Master Index of Archived Threads


Welcome Back Sandy

Centerfield Jan 08 2016 01:32 AM

Sandy Alderson makes a public appearance. Defends Mets' spending: http://www.nj.com/mets/index.ssf/2016/0 ... es_no.html First off, glad he's feeling better and is able to work. All criticism or praise aside, will be wishing him the best. Secondly, I feel like the Wilpons have definitely handcuffed him again. He is trying to justify this winter, marking the return of Sandy DoubleSpeak: "It's not as if we're not looking to improve the team and if possible, in significant ways, but it has to make some sense in terms of how these pieces all fit," Alderson said. "Even if you go back to the trade deadline, we were trying in many ways to fit a square peg in a round hole. We talked to a number of clubs about players who were going to play right field, left field. How do we improve, and even if it's not the perfect fit, does it still make some sense? Well, for two months, three months, it may make some sense. For five years, six years, it doesn't make a lot of sense to try to do that. So if we had the right fit, if we had the right healthy player in the right position, it might be a very different story for us. "The idea that we're not investing in this team, I think, is really misplaced and sort of tied up in the populism involving Cespedes." It's not about Cespedes Sandy. It's about passing up everyone. There was an incredible amount of talent all available in this amazing free agent class. We watched it all go elsewhere while we squandered money on middling players. That's why this part, in particular, just infuriates me. So if we had the right fit, if we had the right healthy player in the right position, it might be a very different story for us. Here are some of the guys who are free agents or were made available via trade: SP: Zack Greinke, David Price, Johnny Cueto RP: Aroldis Chapman, Joakim Soria, Darren O'Day 1B: Chris Davis 2B: Ben Zobrist SS: Andrelton Simmons, Ian Desmond 3B: Todd Frazier LF: Yoenis Cespedes, Carlos Gonzales (rumored) CF: Jason Heyward, Dexter Fowler, Denard Span RF: Justin Upton, Alex Gordon In other words, there was either an elite (or very good) player available at literally every position except for catcher. Makes me want to pull my hair out. At the end of the day, I think the Mets opted not to upgrade the OF because of the money committed to Juan Lagares. Just unbelievable.

d'Kong76 Jan 08 2016 02:05 AM Re: Welcome Back Sandy

The idea that we're not investing in this team, I think, is really misplaced and sort of tied up in the populism involving Cespedes." Don't tell us what we think! Rinse. Repeat.

Centerfield Jan 08 2016 02:30 AM Re: Welcome Back Sandy

The entire off-season plan of the Mets is coming into focus now. The Mets didn't upgrade the outfield because they never had any intent to upgrade the outfield. And the reason for that is the money committed to Juan Lagares. They are intent on giving him his chance. But they knew that it would be foolish to just run him and his .650 OPS out there. So they looked for a platoon partner that is good enough to give them a boost in production, but not good enough to take his position. That's why we have De Aza, and not Cespedes, Span or even Gerardo Parra. We have been handcuffed this entire off-season because of the extension they gave Juan Lagares in the spring. That made second base the only place they could have upgraded, which explains their unabashed pursuit of Zobrist. Had they gotten Zobrist, they would have cited to him as an upgrade over Murphy, and that would have been their justification for the downgrade in CF. But it didn't happen. And that's why they are scrambling and hiding behind rhetoric. FK called this way back. I didn't want to believe it. Didn't want to believe that a big market team is handcuffed by a $24 million contract spread out over 5 years. But I guess it is what it is.

Frayed Knot Jan 08 2016 02:52 AM Re: Welcome Back Sandy

Centerfield wrote: FK called this way back. I didn't want to believe it. Didn't want to believe that a big market team is handcuffed by a $24 million contract spread out over 5 years. But I guess it is what it is. Well it wasn't just the Lagares contract I was talking about. My point was that we ended the season with 3 OFs under contract for 2016 (4 prior to Cuddyer's retirement) whom they intend to play full-time (Granderson), mostly full-time (Conforto), and at least half-time (Lagares). So when the early off-season lists to the great baseball Santa were asking for top-shelf OFs (Hayward, Upton, Cespedes) I was merely shooting down the idea that any of those guys were going to come here as platoon players whether it was as a L/R platoon or as a positional platoon (this spot one day, that spot the other). I said that importing someone like that would need to be instead of one of the incumbents rather than in addition to. I was fine if someone wanted to work out a FA import in conjunction with a trade but those if/then deals get more complicated and less likely, particularly since you'd be importing someone but losing your best 2015 offensive player in Grandy (which would negate much of the benefit); or trading Conforto (not happening); or selling low on Lagares which would, yes, bring his contract into the equation, but then also make the import have to be a CF, something that would eliminate Upton and, from what we heard, also Cespedes. And, yes, all this assumes that such moves were even monetarily possible in the first place.

