Master Index of Archived Threads


should we be talking about Denard Span?

John Cougar Lunchbucket Nov 13 2015 01:49 PM

I think we should. I think if the docs check him out and all looks good, he'd make a nice addition in CF. Can platoon with Lagares, might not break the bank, gets on base and steals. Former teammate of Cuddyer. Uses Twitter to quote bible passages. Knows the enemy pretty well. Non QO'ed.

Benjamin Grimm Nov 13 2015 01:54 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

He'll turn 32 in spring training. Made $9 million last year with the Nationals. Played a full season in 2014 at age 30, with 184 hits, 39 doubles, 50 walks, and 39 steals. What exactly were his health-related issues?

d'Kong76 Nov 13 2015 02:02 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

He's rehabbing from hip surgery... yikes. He started jogging a week or so ago, sounds kinda risky to me. (and aarp-ee too)

Benjamin Grimm Nov 13 2015 02:04 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

Hip surgery sounds a little scary. I wonder how well a doctor can evaluate how he's recovering, and how that would translate to his on-the-field abilities.

d'Kong76 Nov 13 2015 02:08 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

I misread, he was expected to start jogging in two weeks on Nov 6 according to a blurb on rotoworlddotcom...

Benjamin Grimm Nov 13 2015 02:20 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

Washington Post, August 28 wrote: The optimism surrounding Denard Span’s return from back trouble earlier this week morphed quickly to disappointment Friday. The Nationals placed Span on the disabled list with left hip inflammation, and a person familiar with the situation said he will have season-ending hip surgery on Tuesday. Nationals Manager Matt Williams reports the surgery involves the labrum in his hip. Washington Post, September 1 wrote: Denard Span underwent successful surgery on his left hip in New York on Tuesday morning. According to Nationals Manager Matt Williams, a labrum tear in Span’s hip was fixed and some bone was shaved down to clear space. “He’ll recover for a few days and then get to the therapy part of it which starts almost immediately,” Williams said. “He went through it well. Procedure went well. He’s on the road to recovery now.” Before surgery, Span said he expected a 4-6 month recovery. Span, who has been with the Nationals since 2013, is a free agent at season’s end and his Aug. 26 game is likely his last in a Washington uniform. He sounds quite risky. I wonder if he'd go for a one-year contract so he can go to market again next year with a healthy season behind him?

John Cougar Lunchbucket Nov 13 2015 02:21 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

Benjamin Grimm wrote: He'll turn 32 in spring training. d'Kong76 wrote: He's rehabbing from hip surgery... yikes.

metsmarathon Nov 13 2015 02:23 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

i think span is a risk worth taking, provided the price is right.

d'Kong76 Nov 13 2015 02:24 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Me neither!

Benjamin Grimm Nov 13 2015 02:24 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

I guess a tweet is just about as good as a medical report from a physician!

d'Kong76 Nov 13 2015 02:25 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

I'd prefer a tweet from his surgeon!

HahnSolo Nov 13 2015 02:27 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

FWIW in my lurking on Nats boards in August/September, fans loved this guy and pointed to his absence as one of the big reasons they fell short. Otherwise I got nothing.

Benjamin Grimm Nov 13 2015 02:28 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

metsmarathon wrote: i think span is a risk worth taking, provided the price is right. I agree. It looks like he has a pretty high upside. I don't know what the right price would be. The same is true of the length of the contract. One or two years with options that kick in automatically if he's healthy? Would he go for that? I guess it depends on how much competition there is for his services.

Centerfield Nov 13 2015 03:42 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

He didn't get a QO right? That might tell you something.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Nov 13 2015 03:57 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

Yeah that he's not worth a $15-million 1-year contract but we knew that already.

Ashie62 Nov 13 2015 04:51 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

We already have Span and his name is Juan Lagares.

Edgy MD Nov 13 2015 05:06 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

Well, this one bats left-handed and gets on base more prodigiously. So he has the potential to be a nice complementary figure whose redundancy would allow the team to link his playing time to his performance.

