Master Index of Archived Threads


Can we trade Julio for him?

Bret Sabermetric Apr 20 2006 03:15 PM

Why [url=http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?statsId=6930]not?[/url]

Yancy Street Gang Apr 20 2006 03:17 PM

I doubt that Tampa would be interested.

mlbaseballtalk Apr 20 2006 03:22 PM

I like how ESPN is behind the ball when it comes to official player photos. When Lance Carter was the lone DRay all star a few years back Jim Rome made a joke about the fact that ESPN.com didn't even have a picture of him on his page, and joked that if he made it into that All Star Game he would never watch a single All Star Game (any sport) ever again. Carter wound up not pitching though, but it was funny that a player selected to an All Star Game did not have his photo on the World Wide Leader's website. Back on topic, would Wiggy want to be Wright's and Delgado's caddy? Can he play the outfield? Isn't the reason why we traded him for Benson was because of the call up of David Wright in the first place? Or maybe do some sort of goofy three way with the Marlins and we get Cabrera, Wigginton and Willis! Lets see, Wright to Marlins for Cabrera and Willis, we trade Juilo to TB for Wiggy...

MFS62 Apr 20 2006 03:27 PM

He wouldn't just be a caddy for Wright and Delgado. He played shortstop in college and second base in the pros. He'd certainly look like a good second base option if Keppenger remains in somebody's doghouse. (Assuming Matsui is terrible again) Of course, anybody with a measurable pulse rate looks better than Valentin. Later

KC Apr 20 2006 03:49 PM

I don't know what they make in 2006, but in 2005 Jorge made approx 7 1/2 times what Ty made and Tampa Bay doesn't strike me as the type of team looking to add payroll for suspect players. OE: duh, the salaries are on the ESPN pages .... it's only about 4 times this season. But still.

Hillbilly Apr 20 2006 03:57 PM

Not you can't he's a Met, not a Red Sox.

Frayed Knot Apr 20 2006 04:00 PM

I actually saw Wiggy on the highlight films last night. He was playing out in LF ... a ball was hit right to him ... he dropped it.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 20 2006 04:04 PM

Some non-Mets fans believe David Wright made three errors yesterday. Is this somehow significant?

seawolf17 Apr 20 2006 04:17 PM

I don't think anyone expects Wright to take home the Gold Glove this year; everybody has bad days. But he's gotta be better defensively than Wigginton. Either way, even eating Julio's salary, I'd make that deal. I don't know why Tampa Bay would want Julio, though.

sharpie Apr 20 2006 04:26 PM

I also remember Wigginton as a godawful second baseman.

Rotblatt Apr 20 2006 04:38 PM

Ah, Ty. He was a fun player to watch and he's having a hell of a season so far. He'd probably be adequate defensively at second, and if he gave us his career line of .262/.325/.438/.763, I'd be pretty darn happy. Still, it's not going to happen, at least not unless we give up someone valuable and cheap.

Johnny Dickshot Apr 20 2006 05:18 PM

sharpie wrote: I also remember Wigginton as a godawful second baseman. Actually he was a poor defensive 3rd baseman for most of his Metly days. I didn't see enuf of him to make a decision of how he could field at 2nd but certainly he was no acrobat out there. I don;t think he'd come in a deal for Julio and not sure he'd bring much more to the bench than say Victor Diaz, who had the same offensive role he would. We need a lefty-hitting Wigginton to replace Valentin a little more badly.

Nymr83 Apr 20 2006 05:53 PM

]He'd probably be adequate defensively at second, and if he gave us his career line of .262/.325/.438/.763, I'd be pretty darn happy. Keppinger can put those numbers up with equal or better defense than Ty Wigginton if thats all you are looking for. Matsui might even be able to do it.

Elster88 Apr 20 2006 09:20 PM

Nymr83 wrote: ]He'd probably be adequate defensively at second, and if he gave us his career line of .262/.325/.438/.763, I'd be pretty darn happy. Keppinger can put those numbers up with equal or better defense than Ty Wigginton if thats all you are looking for. You're pretty sure of yourself for someone who assured the world that Cairo and Anderson were both better players then Matsui at different times over the past ten months. If you think Keppinger is slugging .438 in the Major Leagues you've got some research to do.

