Master Index of Archived Threads


Sandy Extendo

Edgy MD Dec 21 2017 12:38 AM

The Mets have announced Sandy Alderson has gotten an extension. It's curious that this has been finalized this deep into the winter, and I'm curious to see if this changes the course at all.

Edgy MD Dec 21 2017 03:34 AM Re: Sandy Extendo

Officially, terms have not been announced. That's not particularly surprising, as far as salary goes, but they also haven't released, even by leak, any indication of the duration, leading to speculation that Alderson is going year-to-year, perhaps by choice, perhaps not. "Unfinished business" is the term he used. Maybe he hoped to walk away after this season, but just couldn't after the outcome.

Ashie62 Dec 21 2017 05:59 AM Re: Sandy Extendo

At this point I am Verkempt. The Mets are wearing me out.

Benjamin Grimm Dec 21 2017 01:31 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Daily News reporting that it's two years.

metirish Dec 21 2017 01:33 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Unfinished business , christ , 2015 seems like the aberration I am not at all bent out of shape by this, #metstwitter is in a frenzy , it's natural state really .

MFS62 Dec 21 2017 01:44 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Ashie62 wrote: At this point I am Verkempt. The Mets are wearing me out. (Violating my rule for myself) Verklempt? If you're thinking of fah'klempt (there are alternate spellings) it means choked up with tears of joy. That seems to contradict the rest of your post. Later.

Lefty Specialist Dec 21 2017 02:11 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

I'd like to give Sandy an extension, but it probably wouldn't be as pleasant. Is this to buy his silence on all matters Wilpon for the next two years? Because I can't think of another reason; they have a bare farm system and a team that finished 22 games under .500. Those are not generally conditions that engender job security.

Edgy MD Dec 21 2017 02:19 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

It's not like 2017 was the sum total of his tenure. And the system isn't bare so much as it was in a growing cycle his first few years, and has been pruned the last three.

dgwphotography Dec 21 2017 02:21 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

It's a reward for salary growth below MLB average, and for being a good soldier. He has basically been their shield since he arrived.

Ceetar Dec 21 2017 02:23 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Edgy MD wrote: It's not like 2017 was the sum total of his tenure. And the system isn't bare so much as it was in a growing cycle his first few years, and has been pruned the last three. We are hitting a dead spot, though perhaps it's injury related, but even so, it's on him. Of course, we could be talking about the Mets rich farm system next year. It's hard to take some of these things too seriously, when there's so much variation and randomness. I'm fine with an Alderson extension though, though I guess 2018 will tell us a lot.

Edgy MD Dec 21 2017 02:47 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

I don't know if they're hitting a dead spot or not. It's December. But four of their top five prospects* all "graduated" in the second half of last year, and are neither being counted as among their minor league assets nor particularly among their major league assets this season. It's unclear which of them will perform going forward, but they are certainly still assets. I tend to think teams shouldn't be ranked on their minor league systems so much as their talent under X age. Why should one team get points for having a 22-year-old shortstop in AA, while another team comes up short despite having a 21-year-old shortstop starting in the majors? Beyond that, a bunch of talent got traded off in 2015 and 2016 that would have otherwise been blossoming now, but has yielded a meaningful return in big league wins. According to the MLB.com list, anyhow (#'s 26, 28, and 29, too).

Centerfield Dec 21 2017 03:18 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Sandy has done a terrible job with the farm system. I don't see how anyone can really refute this. In this recent ranking, it was ranked 27th out of 30. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2731 ... ilb-season Now, of course this is subjective, but the low rating is pretty well accepted across the board. And sure, it's easier to have a better farm system when rebuilding, but that hasn't stopped the Yankees, Dodgers, Nationals and Cardinals from being much stronger than us. And that's not just this year. The Dodgers just graduated Bellinger, and that hasn't slowed them down at all. Simply stated, these clubs are just better at developing players. It's not hard to see why. Look at the number of impact players Alderson has drafted and developed. It's Michael Conforto. That's it. The jury is still out on Rosario and Smith, but that's a terrible track record for someone who went through a rebuild and is now in his 7th year. Of the players he traded away, only Michael Fulmer has found success elsewhere. By contrast, the Minaya years produced Harvey, deGrom, Matz, Murphy, Duda, Dickey, Familia, Mejia, Parnell and Flores. Also, Sandy only gets production from the 1st Round (or supplemental first round). Conforto and Fullmer were both first round. So was Smith. Nimmo and Cecchini are role players, but they were also first rounders. He gets nothing after that. No gems like deGrom or Murphy. And yes, 2015 was nice, but that team won only 90 games. The only reason we won the division that year is because the Nationals happened to stumble in 2015. If they had reached the mid-90's win total they typically reach, we would have been WC winners. And that post-season might have been very different. Seven years, two winning seasons. Highest win total is 90. Terrible farm system. The only good thing you can say about Sandy is that he fosters more faith than the Wilpons.