Frayed Knot Nov 13 2015 09:18 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

Had a whole slew of injury problems the past year, one just seemed to lead into another. And, yes, I do think his absence was one of several factors that kept the Nats from being what most expected them to be this past season. Would be the leadoff type of guy we've been missing (especially attractive to those on the 'Get Grandy to the middle of the order' campaign). Would want him short-term though just one year probably isn't possible.

Fman99 Nov 13 2015 10:01 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

Ashie62 wrote: We already have Span and his name is Juan Lagares. That's kind of what I was thinking. We need a power bat. Span ain't that. Theoretically losing 30+ HR worth from last year's lineup (Murphy + 1/2 year of Cespedes) and replacing it with a leadoff type?

Edgy MD Nov 14 2015 08:25 AM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

Theoretically, but if Moneyball taught us anything, it's to not try and fill in number stats like that. Work on rates, out rates and safety rates and stuff like that. Else we just get ourselves caught up in a Heyward-or-Cespedes-or-bust situation. But neither of them, while they may cost the moon, are ideal fits either.

Frayed Knot Nov 14 2015 08:41 AM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

Yeah, there's always more than one way to skin el gato. Runs Created/Game (per BB-Ref) Span (2014 + 2015): 5.8, 6.1 Cespedes: 4.6, 6.1 What you give up in power you get back in OBP plus a bushel full of doubles and triples. Now 2015 was only a partial year for Span and 2014 one of his best ones, but the RC numbers between the two are fairly similar given the small-ish sample size of Cespedes's US-based career. And that's all before you bring fielding/running into the equation.

Lefty Specialist Nov 14 2015 10:48 AM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

Go get Parra and you're done. Span may not be old, but he's got an old body.

Edgy MD Nov 14 2015 12:51 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

I'm kind of unable to escape the alternative, more literal meaning of the sentence "Go get Parra and you're done." Parra has had one goodish year, back in 2010. And there he was last year, seemingly in the midst of an excellent one, in his walk season, and he got traded to a contender and absolutely sank. And the Orioles best aspirations sank with him. We could be done, indeed. I can't speak to Span's healthy, but I have more faith in a gimpy Span than a healthy Parra. The best argument I can make for him is that he won't take the sort of commitment that would interfere with a transition to a burgeoning Nimmo or a redeeming Lagares. Buy Span's the better soldier, to me, if neither of those things come to pass. I may need to re-convene the Toaster Oven Society.

Centerfield Nov 14 2015 01:49 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

Edgy MD wrote: Else we just get ourselves caught up in a Heyward-or-Cespedes-or-bust situation. But neither of them, while they may cost the moon, are ideal fits either. I don't understand this at all. Heyward is a 26 year old superstar outfielder who can give you great defense at every outfield position and hit anywhere in the lineup. It's hard to imagine any more of an ideal player than Heyward. If we are applying that logic, neither then, is Span. We have a centerfielder and a leadoff man already. I thought the argument proposed here was that anyone we sign for the OF would have to platoon with Lagares. What makes anyone think Span is willing to do this?

Centerfield Nov 14 2015 02:05 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

And my thoughts on Denard Span... He is a terrific player when healthy and would be a great complement to any team that is in need of his specific set of skills. Leadoff centerfielder. For the Mets, the idea is that they need to offset the lost offense of Cespedes/Murphy. And OF is the most likely arena in which this can happen. Of the outfielders available, even if you take out age and health, Span is the fourth best option. Cespedes, Heyward, and Upton are all better. They have a higher career OPS. Their WAR numbers are higher. And the top three have a higher ceiling than Span. (Each can realistically give you an MVP year. Span, realistically, will not.) Once you factor in age (Span is the oldest and will be 32 next season) and health (speed guy who missed last season and just had hip surgery), it is not even a comparison. Sure, there are many ways to skin a cat, but Span is the worst option of the three. If money were not an option, only a fool would prefer Span to the Big Three. But because money matters, Span is being discussed. For the Mets, clearly money is a limiting factor. Some fans react by saying: "Ok. Then given our budget, let's go get Denard Span." I react with: "WHAT THE FUCK. WHY IS THERE NOT MORE MONEY? FUCK THESE GUYS. GO GET HEYWARD." So, back to Span. If you can get him to sign to reasonable money, reasonable length, get him to platoon with Lagares, and then trade Granderson at the peak of his value, and go get Heyward or Upton as well, then I am all in on Denard Span.