Zvon Jan 08 2016 03:00 AM Re: Welcome Back Sandy

Centerfield wrote: The entire off-season plan of the Mets is coming into focus now. The Mets didn't upgrade the outfield because they never had any intent to upgrade the outfield. And the reason for that is the money committed to Juan Lagares. They are intent on giving him his chance. But they knew that it would be foolish to just run him and his .650 OPS out there. So they looked for a platoon partner that is good enough to give them a boost in production, but not good enough to take his position. That's why we have De Aza, and not Cespedes, Span or even Gerardo Parra. We have been handcuffed this entire off-season because of the extension they gave Juan Lagares in the spring. That made second base the only place they could have upgraded, which explains their unabashed pursuit of Zobrist. Had they gotten Zobrist, they would have cited to him as an upgrade over Murphy, and that would have been their justification for the downgrade in CF. But it didn't happen. And that's why they are scrambling and hiding behind rhetoric. FK called this way back. I didn't want to believe it. Didn't want to believe that a big market team is handcuffed by a $24 million contract spread out over 5 years. But I guess it is what it is. Ka know if that's the case, that they are planning on giving Lagares a shot at full time, they should just say that. I can get behind rooting for Lagares to excel. I thought he would a season ago. I wanted him to be our lead-off hitter. And he didn't do bad in spring training but they still dropped him in the line-up. If they are giving Lags a last chance to be a regular CF in NY then just say it, for his and our sakes. Also, De Aza makes even more sense to me in this scenario. If they pitched it right we'd all be getting pumped up to root for Lagares to be what we need.

Centerfield Jan 08 2016 03:29 AM Re: Welcome Back Sandy

Zvon wrote: Also, De Aza makes even more sense to me in this scenario. Right? If you think about it from this perspective, a De Aza type is the only guy that makes sense. Playing this out a little further, the Mets went into the offseason intending to upgrade at 2B, and downgrade in CF and then try to justify it as a wash. (We know better, but this would have been the party line). That is why it had to be Zobrist. Only Zobrist represented an upgrade over Murphy. But Zobrist doesn't work out. The Mets are, however, able to pull off the Walker trade. It makes a ton of sense. Walker for Niese is a great fit for both clubs and it's a financial wash. The problem is, as far as talent, it's also a wash. (This is part of the reason Murphy was not seriously considered, he's not an upgrade over himself.) So if you stay the same at 2B and downgrade in CF, then it's hard not to admit that you have taken a step back. And so, as crazy as this sounds, the Mets, having solved their 2B dilemma in a cost-efficient way, suddenly found themselves standing there in Nashville with money to spend. But you still need to upgrade the offense. How? The OF is, as we mentioned, set. Catcher is fine. First, second and 3B are all accounted for. The only position left is SS. What can we do? Andrelton Simmons is already off the board. And doesn't give you any offense anyway. Ian Desmond is out there. But he's a big risk, was worse than Flores last year with the bat and costs a draft pick. The only option is Asdrubal Cabrera. He's not much of an upgrade, but he's still an upgrade. We can sell this. $18.5 million? Totally do-able. They sweep up Cabrera that same day. De Aza is signed. He's perfect. Good numbers against righties. Not good enough that the fans will clamor to have him play full-time. Soon they will sign a RH bat to replace Cuddyer. Get some bullpen guys. Sign Bartolo. And that's your offseason folks. Key words to justify the winter? Flexibility. "Raise the floor". There weren't many good fits. It's just good enough that enough fans will buy it.

Centerfield Jan 08 2016 03:52 AM Re: Welcome Back Sandy

FK called this way back. I didn't want to believe it. Didn't want to believe that a big market team is handcuffed by a $24 million contract spread out over 5 years. But I guess it is what it is. Well it wasn't just the Lagares contract I was talking about. My point was that we ended the season with 3 OFs under contract for 2016 (4 prior to Cuddyer's retirement) whom they intend to play full-time (Granderson), mostly full-time (Conforto), and at least half-time (Lagares). So when the early off-season lists to the great baseball Santa were asking for top-shelf OFs (Hayward, Upton, Cespedes) I was merely shooting down the idea that any of those guys were going to come here as platoon players whether it was as a L/R platoon or as a positional platoon (this spot one day, that spot the other). I said that importing someone like that would need to be instead of one of the incumbents rather than in addition to. I was fine if someone wanted to work out a FA import in conjunction with a trade but those if/then deals get more complicated and less likely, particularly since you'd be importing someone but losing your best 2015 offensive player in Grandy (which would negate much of the benefit); or trading Conforto (not happening); or selling low on Lagares which would, yes, bring his contract into the equation, but then also make the import have to be a CF, something that would eliminate Upton and, from what we heard, also Cespedes. And, yes, all this assumes that such moves were even monetarily possible in the first place. Right. I know it took some time for me to grasp during our initial discussion, but I think I eventually picked it up. Where I disagreed with you was: 1. I thought the Mets would not let the Lagares contract stand in the way. A star FA bat would command full playing time, so Lagares would have stood to lose at-bats. But I figured it would be fine since we all know Lagares will get plenty of chances anyway, with 2 left handed corner OF's, and inevitable injury. And in a worst case scenario, I figured the Mets wouldn't let this relatively small contract prevent them from making a move big move. 2. I thought the Mets would be willing to platoon Granderson and Lagares in some way. Both players are signed long term, but their numbers call for a platoon. 3. I thought Heyward would have no problem switching between CF and RF. You were right on the first two. Which makes the third one irrelevant.