Edgy MD Dec 21 2017 03:36 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Centerfield wrote: Sandy has done a terrible job with the farm system. I don't see how anyone can really refute this. Easy. It was typically ranked around #2 or #3 just a few years earlier, and then in recent years it has both graduated many players, including 4 of their top 5 prospects from the previous season, and been gutted by trades as the 2015 and 2016 team muscled up. Heck, Law ranked it #7 even as recently as last January. It's been a terrible year, but it's like judging an orchard after a pruning.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 21 2017 04:39 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Centerfield wrote: Sandy has done a terrible job with the farm system. I don't see how anyone can really refute this. In this recent ranking, it was ranked 27th out of 30. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2731 ... ilb-season A team's ranking at any one moment in the system is pretty irrelevant, as noted they graduated their best prospects and traded some others to support their pennant run. I wouldn;t say that's a terrible job. Now, of course this is subjective, but the low rating is pretty well accepted across the board. And sure, it's easier to have a better farm system when rebuilding, but that hasn't stopped the Yankees, Dodgers, Nationals and Cardinals from being much stronger than us. And that's not just this year. The Dodgers just graduated Bellinger, and that hasn't slowed them down at all. Simply stated, these clubs are just better at developing players. So are you saying that had Bellinger been with the Mets he wouldn't be as good? Or are you saying that that because the Dodgers picked Bellinger they are better at "developing" them? Which is it? It's not hard to see why. Look at the number of impact players Alderson has drafted and developed. It's Michael Conforto. That's it. Could they do the 2014 draft all over again Conforto would probably be the first pick. The jury is still out on Rosario and Smith because they are 21 and 22 years old. How many guys that age in the big leagues are the juries not out on? Show your work! Of the players he traded away, only Michael Fulmer has found success elsewhere. but that's a terrible track record for someone who went through a rebuild and is now in his 7th year. That would indicate he traded away the right ones, wouldn't it? By contrast, the Minaya years produced Harvey, deGrom, Matz, Murphy, Duda, Dickey, Familia, Mejia, Parnell and Flores. In other words, 1 superstar. Also, Sandy only gets production from the 1st Round (or supplemental first round). Conforto and Fullmer were both first round. So was Smith. Nimmo and Cecchini are role players, but they were also first rounders. He gets nothing after that. No gems like deGrom or Murphy. You're welcome to have Minaya back as GM. Of course he pissed away more useful players for less return in a single trade than Alderson has in seven years. Also, the farm system was generally ranked very poorly in his tenure, with his "top" guys generally big disappointments. I'm not ready to toss aside Zimmo as a guy who won't be a good player. Cecchini looks like a miss, but so have been most of the 1st round guys from that draft. Plenty of non-1st round guys in the system could still make a difference. And you're giving Omar credit for Dickey but not Alderson for Syndergaard? Would that happen to be because it's too far off the agenda? And yes, 2015 was nice, but that team won only 90 games. The only reason we won the division that year is because the Nationals happened to stumble in 2015. If they had reached the mid-90's win total they typically reach, we would have been WC winners. And that post-season might have been very different. Right, the Nationals "happened" to "stumble" into a team with vastly better pitching that beat them 11 of 19 times. What an unfortunate "stumble" for them. The only good thing you can say about Sandy is that he fosters more faith than the Wilpons. I don't believe that either. The Mets had a huge boner for hiring Minaya to make a show of their progressiveism, whereas Sandy was foisted upon the club by MLB in the manner of an activist shareholder proxy because it knew the owners were so fucking stupid they couldn't be trusted to make a decent hire on their own while they were $25M in debt to them. Even when it was clear Omar was the least competent signer and trader in the league, ruining a great 2006 team he built in a rare period of free spending allowed by the club with dumb wasteful signings and terrible personnel decisions wrt managers, they still re-hired him.

Centerfield Dec 21 2017 05:00 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Certainly not advocating the return of Minaya. He wasn't a very good GM, and I have more faith in Sandy than Omar, but he seems to have had talent as a scout. He found a good deal of hidden gems during his time here. Addressing your points: *Bellinger: I'm saying that the Dodgers graduated Bellinger last year but are deep enough to still rank pretty high. Losing your top guys doesn't mean you have to drop if your system is deep enough. *I disagree that Minaya developed one superstar. deGrom is an elite pitcher. Murphy was a strong hitter for us and has turned into an MVP candidate. Harvey was, for a time, the best pitcher in baseball. Dickey won the Cy Young. That's four that could legitimately be called a superstar (even if some of those stars have faded). Familia is one of the best closers in the game, Duda his 30 HR's and is a useful player. Flores is a good sub, and Parnell and Mejia had brief periods of success. This is far better than Alderson's production. *I gave Omar credit for finding Dickey. I'm sure there's some luck involved but the degree of difficulty on finding a journeyman and turning him into a Cy Young winner is much harder than trading a Cy Young winner for a nice prospect haul. Sandy did a great job on that trade, but the topic here was player development. *The Nats didn't stumble that year just because the Mets beat them. If you reverse the head-to-head, and give the Nats 3 more wins, they still don't win the division. The Nats stumbled because they were a flawed team. We were lucky. 90 wins is usually not enough to win a division. Only Texas with 88 wins had fewer wins among the division winners that year. A team truly wanting to win a division should aim for a win total in the mid 90's. Again, I'm certainly not advocating for the return of Omar Minaya. I'm saying that if you look at Sandy's work, objectively, it's hard to argue that he has been successful. Put it another way. If we showed you these seven years of results when Alderson was hired, would you have been happy? No. You would have said I can live with a few years of down years to build a consistent winner. You would not accept years of rebuild, followed by a 90 win season, an 87 win season, then back to losing. The book is still open on Alderson, and he has time to change his legacy, but I just don't see the success to match the high expectations we had in the beginning. On Edit: All I meant by my comment about Rosario and Smith is that we don't know what they will be yet. They are highly regarded, but have just not performed at the ML level yet. Not a knock on either of them or Sandy, just explaining my reasoning for excluding them from the "it's only Michael Conforto" comment.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 21 2017 05:36 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Yeah, well. I wanted to be sure you weren't saying Minaya was a better leader for this franchise because he sure as shit was not and it sounded like it. And when the money went away he was terrible. Sandy has basically never had money, except last year, and that was a mistake. The Dodgers and Yankees and your other favorite teams do. I haven't agreed with everything Sandy has done but that would be the case for any GM. I'm more concerned than anything that there was brain drain in the org that hasn't been addressed since DePodesta left (money) and I was unhappy how last year went because what $$ Sandy had he was sorta foisted with (Bruce, Walker) and that probably, they payroll was drawn up cheaper. That's making this year look worse by comparison. Of course the Wilpons should consider devoting more but we are in agreement they are idiots. As long as we're a cheap-ass team I think Sandy has been pretty good. Good trades for the most part, mixed results in the draft for sure and last year everything went wrong but I wouldn;t say that as a club with the resources here he's bad. I give Omar huge credit for finding Dickey. But Sandy can't get enough for flipping him for Syndergaard and darnaud AND throwing in Omar's prize prospect, Josh Thole! Come on!

Centerfield Dec 21 2017 06:52 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Sorry. Should have been more clear. Sandy's a much better overall GM. But I wouldn't mind having Omar involved some way in scouting. Or really, anyone with more of a baseball background? Again, not sure that is Sandy's strong suit. I don't think he's done a good job with the farm system. Maybe the Wilpons aren't investing enough in some ways? Not sure. I thought Sandy made great trades for Noah and Zack. The results for Zack notwithstanding. I wonder how much of Sandy's subpar win record is a result of not getting clarity on the budget from the Wilpons. For instance, if when he was hired, he was told, hey this is the budget and it's never going above that. I think he would have done a Houston style rebuild. No Granderson, no DJ Carrasco. Etc. But I get the feeling he was told to build a core and that he'd be allowed to spend around it. I think he was told that as recently as October/November. But then they pulled the rug out from under him.

