09:00 PM Re: Shakeup Street

Lamar Johnson

Mets Guy in Michigan Jun 03 2014 06:15 AM Re: Shakeup Street

Howard might write: Mets would have scored 14 runs and won all five games had ownership not run out of money and traded Ike Davis to save cash.

metirish Jun 03 2014 06:38 AM Re: Shakeup Street

Lamar Johnson Lamar getting a lot of twitter fame recently old friend Brian Bannister ?@RealBanny Lamar Johnson for president. #LGM Bannister still loves his mets https://twitter.com/RealBanny

Edgy MD Jun 03 2014 07:05 AM Re: Shakeup Street

That's pretty awesome. metsguyinmichigan wrote: Howard might write: Mets would have scored 14 runs and won all five games had ownership not run out of money and traded Ike Davis to save cash. HowardMightWrite would be a good thread title/hashtag/website/internet sensation.

batmagadanleadoff Jun 03 2014 11:41 AM Re: Shakeup Street

Edgy MD wrote: That's pretty awesome. Howard might write: Mets would have scored 14 runs and won all five games had ownership not run out of money and traded Ike Davis to save cash. HowardMightWrite would be a good thread title/hashtag/website/internet sensation. There's no doubt in my mind that the Mets chose Duda over Ike because Duda's free agency eligibility is farther away by a year. And if the Mets are worrying about what kind of free agent hit they might get whacked with in 2107 over Ike, two and a half years from now, the Mets are broker than you could imagine.

Ceetar Jun 03 2014 11:48 AM Re: Shakeup Street

There's no doubt in my mind that they traded Ike because Duda was more consistent and/or they simply got a better offer for Ike.

batmagadanleadoff Jun 03 2014 11:53 AM Re: Shakeup Street

And why would the Mets have gotten better offers for Ike, (assuming that's even true ... assuming the Mets were shopping Duda as actively as they were shopping Ike)?

Benjamin Grimm Jun 03 2014 11:56 AM Re: Shakeup Street

And why would they be worrying about paying a high salary to Ike Davis in 2107, when he'll be 120 years old? Or even 2017 for that matter? I think they traded him because he's shown the ability to suck really badly for extended periods.

Ceetar Jun 03 2014 12:03 PM Re: Shakeup Street

batmagadanleadoff wrote: And why would the Mets have gotten better offers for Ike, (assuming that's even true ... assuming the Mets were shopping Duda as actively as they were shopping Ike)? his pedigree? His slightly higher potential? his better defense? Who knows, I'm not Pittsburgh. Maybe he fit better with their philosophy. Maybe he looks good in yellow. But if they'd said "You know, I'd rather have Duda" they'd likely have Duda.