Nymr83 Apr 20 2006 09:55 PM

I wasn't a Cairo fan, i just wanted Kaz out, i spent July, Augustr, and September screaming for a prospect to get a chance to no avail. Hernandez isn't a failure yet. Keppinger will give us the .735, who the heck cares if he does it with a little more obp and a little less slg?

Elster88 Apr 20 2006 10:50 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 20 2006 10:54 PM

Keep fighting the good fight. Hopefully either KazMat or AndHer will make the argument an easy win for one of us. Kaz's line after the first at bat... 1.000 / 1.000 / 4.000 / 5.000 ....EVERY YEAR BABY!!!

Nymr83 Apr 20 2006 10:54 PM

I'd be more than happy to see Kaz succeed, but he hasn;t yet and until he does he doesn't deserve to start full-time, all i asked for Hernandez is a reasonable time to show what he can do (which he hasnt had.) If i were the Mets right now i'd cut Valentin on his ass and call up Keppinger, giving Matsui 4-5 starts a week and Keppinger 2 until one of them shows they deserve more or less than than.

Frayed Knot Apr 20 2006 11:42 PM

So AndyHandy hasn't had enough time yet but Valentin's already proved he's worthless? P.S.: Ditto Julio

Nymr83 Apr 20 2006 11:44 PM

Frayed Knot wrote: So AndyHandy hasn't had enough time yet but Valentin's already proved he's worthless? P.S.: Ditto Julio Julio and Valentin have already proven that they stink over the past couple of years, thus a large sample isn't necessary to prove what we already knew.

Frayed Knot Apr 20 2006 11:49 PM

Both have also had success on the big league level, something yong Mr. Hernandez has yet to show. And look, I'm not becoming the president of the fan club for either Julio or Valentin but they're also filling very different roles here. One's a PH off the bench and our only (even potential) lefty power threat (he does have 500+ Xtra-base hits to his credit) while the other is no better than the 4th pen option. The snag w/Hernandez is he was filling a regular spot in the lineup with VERY sub-standard offense.

Nymr83 Apr 20 2006 11:58 PM

Julio hasn't had "success" since 2002 and he's gotten progressively worse every year since then, it was perfectly fair to say "he sucks" before he ever threw a pitch for the Mets. Prefering guys who haven't been good in years over guys who are too young to have ever done anything is the kind of attitude that sunk the Mets for a couple of years and that makes the Pirates the worst run team in baseball the last 10 years or so.

Frayed Knot Apr 21 2006 12:05 AM

How was Steve Trachsel in his first half-year as a Met? Point is, they're not going to throw away Jorge Julio after just 4 innings as if it's proved anything.

Nymr83 Apr 21 2006 12:08 AM

apples and oranges, Traschel was good BEFORE he was a Met. Julio, at the very least, needs to be sent to Norfolk until he proves he isn't still the same guy who had a 5.90 ERA last year.

A Boy Named Seo Apr 21 2006 12:12 AM

Apples and oranges: [url=http://www.improbable.com/airchives/paperair/volume1/v1i3/air-1-3-apples.html]more similar[/url] than peeps think.

Frayed Knot Apr 21 2006 12:16 AM

That may happen yet (sending to Norfolk) although I don't know if there are any obstacles preventing that. If there's a risk that they'd lose him trying I don't think they'll chance it ... not yet anyway. Julio's had some rocky stats lately but is neither old nor untalented at this point in his career. The Trax comparison was merely to point out that at least as many fans were calling for his immediate dismissal (or was it summary execution?) early-on in his NYM tenure as if it was a no-doubt addition by subtraction move. P.S. It would have sucked if we had dumped Robo Hernandez if he started off w/2 or 3 bad innings last year and he had a lot less (potentially) going for him a year ago than Julio does now.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 22 2006 07:54 AM