Ceetar Dec 21 2017 07:02 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Maybe the Wilpons knew it was coming and told him, but I believe the Madoff lawsuit hit merely a few months after Sandy was hired. I suspect they were going to try to pare down anyway, given the losing records and the bleeding money bits, but I don't think they realized HOW bad it was going to get (add the economy tanking stuff on top of that) As i said though, lot rides on 2018. If they're a winning team again, then 2017 was a weird injury-laden blip in a series of success. And one that they'd have successfully righted before it got disastrous. If everyone's hurt again and sucks, then it's probably the brief success that was fluky, gambling on the right players at the time, etc.

Nymr83 Dec 21 2017 07:15 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Ceetar wrote: Maybe the Wilpons knew it was coming and told him, but I believe the Madoff lawsuit hit merely a few months after Sandy was hired. I suspect they were going to try to pare down anyway, given the losing records and the bleeding money bits, but I don't think they realized HOW bad it was going to get (add the economy tanking stuff on top of that) well, it depends if Wilpon was another innocent Madoff victim or if he should have known what was coming oe - but we dont really need to re-litigate that issue here i think Sandy has done a good overall job under the circumstances.

Benjamin Grimm Dec 21 2017 07:22 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

I think so too. While some may get exasperated by his patience and restraint, at least he didn't trade Jacob deGrom for Victor Zambrano. That's the kind of thing that a more impulsive GM might have done. I've gotten the impression that JP Riccardi would have a quicker trigger (he's said so) and that John Ricco is the more patient one. When Sandy goes, if one of those two is the heir, I'd prefer Ricco for that reason.

Ceetar Dec 21 2017 07:25 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Nymr83 wrote: Ceetar wrote: Maybe the Wilpons knew it was coming and told him, but I believe the Madoff lawsuit hit merely a few months after Sandy was hired. I suspect they were going to try to pare down anyway, given the losing records and the bleeding money bits, but I don't think they realized HOW bad it was going to get (add the economy tanking stuff on top of that) well, it depends if Wilpon was another innocent Madoff victim or if he should have known what was coming Not really. I mean, they probably should've known the lawsuit was coming, but maybe not just how much of their money it would tie up, how much they might seek in damages (originally like a billion if I recall?) They ultimately only paid(are paying) like $60. They paid $16 million in 2016, and in 2017-2020 they're due to pay about $12 million each year. Theoretically that's a drop in the bucket and something Sterling can easily handle and shouldn't have any effect on the Mets, but in the times while the lawsuit was still going on and they were at risk of much more, they probably couldn't even touch a large portion of their own money that Picard could've determined was not actually theirs, but Madoff victims. Thinking themselves victims, or even just thinking that they'd be viewed is victims, I'm not sure they expected or told Sandy that hundreds of millions of dollars would be inaccessible.

Edgy MD Dec 21 2017 07:26 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I give Omar huge credit for finding Dickey. But Sandy can't get enough for flipping him for Syndergaard and darnaud AND throwing in Omar's prize prospect, Josh Thole! Come on! Dickey signed eight years ago today, to much would-be comic derision. Twenty-three-point-two WARs later and counting, I think it's worked out!

Frayed Knot Dec 21 2017 09:08 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Centerfield wrote: Sandy has done a terrible job with the farm system. I don't see how anyone can really refute this. In this recent ranking, it was ranked 27th out of 30. Sure, but that's just a snapshot in time. Several (hopefully) good players were promoted and no one in the next level has stepped up, at least not dramatically. Now if that next crop never improves then it's going to be a dry couple of years, but we'll have to see how that goes. In short, it's not like a farm system can be managed so as to grow incrementally year by year; good systems lead to promotions which inevitably lead to thinner systems.

Centerfield Dec 22 2017 02:15 AM Re: Sandy Extendo

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Sandy has basically never had money, except last year, and that was a mistake. Sandy has never had money. Last year the Mets splurged and went all the way to 12th in payroll. I hardly call that having money. And I get that you never liked Bruce or Walker, and how you felt that was "extra" salary. But I would love to hear how those two guys, who combined for 3.7 WAR despite being traded away mid-season, constituted a "mistake". John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: The Dodgers and Yankees and your other favorite teams do. Don't really understand this dig at all. The Dodgers and Yankees fund the highest payroll they can to maximize their chances of winning. And they win more often than not. Wanting the Mets to do this makes me a Dodger and Yankee fan? The Dodgers and Yankees have strong farm systems. As far as I can tell, this strength seems to be independent of money. If I want the Mets to do this also, does that make me a Dodger and Yankee fan? The Houston Astros just won the World Series. I want the Mets to do this too. Does that make me an Astro fan?

Nymr83 Dec 22 2017 02:31 AM Re: Sandy Extendo

NY fans would not accept the path the Astros took to win that WS. the Wilpons would never be allowed to bottom out like that.

Edgy MD Dec 22 2017 02:34 AM Re: Sandy Extendo

I think they did in their own fashion, and the Mets beat the Astros to the World Series by two years. The real question is whether to do that again or believe despite the evidence of last season that what they built can continue.

Centerfield Dec 22 2017 02:35 AM Re: Sandy Extendo

Nymr83 wrote: NY fans would not accept the path the Astros took to win that WS. the Wilpons would never be allowed to bottom out like that. I can't speak for other fans, but if the max budget we are ever going to have is middle of the pack, this is our only chance. We have to own up to being a small market team and strategize like one. Tear it down. Rebuild. Stock that farm system, hope they pan out, then take advantage of the small window you have to compete. Lose those players as they get expensive, then tear it down again. Honestly, I much prefer that over mediocrity over and over again.

Centerfield Dec 22 2017 02:40 AM Re: Sandy Extendo

The Astros committed to a rebuild and built a 100 win team. The Mets never committed to rebuilding and built a 90 win team.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Dec 22 2017 06:51 AM Re: Sandy Extendo

The Dodgers and Yankees have strong farm systems. As far as I can tell, this strength seems to be independent of money. Not so. They splash the pot for the cherries in 1-2 year bursts (see: Dodgers spending over $30M in 2015-16, well beyond their $3M international-money allotment; MFYs doing much the same in 2014-15), take the penalties associated therewith, then do the same thing once the penalties are completed. In the meantime, they have traded away major league assets aggressively during the penalty periods when they have been unable to sign players for more than $300K. They do what they've been doing in the domestic FA market, basically-- overspend, but do so smartly, as an investment. They continue to do so.