Edgy MD Nov 14 2015 02:38 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

Centerfield wrote: Edgy MD wrote: Else we just get ourselves caught up in a Heyward-or-Cespedes-or-bust situation. But neither of them, while they may cost the moon, are ideal fits either. I don't understand this at all. At all? Neither of those two sentences? As to the first sentence, I don't believe that if the team can't replace each homer of each player lost in the free agent market, they shouldn't shop. As noted, there are many ways to build the best team. With regards to the second sentence, I think it speaks for itself. While both are excellent players, neither are perfect fits, and require some maneuverings in the lineup. I certainly don't mean to suggest this reality makes a deal definitively prohibitive. I only mean to provide some context to suggest that Span not being a power hitter (of the order of Cespedes) should neither be definitively prohibitive.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Nov 14 2015 02:58 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

I do think the reason you'd look elsewhere than Span would be if you might find *his* skills elsewhere (like, if we acquired a leadoff, stolen-base type at shortstop, or 2B or whatever). But if we went and got Desmond and penciled in 20 dingers from him, we wouldn't necessarily need to acquire the homer-iest center fielder out there. Also, barring the unforeseen we can probably forecast more home runs to come from C, 3B, LF, and 2B by doing nothing this offseason.

Centerfield Nov 14 2015 03:07 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

Edgy MD wrote: Edgy MD wrote: Else we just get ourselves caught up in a Heyward-or-Cespedes-or-bust situation. But neither of them, while they may cost the moon, are ideal fits either. I don't understand this at all. At all? Neither of those two sentences? As to the first sentence, I don't believe that if the team can't replace each homer of each player lost in the free agent market, they shouldn't shop. As noted, there are many ways to build the best team. With regards to the second sentence, I think it speaks for itself. While both are excellent players, neither are perfect fits, and require some maneuverings in the lineup. I certainly don't mean to suggest this reality makes a deal definitively prohibitive. I only mean to provide some context to suggest that Span not being a power hitter (of the order of Cespedes) should neither be definitively prohibitive. Agree on the first point. If we swing and miss on the top guys absolutely keep going. Sandy did just that this July when he was relentless. Just confused on the ideal part. Just about any player we sign will require further moves or maneuvering. Including Span. So I don't see how this is an obstacle to signing an elite guy.

Centerfield Nov 14 2015 03:10 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I do think the reason you'd look elsewhere than Span would be if you might find *his* skills elsewhere (like, if we acquired a leadoff, stolen-base type at shortstop, or 2B or whatever). But if we went and got Desmond and penciled in 20 dingers from him, we wouldn't necessarily need to acquire the homer-iest center fielder out there. Also, barring the unforeseen we can probably forecast more home runs to come from C, 3B, LF, and 2B by doing nothing this offseason. Yes, if you went the Desmond route, or went crazy and got Tulo, then yes, Span makes a lot of sense then. Same with second base, if you got power there then same thing. But I don't think there is anyone at 2B.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Nov 14 2015 10:46 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

Just because we lost Big HomeRun Hitter Guy(s) doesn't mean that this is the exact skill set we need to go out and get, or try and replace in the aggregate. He's defensively great, and a consistently good on-base guy, and showed no signs of decline before the hip thing last year. No QO, either. For me, the only issue is health, and if he's willing to prove it by taking a one-year deal, or a couple of years at a steep discount, and Heyward's not an option... well, come to papa.

Frayed Knot Nov 15 2015 08:00 AM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

And besides, no one is saying that Span is THE option to be taken ahead of all others, only that he's AN option to be considered.

Ceetar Nov 16 2015 08:29 AM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

I'd give Span a one year deal right now, but, anything more is going to have to wait. I suspect other teams feel this way too. I think he's really going to have to progress in time/rehab a little bit first, so there are legitimate recovery metrics in place. Of course, maybe you play that risk and gamble with it early when other's are worried. What about something like a one year deal with a second year as a mutual (either/or) option at $9 per?