Frayed Knot Jan 08 2016 04:36 AM Re: Welcome Back Sandy

I look at it this way: - If the theoretical big FA upgrade was either Upton or Cespedes then one of Conforto or Granderson has to go. Upton never was a CF and it's apparent that neither NYM mgmt (nor many of the fans for that matter) sees Cespedes as anything other than a short-term solution there and, as a FA, you don't have the short-term option that they had with the deadline trade. - if it was Heyward then Lagares has to go. Juan's value is as a CF and you don't bring in the most expensive position FA of the year to platoon. I could make an argument that the ideal move would have been Heyward to RF where his glove, range and arm would be an upgrade over Granderson even though the offense would be more or less a wash (46 HRs over the last two season drops to 24). But even that means you need to deal Grandy (tough to do particularly since it would be known that he's excess weight once Heyward is on board) or move him to CF where you give back a lot of defense you just gained and then either admit that you're giving up on a 26 y/o gold glove CF you believed in enough a year ago to sign through his arbitration years (and try to sell him low) or reduce him to a PH/defensive replacement with no hope of winning a full, or really even a partial, role for at least the next two seasons. Would they have pursued Heyward if Granderson's deal were up this winter? The answer to that, I suppose, depends on the actual budget constraints at which point we're back to guessing again. Ideally Cespedes could play RF too but when traded to Boston he balked at even the thought of it. Which then leaves him only LF and then wither Conforto? The other option, and obviously the one they chose, is to get Juan a LH caddy in the hope that plus better health means that his 2016 season is more '14 than '15, figure that your offensive OF upgrade comes both via that and in the form of Conforto over Cuddyer, and instead spend your money on infield upgrades.

Lefty Specialist Jan 08 2016 01:57 PM Re: Welcome Back Sandy

Well, is there any prohibition on Conforto playing RF? His arm is certainly better than Granderson's. All a moot point anyway. They'll add a Raburn/Pierce type and a bullpen arm and they'll be done for the winter, I'd expect.

seawolf17 Jan 08 2016 02:35 PM Re: Welcome Back Sandy

"You know, I spend some time in the hospital, and I come back and find that we've signed Cabrera and De Aza. Clearly I need to not take so many sick days."

Centerfield Jan 08 2016 03:00 PM Re: Welcome Back Sandy

"You know, I spend some time in the hospital, and I come back and find that we've signed Cabrera and De Aza. Clearly I need to not take so many sick days." (Sandy Alderson's office. JP Ricciardi, John Ricco and Paul DePodesta scurry in. Alderson sits at his desk, both hands on his forehead, looking down) Alderson: Someone want to explain this? Ricco: About Cabrera, yeah, that's on us. We read your memo and we um, missed the part about not signing him if we got Walker. Ricciardi: The memo, it was double sided. And usually, they're not double-sided, I mean, why not make it just two pages, then everyone can see... Alderson: What about De Aza? What the fuck guys? Ricco: Well we were just following your orders. That conference call, you said "Sign De Aza". Alderson: (slamming fist) Are you kidding me? I didn't say "Sign De Aza"! I said "Find Piazza". We're supposed to retire his number. Ricco: Right. Got it. That makes more sense. We were wondering, in what circumstance, would De Aza be appropriate... Ricciardi: It was Paul's idea. He made us do it.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 08 2016 03:53 PM Re: Welcome Back Sandy

This is all fun but with Sandy being 68 years old, battling cancer, and arguably having completed the task of turning the Mets from an bloated loser to a value-priced winner, and DePodesta, whose oversight helped to produce much of the current and near-future prospects out the door, and a LONG organizational history of for-shit succession planning it's very easy to imagine this as another one of those moments in history where the org starts spinning wheels again. I don;t mean to say that by not having the first idea of how to effectively replace Devine, or Murphy, or Hodges, or Valentine, or Johnson, or Cashen, or McIlvaine, or Phillips, or Randolph will cause the Mets to also bungle these needed changes, but the fact that the team doesn't appear capable of learning from that all that history is a worry, and if folks are up in arms over what this FO has accomplished behind some of the brightest and most accomplished execs out there, just wait.