Centerfield Dec 22 2017 01:12 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

I don’t understand all the specifics of what you just wrote but yeah we should do that. What he said.

Ceetar Dec 22 2017 02:31 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Centerfield wrote: The Astros committed to a rebuild and built a 100 win team. The Mets never committed to rebuilding and built a 90 win team. The Marlins committed to rebuilding, repeatedly, and haven't made the playoffs in 15 years. The Astros have what's practically a historical offense. No. not practically. If you sort team seasons by OPS+ on Baseball Reference, they are literally first. That's way out to the right of the rebuilding standard deviation curve. Some of it's good drafting and development, but a lot of it's luck and timing.

SteveJRogers Dec 22 2017 03:01 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

I’d take a 5 year run of division champion 95-100 win seasons of domination, even with a Wild Card in the mix, despite zero rings over having to scrape and claw late just for the chance to make the postseason as an 85-93 win team every few roster turnover cycles. OE: Yes I’m now aware that their NL Champion 2017 season was the Dodgers’ first over 95 win season since the McCourt era broke bad.

Benjamin Grimm Dec 22 2017 03:08 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

I'm not at all convinced that the only road to winning 100 games is to first allow yourself to lose 100 games. The Arizona Diamondbacks went, literally, from not existing in 1997 to 102 wins in 1999.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 22 2017 03:15 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

I don't think the org can take three consecutive 100-loss seasons and of course there's no guarantee they do everything right if they orchestrate it. A 90-loss campaign when they lost nearly every starting pitcher and their 3 and 4 hitters to injury and the fans are dying to be offended. The 2015 season was one of the best and most satisfying the team ever had and a bunch of dipshits spent spring training raising money to buy a billboard bragging about how tortured they were. We're all in agreement that Wilpons are fools who think they're geniuses.

Centerfield Dec 22 2017 04:58 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Centerfield wrote: Sorry. Should have been more clear. Sandy's a much better overall GM. But I wouldn't mind having Omar involved some way in scouting. Or really, anyone with more of a baseball background? Again, not sure that is Sandy's strong suit. I don't think he's done a good job with the farm system. Maybe the Wilpons aren't investing enough in some ways? Not sure. Wow. How crazy is this. Maybe Fred reads the board. Hi Fred!

TheOldMole Dec 22 2017 05:02 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

I’m glad to see Omar back. I think he’s a good baseball man, and a good talent evaluator.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 22 2017 05:31 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Yeah, I think the fact that he has gotten hired again and again indicates he's got real ability in baseball. I do hope he's not a heartbeat from the presidency, so to speak, bceause that job wasn't good for him: Too little big-picture viewership, destroyed by other teams in trades, not a proven dollars-and-years evaluator, apparently pushed around by underlings, awkward and at times insanely inappropriate understanding of the role of the press and how to interact with them.

Benjamin Grimm Dec 22 2017 05:42 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

My impression is that John Ricco is the guy in the heartbeat seat.

Ceetar Dec 22 2017 06:26 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Benjamin Grimm wrote: My impression is that John Ricco is the guy in the heartbeat seat. My impression is that Ricco is the source of any "against the wishes of the front office" rumors

Centerfield Dec 24 2017 10:26 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: The 2015 season was one of the best and most satisfying the team ever had and a bunch of dipshits spent spring training raising money to buy a billboard bragging about how tortured they were. Those fans were right. The first half of 2015 was miserable and the team was going nowhere. The fans said the addition of Michael Cuddyer wasn’t enough. They were right. Remember how “fun” it was batting Mayberry and Campbell in the middle of our lineup. It wasn’t until the team went and got Cespedes, the legitimate hitter they needed, that the team turned it around. Then they went on one of the most amazing runs we have ever seen. And finished with 90 wins.

Lefty Specialist Dec 26 2017 12:31 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Really. Coming into July 31st, they were 52-50 and had just lost 8-7 to the Padres in the rain in excruciating fashion. Met fans were ready to revolt at that point. Only the next 60 games and the postseason were fun.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 26 2017 03:33 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Centerfield wrote: John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: The 2015 season was one of the best and most satisfying the team ever had and a bunch of dipshits spent spring training raising money to buy a billboard bragging about how tortured they were. Those fans were right. The first half of 2015 was miserable and the team was going nowhere. The fans said the addition of Michael Cuddyer wasn’t enough. They were right. Remember how “fun” it was batting Mayberry and Campbell in the middle of our lineup. It wasn’t until the team went and got Cespedes, the legitimate hitter they needed, that the team turned it around. Then they went on one of the most amazing runs we have ever seen. And finished with 90 wins. No, they were dipshits. They did it while the team was fashioning its best spring training in years and it sat up there overlooking the stadium while the team won in 11 in a row that April, including an 8-0 homestand. It ought to have been clear even then that was what the team was at least capable of. And just like a good team would they adjusted in-season when things went bad (Cuddyer, Wright, dArnaud) through promotions and trades. I can't believe you guys are of the mind that 2015 was some kind of disappointment worthy of fan revolt. The season is long and hard.

41Forever Dec 26 2017 03:59 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: The 2015 season was one of the best and most satisfying the team ever had and a bunch of dipshits spent spring training raising money to buy a billboard bragging about how tortured they were. Those fans were right. The first half of 2015 was miserable and the team was going nowhere. The fans said the addition of Michael Cuddyer wasn’t enough. They were right. Remember how “fun” it was batting Mayberry and Campbell in the middle of our lineup. It wasn’t until the team went and got Cespedes, the legitimate hitter they needed, that the team turned it around. Then they went on one of the most amazing runs we have ever seen. And finished with 90 wins. No, they were dipshits. They did it while the team was fashioning its best spring training in years and it sat up there overlooking the stadium while the team won in 11 in a row that April, including an 8-0 homestand. It ought to have been clear even then that was what the team was at least capable of. And just like a good team would they adjusted in-season when things went bad (Cuddyer, Wright, dArnaud) through promotions and trades. I can't believe you guys are of the mind that 2015 was some kind of disappointment worthy of fan revolt. The season is long and hard. Luckily, I know of an excellent book that will help anyone relive that magical season! Sometimes I think we get so focused on the stuff that is bad that we forget or easily dismiss the things that went well or are going well. The Wilpons have their issues -- some pretty big ones -- but they are far from the worst owners in baseball and not worthy of a revolt. I still think they need G-FAFIF installed as vice president for fan experience and tradition. But the team has been to the postseason two of the last three years, and the last year was considered by all to be a legitimate contender until everyone but Mr. Met was on the disabled list or traded. I'll take that.