Centerfield Nov 16 2015 09:10 AM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

Frayed Knot wrote: And besides, no one is saying that Span is THE option to be taken ahead of all others, only that he's AN option to be considered. Fair. And LWFS point is taken as well. I'm just saying if you are going to go the "we don't necessarily need power" route, Jason Heyward basically is a much better, younger, healthier version of Span with tons more upside. (He just costs the Wilpons a lot more.) I like the idea of a "None of us are stars, but we're all great hitters" type of lineup, but for some reason I feel like trying to construct one of these is a lot more tenuous than the "get a masher" approach. And I know it's not logical since your masher could get hungry for Dominican food and get into the wrong cab, but I feel like getting a HR hitter seems like more of a sure thing. And I really hope that the goal this offseason is to be better than the team that ended 2015, rather than to be better than the team that started it.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Nov 16 2015 09:20 AM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

I think the 2016 club can be a lot better than 2015 only by staying healthier longer and playing better D, which are two very achievable goals not requiring a huge outlay of $$.

Benjamin Grimm Nov 16 2015 09:39 AM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

I don't know if we need a "Let's Talk About Jackie Bradley Jr." thread. MLB hot stove: Mets showed interest in this Boston Red Sox outfielder The Mets continue to look for ways to upgrade their offense and one of the places they've looked to is Boston. The team expressed interest in center fielder Jackie Bradley Jr., according to a report by the Boston Globe. They weren't alone. The Globe report says the Royals, Mariners and Cubs talked to the Red Sox as well, and maybe the Nationals. Bradley is an intriguing asset. He is a super defensive center fielder, likely among the best in baseball. And this past season he showed improvement as a hitter, posting an .832 OPS in 255 plate appearances and popped 10 home runs. Writes the Globe: "The GMs we spoke to said Bradley is one of the most coveted outfielders this offseason. "His low cost, his elite defense, and his emerging offense" are major selling points, according to an American League GM. But those are also the reasons Boston wants to keep him." It would make for a quality duo in center field for the Mets if they could procure him. The left-handed hitting Bradley could split time with the right-handed Juan Lagares. Mets pitchers would love it because both are Gold Glove quality defensive players and as platoon players could compliment each other well -- although Bradley actually reverse batting splits for his career, hitting left-handed pitching much better of his over time in the majors. But the Globe reports that the Red Sox don't seem intent on dealing Bradley after acquiring Craig Kimbrel. They used their vast reserve of talent for a reliever and seem likely to look for a starting pitcher in free agency.

Centerfield Nov 16 2015 10:07 AM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span? Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Nov 16 2015 10:32 AM

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I think the 2016 club can be a lot better than 2015 only by staying healthier longer and playing better D, which are two very achievable goals not requiring a huge outlay of $$. Staying healthy and playing better D would help, but I don't think it brings you there. Right now, the team projected to start 2016 is basically the same, except we swap in Herrera for Murphy, and Lagares for Cespedes. (And the bullpen will be different) And definitely, this team is already better defensively. But it's a lot worse offensively. Even if this team managed to stay healthy longer, I don't think the improved defense is enough to offset the lost offense. The only way this team would be a lot better is if they played better defense, stayed healthy, got repeat performances from Granderson, Duda and d'Arnaud (Duda and d'Arnaud are good bets. Granderson is more of a variable), and saw steps forward taken by the young guys (Herrera, Flores, Lagares, Conforto). All while staying healthy in the rotation and at closer. And while all of this is possible, it leaves a lot to chance. They can take some of the guesswork out of this by spending money and bringing in more talent. And while you will never take luck and health out of the picture, adding shit tons of talent gives you more of a safety net. Now, all of that being said, as long as they fill out their pen, I think the current Mets can still be a contender. Maybe even win 90 games again. I think Conforto will be a star. I think Lagares, if he is healthy, will make strides at the plate. And if not, there is always Nimmo who can step in. And I think Granderson and Cuddyer will platoon in RF. And I think Cuddyer, after his surgery, will bounce back with a productive year. And I think our pitching will carry us. But who knows what might happen. That's why I want the Wilpons to open things up and put at team out there that has an upside of 120 wins.