Centerfield Jan 08 2016 04:30 PM Re: Welcome Back Sandy

Definitely a concern. But you'd like to think that in this day and age, the Mets would be smart enough to keep smart people in charge. I thought the plan all along was to have either Ricciardi or Depo step in once Sandy retired. Both are good lieutenants from what I hear, but both had underwhelming success when they were in charge with other clubs. So I guess I'm not all that broken up to see Depo walk. Plus, for as famous as he is, the jury is still out on Depo's scouting prowess. Conforto was terrific last year, but we have to wait and see on his other draftees. Nimmo, Cecchini, Smith etc. Not to say they are busts, but we just don't know yet. Plus we have to see if his era delivers 9th and 13th round hidden gems like deGrom and Murphy.

Frayed Knot Jan 08 2016 04:47 PM Re: Welcome Back Sandy

Worth noting that it's Ricco with the title of Assistant General Manager and it's him, rather than DePodesta or Ricciardi, who's been put in charge during Sandy's absences. All of which makes one assume that if there's a plan to promote from within that he'd be the anointed one and not either of the two with prior GM-ing experience.

Benjamin Grimm Jan 08 2016 04:49 PM Re: Welcome Back Sandy

I'm hoping that Sandy will have a say in picking his successor. I read a quote this offseason where Ricciardi said that he wouldn't have the patience that Sandy has shown, so I'd be wary of him becoming the GM. I have no desire to see the Mets rashly trade prospects. (Anyone remember Victor Zambrano?) I wonder if there's anything to be read from the fact that John Ricco seemed to take the lead in Nashville when Sandy wasn't able to attend the winter meetings? [edit: This sentence was posted before I saw Frayed Knot's previous post.]

d'Kong76 Jan 08 2016 04:57 PM Re: Welcome Back Sandy

Alderson: What about De Aza? What the fuck guys? Ricco: Well we were just following your orders. That conference call, you said "Sign De Aza". Alderson: (slamming fist) Are you kidding me? I didn't say "Sign De Aza"! I said "Find Piazza". We're supposed to retire his number. Pretty funny!

Mex17 Jan 09 2016 02:31 PM Re: Welcome Back Sandy

Flexibility. "Raise the floor". And they made a book and a movie about how this worked for an Alderson protege when the protege had a stable of premium young starting pitching. I think that you can argue that we saw another version of the same theme celebrate on our field last fall. Why can't it work for us as well, especially since we (at least theoretically) should have a bigger budget than teams that play in Oakland and Kansas City? I think that the main point that is being missed in this thread is that Alderson basically revealed that he can go as high as $120 million this winter. I see that as a positive trend. . . . Fred: "Sandy, once all of this Madoff stuff is behind us I think we can get back to a $180 million payroll again." Sandy: "That's great, but my professional opinion is that you want to get back up to that level in a gradual and modular manner. We bottom out as much as we can while stockpiling young talent, then start heading back up about $15 to $20 million a year as the young talent we stockpile coagulates and matures together until we hit a point where we have enough of a budget and enough free money within it to lock up a solid core of our own guys when it is in it's prime. The best way to achieve that is to be very careful with when and who to give multi-season deals to with regard to external veteran free agents. The more money we have coming off the books each and every year as we concurrently raise the level of payroll over those same years, the better position we will be in when our own talent gets into their arbitration eligibility, when we can then buy out their remaining arbitration years as well as a solid portion of their free agent seasons so that we can retain them and pay them when they are actually in their prime and not overpay anybody who is past their prime for services rendered to other organizations." Fred: "Alright. We hired you to do a job so go do it." I am not guaranteeing that this specific conversation has ever taken place, but it is just as feasible to speculate on compared to all the doomsday theories that are also out there. In fact, I remember Alderson talking about this very approach when he was first hired, so maybe is is more feasible to speculate on compared to the doomsday theories (although there are days when the doomsday theories appear to carry weight with me also).

John Cougar Lunchbucket Apr 07 2016 02:52 PM Re: Welcome Back Sandy

Anthony DiComo beats out a thoughtful piece on the SandyMan. I'd be shocked if this isn't his last year: [url]http://m.mets.mlb.com/news/article/170882060/mets-gm-sandy-alderson-still-has-goals-to-meet

TransMonk Apr 07 2016 03:09 PM Re: Welcome Back Sandy

All the more reason to win it all in '16!

Benjamin Grimm Apr 07 2016 03:15 PM Re: Welcome Back Sandy

I don't think I'd be shocked if Sandy came back in 2017. Nor, however, would I be shocked if he retired after 2016, especially if the Mets win the World Series this year.

d'Kong76 Apr 07 2016 03:23 PM Re: Welcome Back Sandy

Do it for Sandy! 2016