Centerfield Dec 26 2017 04:02 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. 2015 was the tale of two seasons. One where they didn't do enough, and one where they did. In 2015 the Mets had the 4th ranked pitching staff in baseball. They were awesome. Post-season caliber, and they were young and under team control. If the team had secured better offense, they would have been a playoff contender. They failed that winter to do so, adding only Michael Cuddyer. Many of us said it wasn't enough before it happened. We were right. Spring training games? Are you really citing to that as evidence of greatness? And sure, the 11 game winning streak was nice, but I don't need to tell you about the dangers of small sample size. The far better indicator of that team's ability was the 52-50 record and their 28th ranked offense in the first half. Then they went out and added the slugger we had been clamoring for. And sure, there were a lot of other factors that worked out as well, but without Yoenis Cespedes that team doesn't come close to being what they were. Post all-star, they had the #3 ranked offense, to go along with all that pitching. And they went to the World Series. The reason I mention the 90 games is that we were incredibly lucky that year. If the Nats had their typical 95 win season, we still lose that division and are left with a 1 game play in. It's dangerous to tread water for 102 games, then hope to catch fire for the last 60. A good team puts itself in a position to start winning from Opening Day. And again, if a 90 win season is the pinnacle of our greatness, I would say we are not aiming high enough.

Centerfield Dec 26 2017 04:04 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

41Forever wrote: The Wilpons have their issues -- some pretty big ones -- but they are far from the worst owners in baseball and not worthy of a revolt. I'm willing to listen on this one. I don't really know a lot about other owners. Who is worse?

batmagadanleadoff Dec 26 2017 04:07 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Edgy MD wrote: I think [the Mets did an Astros style tear-down] in their own fashion, and the Mets beat the Astros to the World Series by two years. If by they did it, you mean they didn't. Because when you're three or four years away from contention, the very last kind of player you sign up is an over the hill 30 year old in decline who's nevertheless gonna command a very high salary given his past MVP caliber level of play and solid citizen status. Like David Wright.

batmagadanleadoff Dec 26 2017 04:09 PM Re: Sandy Extendo Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Dec 26 2017 04:16 PM

Centerfield wrote: 41Forever wrote: The Wilpons have their issues -- some pretty big ones -- but they are far from the worst owners in baseball and not worthy of a revolt. I'm willing to listen on this one. I don't really know a lot about other owners. Who is worse? I'm not willing to listen. This is more of the same hooey gooey cotton candy up with people nonsense you always get here. Whether the Wilpons are or aren't the worst owners is a meaningless and pointless standard by which to judge them. You're gonna tell me that it'd be a huge consolation if there were worse MLB owners out there? And besides, the Wilpons might in fact be baseball's worst owners when you consider what they have to work with, and the gargantuan competitive advantages they have from owning a team from NYC.

batmagadanleadoff Dec 26 2017 04:15 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Nymr83 wrote: NY fans would not accept the path the Astros took to win that WS. the Wilpons would never be allowed to bottom out like that. "would never be allowed?" Who wouldn't allow them? You? The Wilpons are supposed to be scared of you?

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 26 2017 04:25 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Centerfield wrote: Spring training games? Are you really citing to that as evidence of greatness? And sure, the 11 game winning streak was nice, but I don't need to tell you about the dangers of small sample size. The far better indicator of that team's ability was the 52-50 record and their 28th ranked offense in the first half. I am citing spring training as the point at which idiots were asking for their mom's credit cards so as to donate to an embarrassing monument to self-pity. And yes I felt that Spring Training/April was meaningful that year in that it demonstrated what the club was capable of. No doubt they surely tested the limits but any 11-game win streak ought to be a sign that a team is good enough to contend. Every team adjusts. You keep going back to this "if the Nationals won 95 games..." I can think of 11 reasons they didn't.

d'Kong76 Dec 26 2017 04:26 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

batmagadanleadoff wrote: This is more of the same hooey gooey cotton candy up with people nonsense you always get here. If one can take a moment to see above their hate for a few posters here and leave their forum prejudices at the door, there's really very little hooey gooey cotton candy nonsense regularly posted here. Certain not always? C'mon.

batmagadanleadoff Dec 26 2017 04:33 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

d'Kong76 wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: This is more of the same hooey gooey cotton candy up with people nonsense you always get here. If one can take a moment to see above their hate for a few posters here and leave their forum prejudices at the door, there's really very little hooey gooey cotton candy nonsense regularly posted here. Certain not always? C'mon. You spent eight years mocking me. Mocking me as if I was some Larry "Bud" Melman chump too oblivious to even realize you were mocking me. Eight years. Even though I never did anything to you other than, after a while, to retaliate. Then after eight years, you finally figured out how to attack my posts, colorably at least, on the merits, so that it would appear that you didn't have some crazy personal obsession with me and that you simply had a difference of opinion. With every single thing I ever wrote.

d'Kong76 Dec 26 2017 04:36 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

You're funny. I stand by my comment ... no hooey gooey nonsense always bbbyyy.