Centerfield Nov 16 2015 10:26 AM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

I don't know if we need a "Let's Talk About Jackie Bradley Jr." thread. MLB hot stove: Mets showed interest in this Boston Red Sox outfielder The Mets continue to look for ways to upgrade their offense and one of the places they've looked to is Boston. The team expressed interest in center fielder Jackie Bradley Jr., according to a report by the Boston Globe. They weren't alone. The Globe report says the Royals, Mariners and Cubs talked to the Red Sox as well, and maybe the Nationals. Bradley is an intriguing asset. He is a super defensive center fielder, likely among the best in baseball. And this past season he showed improvement as a hitter, posting an .832 OPS in 255 plate appearances and popped 10 home runs. Writes the Globe: "The GMs we spoke to said Bradley is one of the most coveted outfielders this offseason. "His low cost, his elite defense, and his emerging offense" are major selling points, according to an American League GM. But those are also the reasons Boston wants to keep him." It would make for a quality duo in center field for the Mets if they could procure him. The left-handed hitting Bradley could split time with the right-handed Juan Lagares. Mets pitchers would love it because both are Gold Glove quality defensive players and as platoon players could compliment each other well -- although Bradley actually reverse batting splits for his career, hitting left-handed pitching much better of his over time in the majors. But the Globe reports that the Red Sox don't seem intent on dealing Bradley after acquiring Craig Kimbrel. They used their vast reserve of talent for a reliever and seem likely to look for a starting pitcher in free agency. Definitely worth kicking the tires. Had an .851 OPS in the minors, so seems he could be a pretty good hitter. What would it take to get him?

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Nov 16 2015 11:05 AM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

Good patience (walk numbers no lower than 11% in a full minor-league season), along with pop. Plus, he kinda reminds me, name-wise, of this guy: But he'd cost a guy or two. Span wouldn't... nor would he cost a draft pick. I'd go 2-3 years, with heavy performance rewards.

Centerfield Dec 10 2015 12:58 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

Back to Denard Span. If we can't get the big hitters (and it's looking more and more like that's the case), Denard Span would be my choice for CF. Very small commitment. Maybe throw in some incentives. No draft pick tied to him. Only problem is that Boras is his agent. So we'll have to wait and see. I'm not convinced about Gerardo Parra. Plus he'd cost a lot more money and wants a long-term deal. Will Venable. I can't believe I have to even mention Will Venable.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 10 2015 01:04 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

Do we really need to TALK about Denard Span? Can't we, just, like, nod in his direction, then purse our lips in terse acceptance once it's all done?

Benjamin Grimm Dec 10 2015 01:10 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

I'm hoping for Span too. On Mets Hot Stove last night, Andy Martino said that Scott Boras has said that Span won't take a one-year deal, and won't go anywhere where he has to platoon. Of course, what Scott Boras says now and what eventually comes to pass may be two different things. But it does seem likely that Span won't sign anywhere until we get into January, so we'll have to wait and see.

A Boy Named Seo Dec 10 2015 01:43 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

Screw Span. What about Corey Dickerson? I feel like maybe we should talk about him a little.

Edgy MD Dec 10 2015 01:53 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

The Mets, like Lisa Simpson, have not had good luck with Coreys.

Vic Sage Dec 10 2015 01:55 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

how about Corey Haim? Corey Feldman? Professor Irwin Corey?

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 10 2015 01:56 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

Can he play CF? I look at Charlie Blackmon a lot myself but you never know what kinda non-Coors hitters these guys might be.

A Boy Named Seo Dec 10 2015 02:49 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Can he play CF? I look at Charlie Blackmon a lot myself but you never know what kinda non-Coors hitters these guys might be. He's played CF, but I don't know if he's a centerfielder. And slightly less crappy away from Coors than Blackmon (Blackmon .695 OPS, Dickerson .724).

TransMonk Dec 10 2015 02:55 PM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

Are we down on Parra?

Centerfield Dec 19 2015 08:57 AM Re: should we be talking about Denard Span?

Denard Span will work out for teams in Tampa after the new year. Boras says this will prove his client's health. I think this makes sense. I had reservations about giving a multi-year deal to a speed guy on the wrong side of 30 coming off of hip surgery. But if he can hit off a tee and shag some fly balls, then I say let's go for it!