MFS62 Dec 26 2017 04:43 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Take it to the Red Light Forum, guys. That's what its for. This is the baseball forum and this thread is for discussing Sandly Alderson's contract extension. This place isn't personal, its business. Later

Centerfield Dec 26 2017 04:46 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Spring training games? Are you really citing to that as evidence of greatness? And sure, the 11 game winning streak was nice, but I don't need to tell you about the dangers of small sample size. The far better indicator of that team's ability was the 52-50 record and their 28th ranked offense in the first half. I am citing spring training as the point at which idiots were asking for their mom's credit cards so as to donate to an embarrassing monument to self-pity. And yes I felt that Spring Training/April was meaningful that year in that it demonstrated what the club was capable of. No doubt they surely tested the limits but any 11-game win streak ought to be a sign that a team is good enough to contend. Every team adjusts. You keep going back to this "if the Nationals won 95 games..." I can think of 11 reasons they didn't. The Mets were 4-6 against Washington before the deadline. 7-2 against them afterwards. The two losses came on the last weekend of the season after the division was clinched. Cespedes against Washington: 1.046 OPS. We were very lucky that: (1) Washington was in striking distance when we went on our run; (2) the guy we got destroyed them during head-to-head games; (3) that Washington went 23-30 overall during July and August that year.

d'Kong76 Dec 26 2017 04:46 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

MFS62 wrote: Take it to the Red Light Forum, guys. That's what its for. Fuck that, I said nothing wrong.

d'Kong76 Dec 26 2017 04:54 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Now you want to censor me from defending (or at least trying to) the integrity of what gets posted here? Hooey gooey nonsense does not ALWAYS get posted here. RED LIGHT THAT, MFS. Sooner

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 26 2017 05:01 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Centerfield wrote: Centerfield wrote: Spring training games? Are you really citing to that as evidence of greatness? And sure, the 11 game winning streak was nice, but I don't need to tell you about the dangers of small sample size. The far better indicator of that team's ability was the 52-50 record and their 28th ranked offense in the first half. I am citing spring training as the point at which idiots were asking for their mom's credit cards so as to donate to an embarrassing monument to self-pity. And yes I felt that Spring Training/April was meaningful that year in that it demonstrated what the club was capable of. No doubt they surely tested the limits but any 11-game win streak ought to be a sign that a team is good enough to contend. Every team adjusts. You keep going back to this "if the Nationals won 95 games..." I can think of 11 reasons they didn't. The Mets were 4-6 against Washington before the deadline. 7-2 against them afterwards. The two losses came on the last weekend of the season after the division was clinched. Cespedes against Washington: 1.046 OPS. We were very lucky that: (1) Washington was in striking distance when we went on our run; (2) the guy we got destroyed them during head-to-head games; (3) that Washington went 23-30 overall during July and August that year. The 2017 Astros were similarly lucky in that their plane wasn't blown up by terrorists between Games 5 and 6 of the World Series.

MFS62 Dec 26 2017 05:13 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

d'Kong76 wrote: Now you want to censor me from defending (or at least trying to) the integrity of what gets posted here? Hooey gooey nonsense does not ALWAYS get posted here. RED LIGHT THAT, MFS. Sooner Kase, I was commenting on how these spats, generally between 41 and batmags, get in the way of the discussion. You were in the right, and I was supporting what you said. Sorry if you got hit in the cross fire or took it that I was attacking you. We are in violent agreement. :) Later

Centerfield Dec 26 2017 05:25 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

I think I'm getting lost in the back and forth on this argument. My points are fairly straightforward. 1. 2015 was a tale of two teams. First half team, then second half team. 2. The first half team was not good enough. 52-50, 28th ranked offense. 3. After they went out and got the slugger we wanted, the second half team was awesome. 38-22, 3rd ranked offense. 4. A 90 game winner is lucky to win a division. 90 wins would have won zero divisions in 2017.

41Forever Dec 26 2017 05:52 PM Re: Sandy Extendo Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Dec 26 2017 06:45 PM

MFS62 wrote: Now you want to censor me from defending (or at least trying to) the integrity of what gets posted here? Hooey gooey nonsense does not ALWAYS get posted here. RED LIGHT THAT, MFS. Sooner Kase, I was commenting on how these spats, generally between 41 and batmags, get in the way of the discussion. You were in the right, and I was supporting what you said. Sorry if you got hit in the cross fire or took it that I was attacking you. We are in violent agreement. :) Later As am I. I also think that a spat implies two parties are involved, and that's not the case.

Nymr83 Dec 26 2017 05:59 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Centerfield wrote: 4. A 90 game winner is lucky to win a division. 90 wins would have won zero divisions in 2017. In the past 10 years, of the 60 division winners, 5 had exactly 90 wins while 6 more had less than 90 wins... i didn't bother checking the records of all the 2nd place teams (because you could make the argument that many of these teams didn't need the 90+ they won) but basically Centerfield is right - 90 wins is fairly bad odds to win your division. The first half of 2015 sure wasn't magical, but I think the "badness" of it is getting a little overblown too. being barely above 500 and staying in the race until reinforcements arrived - and some guys already on the team started playing better - it wasn't all Cespedes - shouldn't be underrated. setting yourself up to make a run is a whole shit load better than being 5 or 6 games under .500 with nowhere to go

d'Kong76 Dec 26 2017 06:07 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Hence the old school of thought - you can't win the division in April and May but you sure can lose it. When did winning the pennant become a bad thing for Mets' fans? I clearly remember even on the old forum back in spring 2001 there was a lot of dread still over not winning the WS and the notion of raising the NL Championship flag mean very little to most. When I was a kid, just becoming a Mets' fan, being in the WS in 1973 was a really big fucking deal!

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 26 2017 06:15 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Nymr83 wrote: Centerfield wrote: 4. A 90 game winner is lucky to win a division. 90 wins would have won zero divisions in 2017. In the past 10 years, of the 60 division winners, 5 had exactly 90 wins while 6 more had less than 90 wins... i didn't bother checking the records of all the 2nd place teams (because you could make the argument that many of these teams didn't need the 90+ they won) but basically Centerfield is right - 90 wins is fairly bad odds to win your division. Yes but we're talking about the National League East in 2015 and not every team in every year. One thing all 60 of the 60 division winners have in common was that they were "lucky" to some degree, and I'd also say it's likely that 100% of them did something to improve themselves after their season started. I just wouldn't use that fact to justify an embarrassing show of ignorance by fans of those teams.

41Forever Dec 26 2017 06:43 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: One thing all 60 of the 60 division winners have in common was that they were "lucky" to some degree, and I'd also say it's likely that 100% of them did something to improve themselves after their season started. I just wouldn't use that fact to justify an embarrassing show of ignorance by fans of those teams. I agree. I'd say that to win a division, or go all the way and get the ring, requires all kinds of things to break the right way. The Mets in 2015 benefited from the Nats getting banged up and the Nats in 2017 clearly benefited from the Mets disastrous and endless string of injuries. Heck, I always wonder what Chase Utley's takeout of Reben Tejada did to the Mets' chances in the series. They rolled through the Cubs without him, but IIRC, he was having a solid run at short before Utley slide.

Centerfield Dec 26 2017 07:13 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

If you think the sign was embarrassing and foolish I'm not going to argue with you on that. Certainly I think there are better uses of one's money. But the evidence is overwhelming that the idea was correct. The 2015 team, as constructed at the outset was not good enough. Whatever may have happened in spring training or during one subset of games in April, after 102 games, they were two games over .500, with a 28th ranked offense, and four games behind Washington. Once the addition was made, the offense improved (jumped to #3), they went on a tear, and suddenly became a legitimate threat to win it all. Very few times do you see the data line up so perfectly. If you disagree with these results, the burden is on you to prove otherwise. If you are going to call them ignorant, then you have to prove you were right and they were wrong. I don't think that can be done. To your other points: 1. Improvement at the Deadline: I get what you are saying. Good teams improve themselves during the year, so it was premature for everyone to freak out. I disagree. If the team had a pattern of going the extra mile, getting reinforcements in July, perhaps then, one could make the argument that fans should have some faith. But given their history, I see nothing that would have given any of us reason to believe that Cespedes was coming. 2. Luck: Sure. Every team needs a few breaks to go their way. But a 90 win team needs more luck than a 97 win team.

41Forever Dec 26 2017 09:04 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Metsblog has an interesting post, selecting Sandy's five best and worst moves as GM. [url]https://www.sny.tv/mets/news/sandy-aldersons-five-best-and-five-worst-moves-as-mets-gm/263895894 Click on the link to read the details of each move, but: Sandy's five best moves: 5.) Dec. 4, 2013: Signs Bartolo Colon to a two-year deal 4.) Aug. 30, 2015: Acquires Addison Reed from the Diamondbacks for Miller Diaz and Matt Koch 3.) June 5, 2014: Selects Michael Conforto with the 10th overall pick in the MLB Draft 2.) July 31, 2015: Acquires Yoenis Cespedes from the Tigers for Michael Fulmer and Luis Cessa 1.) December 17, 2012: Acquires Noah Syndergaard, Travis d'Arnaud, Wuilmer Becerra, and John Buck from the Blue Jays for R.A Dickey and Josh Thole Honorable Mentions: Signing Curtis Granderson to a four-year deal in Dec. 2013, trading Jon Niese for Neil Walker in Dec. 2015, and trading Carlos Beltran for Zack Wheeler in July of 2011. Sandy's five worst moves: 5.) Dec. 7, 2011: Signs Frank Francisco to a two-year deal worth $12 million 4.) Dec. 23, 2015: Signs Alejandro De Aza to a one-year deal worth $5.75 million 3.) Dec. 7, 2011: Trades Angel Pagan to the Giants for Ramon Ramirez and Andres Torres 2.) Dec. 2, 2013: DFA's Justin Turner 1.) Jan. 6, 2016: Lets Daniel Murphy sign with the Nationals First, honorable mentions are a cop out. If you really want to list seven moves, then call it "Sandy's seven best and worst moves." It's not like you are limited to five. But I digress. I had completely purged Frank Francisco from my memory bank. Totally forgot about him. I also forgot that Walker came in a trade for Niese. I'd make that move again and again. Speaking of Niese, I guess if I was going to add two more to the bad side, I'd point to the Antonio Bastardo signing. Was Sandy responsible for the Collin McHugh trade? I think the Juan Uribe flier turned out pretty good, too.

G-Fafif Dec 26 2017 09:09 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

If we're gonna relitigate the 2015 Mets, it's worth breaking them down into their streakiness. 2-3 (just like '86, it was noted ad infinitum) 11-0 (encompassing the 10-0 homestand that reset expectations) 23-27 (pitching carrying the hitting-AWOL day, featuring the coming of Thor) 0-7 (the obvious and absolute nadir) 16-13 (the arrivals of Johnson, Uribe and Conforto in response to the Zero Brigade lineup) 31-11 (the Cespedes-powered explosion) 6-6 (clinching period) 1-5 (division clinched, regulars rested) It's impossible to subtract any fraction of a season (I can think of a couple of Septembers when that option would have been awesome), but without the miserable June losing streak in which they scored nine runs in seven consecutive losses, the 2015 Mets are a 90-65 outfit, the point being those Mets hung in remarkably well versus a flawed Nationals outfit before the cavalry arrived, never fully collapsing under the weight of their own offensive ineptitude. Overall, a pretty good if incomplete and injury-riddled team that, once reinforced, played extraordinary ball, most notably against their primary rival.

Nymr83 Dec 26 2017 10:06 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

The Francisco and De Aza deals shouldn't be looked at as big negatives. The money on those deals should be trivial to Wilpon, if they didn't work out it doesn't matter. DFA Turner should be #1 because it is pure talent evaluation. Not signing Murphy, who was a free agent, is more than that and he may just not have had monetary approval.

Lefty Specialist Dec 26 2017 10:41 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

G-Fafif wrote: If we're gonna relitigate the 2015 Mets, it's worth breaking them down into their streakiness. 2-3 (just like '86, it was noted ad infinitum) 11-0 (encompassing the 10-0 homestand that reset expectations) 23-27 (pitching carrying the hitting-AWOL day, featuring the coming of Thor) 0-7 (the obvious and absolute nadir) 16-13 (the arrivals of Johnson, Uribe and Conforto in response to the Zero Brigade lineup) 31-11 (the Cespedes-powered explosion) 6-6 (clinching period) 1-5 (division clinched, regulars rested) It's impossible to subtract any fraction of a season (I can think of a couple of Septembers when that option would have been awesome), but without the miserable June losing streak in which they scored nine runs in seven consecutive losses, the 2015 Mets are a 90-65 outfit, the point being those Mets hung in remarkably well versus a flawed Nationals outfit before the cavalry arrived, never fully collapsing under the weight of their own offensive ineptitude. Overall, a pretty good if incomplete and injury-riddled team that, once reinforced, played extraordinary ball, most notably against their primary rival. And that 11 game winning streak that re-set expectations is why Met fans were so grumpy going into the trading deadline. We saw what that team could be, given a little offense. Terry started a Campbell/Mayberry 3-4 in the order to get the Wilpons' attention as much as anything. They got that offense (and more) from Cespedes and Murphy in August, September and October. But Mets teams have been sniffing around the playoffs lots of times in June and July only to crash and burn. So the unease at that point was well earned. My guess is that this year the Mets will probably peak in spring training, and we'll have no angst at the trade deadline. :)

Centerfield Dec 26 2017 10:57 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Nymr83 wrote: The Francisco and De Aza deals shouldn't be looked at as big negatives. The money on those deals should be trivial to Wilpon, if they didn't work out it doesn't matter. DFA Turner should be #1 because it is pure talent evaluation. Not signing Murphy, who was a free agent, is more than that and he may just not have had monetary approval. The worst move he made was signing Michael Cuddyer. That move was wrong on so many levels. 1. Cuddyer was done. Not worth even the modest contract they gave him. 2. They relied on that signing as their big offensive improvement for that off-season. 3. Gave up a first round draft pick for him.

Centerfield Dec 26 2017 10:58 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

On the other hand, one of his best moves was signing Marlon Byrd, who he turned into Dilson Herrera, and eventually Jay Bruce. That is something out of nothing.

Nymr83 Dec 26 2017 11:25 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Yeah, I didn't KNOW that Cuddyer was done, but I sure knew he wasnt worth losing that pick! Dumb CBA rule.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 27 2017 02:01 AM Re: Sandy Extendo

Getting Cuddyer to go away with a year left on his contract was an underrated win. The correct answer is the Pagan trade.

Ceetar Dec 27 2017 03:51 AM Re: Sandy Extendo

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Getting Cuddyer to go away with a year left on his contract was an underrated win. The correct answer is the Pagan trade. Pagan trade was real bad because there were three players involved and we lost the best one. That list is very retroactive. I mean, I'd have kept Turner but it wasn't like it was obvious. The Mets also didn't know (I assume) that the ball was juiced and was going to be further/remain juiced. And like, Michael Cuddyer was a good hitter. He was a good add. _I_ was very happy with that and not alone. In retrospect, with his ditching on his contract, it seems possible he didn't have the drive to fight through an ailing and aging body. Or simply couldn't make the adjustments. Sometimes it's not a slow sloping decline, it's binary and you can't quite do it anymore. You're delusional if you think you knew that he was going to have a career low BB% and nearly a career worst K% and ISO. And even given that he was basically an average player. 2015 was a good and fun year, most of the year. They had a stretch of bad offense with a bit of abysmal offense in the middle, but throughout it all you could tell the Mets could really pitch and that the offense would get tweaked through promotion, chance, or trade and that would work wonders. The Mets ended up winning by 7 games, which was well more than the value added by Cespedes. Maybe it's all intangibles, I mean, Cespedes wasn't even that good coming into that trade. He too was probably a guy that really benefit(s/ed) from the juiced ball. They continued to be pretty good in 2016, though the injury bug hit them hard and they didn't play the Nats as well head to head. The 2018 squad is also pretty good. The Nats are not unbeatable juggernauts. The Mets might legitmately be one Max Scherzer elbow twinge from winning the division again.

Centerfield Dec 27 2017 02:48 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Ceetar wrote: I mean, I'd have kept Turner but it wasn't like it was obvious. The Mets also didn't know (I assume) that the ball was juiced and was going to be further/remain juiced. Absolutely obvious. Cutting Turner was an unforced error. There was no decision to make, they didn't have to make a big financial commitment. There was absolutely no reason to let him go. Every player in your organization is an asset, with the potential to be productive. Cutting one, especially one as versatile as Turner was, for no reason is dumb. And when you make dumb moves, they sometimes come back to bite you in the ass. I wonder if this mistake is made if Minaya is in the organization at the time. Obviously Omar saw something in Turner that warranted him picking him up. You wonder if he would have been ok with just letting him walk.

Nymr83 Dec 27 2017 03:00 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Well, you do have a roster limit of 25 (40 if he still had options and could be sent down), that is a cost for a guy who hadn't shown a ton and was 28 already

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 27 2017 03:18 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

As I recall it, the champion of acquiring Turner was Wayne Krivsky, who'd been in the Cincinnati front office when Turner was signed. Turner had already been given up by the Reds and Orioles when the Mets got him. We've batted this around before but I sensed a strain of dissatisfaction with Turner's off-field behavior when he was a Met. I think they may have seen him as a influence on guys like Ike Davis and Harvey that was out of proportion to his contributions on the field. He also hurt himself a few times in incidents that made it look like he wasn't in shape. It's not entirely fair but the "versatile reserve" is a hugely valuable asset for any team but if they're not in ready to go at all times they are completely worthless. I suspect the club felt that Turner enjoyed too much nightlife to be ready every day.

Centerfield Dec 27 2017 03:38 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

Nymr83 wrote: Well, you do have a roster limit of 25 (40 if he still had options and could be sent down), that is a cost for a guy who hadn't shown a ton and was 28 already The 2014 Mets opening day roster featured Omar Quintanilla, Andrew Brown, Eric Young and Josh Satin. Not exactly a "what do we do with all this talent" type of team.

Edgy MD Dec 27 2017 03:41 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

The Mets have a history stretching back to something like 1996 of seeing infielders blossom after giving up on them. Kent and Vizcaino and Vina and Wigginton and Keppinger and Turner. On one hand, it's a downside of shopping for bigger names, that there's no room for the guys you've been developing. On the other hand, it sometimes demonstrates a lack of faith in the scouting decisions that brought them into your fold in the first place. On the other hand, it speaks well of the scouting decisions in the first place. On the fourth hand, I don't know. But yeah, a guy costs a roster spot and an inflated salary that you believe he isn't worth, so while it certainly represents an error, I wouldn't call it unforced. This is why there are dozens and dozens of non-tenders every year at Thanksgiving. And as for versatility, virtually every reserve/platoon infielder boasts the same calling card. Almost every infielder comes up with the tag of versatility until he loses it by hitting enough to stick somewhere. You don't think Gavin Cecchini would play second, third, short, left, right, third-string catcher, and drive the Zamboni if he thought it would keep him in the bigs? The Mets had three reserve infielders around that time who were better hitters than defenders: Turner, Satin, and Campbell. They cycled one in when another failed. It's a strategy that works until guys run out of options. Turner ran out while another guy was ahead of him on the depth chart. Maybe (probably?) their failure was in not coaching him and conditioning him to his full potential, though he still looks fat to me.

Ceetar Dec 27 2017 05:21 PM Re: Sandy Extendo

also #juicedball but we've litigated this already. I'd be willing to bet that the number of players that 'blossom' under other teams via arb cuts is not something the Mets are way out ahead in. I don't have the time or easy access to look this up though.