I just think [url=http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/player?statsId=6930]this guy[/url] would do the Mets some good. He's hit 7 HRs so far and it it's April. I think 7 HRs is Kaz Matsui's high mark for a season, including his first at-bat of the year, and that kind of hitting compensates for so-so defense, not that playing better defense than Matsui is difficult. He earns less than 10% of what Matsui makes. Between Matsui and Benson, if the Mets had decided to hang on to Wiggy instead of making that foolish pennant run in 2004, they'd have had another, oh, 30 million dollars to spend elsewhere over the last few years. Worth considering when you hear them complaining that they already spend too much money on salaries. The idea is to spend that money well, and make defensible choices. The whole Wiggy-for-Benson-for-Julio saga is a series of rash, foolish decisions that will cost the Mets dearly this season, has already cost them dearly, both in terms of wins and dollars, to date. "Ranks 2 (tied) in AL in RBI (17)" --Where would 17 RBI and 7 HRs and a 1.056 OPS in 58 ABs place him on the Mets' leaderboard, I wonder? KC is on record btw as being down on Wiggy this year, so I'm interested in tracking this closely. He might be my favorite MLB player-- he was when he played in Queens, and I'm a big believer in loyalty. OTOH, tthey did get Keppinger out of that Benson deal, so their AAA situation has been much improved.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 22 2006 08:05 AM

CURRENT SEASON STATS Year G: ..AB.. R ....H ... ..2B ..HR ...RBI ...... ...OBP SLG OPS AVG 2006 15 ..58 ..10 ....17 .......3 ...7... ..17 ...........349 .707 1.056 . 293 Pro 143. 553. .95..162 ......29.. 67 ...162 ............349 ..707 .1.056 ..293

Nymr83 Apr 22 2006 11:37 AM

Wiggy won't keep hitting like this. Benmson was pitching fine, it was dealing him for Julio that was the mistake, the first trade was fine.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 22 2006 12:04 PM

You don;t think he'll knock in 162 runs? Or hit 67 HRs? Or both? He can practically coast from here through September and he'll put up better numbers than the Mets' secondbase men. Or maybe you'd just rather have a mediocre reliever?

Elster88 Apr 22 2006 01:14 PM

I'd rather have Benson. They ain't trading Wiggy for Julio. They don't want Julio.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 22 2006 02:53 PM

Elster88 wrote: I'd rather have Benson.. Huh.You don't think this club need a powerhiitting 2b man more than they need a starting pitcher? Elster88 wrote: They ain't trading Wiggy for Julio. They don't want Julio. Huh. Why not, do you suppose? Do you think somebody got rubed somewhere along the Wiggy-for-Benson-for-Julio road? Who, oh who, might that someone be, I wonder? All that remains, really, is to trade Julio for a bag of baseballs, and our work here will be done.

Nymr83 Apr 22 2006 04:02 PM

="Bret Sabermetric"] ="Elster88"]I'd rather have Benson.. Huh.You don't think this club need a powerhiitting 2b man more than they need a starting pitcher? ="Elster88"]They ain't trading Wiggy for Julio. They don't want Julio. Huh. Why not, do you suppose? Do you think somebody got rubed somewhere along the Wiggy-for-Benson-for-Julio road? Who, oh who, might that someone be, I wonder? All that remains, really, is to trade Julio for a bag of baseballs, and our work here will be done. For someone who knocks the Mets for their so-called "CYA moves" it's pretty weak for you to be looking at the Benson trade as Wiggy for Julio. the Mets didn't have Wiggington on their roster in January 2006, They had Kris Benson. Are you suggesting they shouldn't have dealt Benson because of who they traded to get him? Isn't that the same twisted logic that says "we've gotta start Zambrano because we traded Kazmir for him"?

Bret Sabermetric Apr 22 2006 04:19 PM

No, I'm suggesting they made a bad deal --forced, no planning, no long range thinking, no real strategic foresight--in acquiring Benson, and then made a worse one in dumping him. if they had hung on to him, foreseeing a day when they might need a 2b man/3b man/ corner OF/ 1B utililty guy who hits the living pis out the ball, hustles constantly, and plays for cheap, they might have saved a few bucks on all the utility players they;'ve been running in and out of here like a Marx brothers movie, or better yet put Wiggy on 2b and saved a fortune on signing Matsui in the first place. Either these guys were so dumb they couldn't see that Wright was going to make a serious move on 3b pretty soon, and that Wiggy might just slide over to 2b, and they could leave Reyes at short and not bother fucking with his development (God knows what harm that did), giving them a cheap holmegrown infield they never had to give another thought to so they could devote their brainpower and wallets to fixing the pitching problem, maybe by bidding on Benson in the offseason, when they could have picked him (or someone similar) up for about what they ended up paying Benson anyway. That's what pisses me off about Wiggy--they had a hole at 2B, they had a solution for that hole, and they give up on the solution because of some CYA move that they were making a pennant run in 2004. Clueless, I tell you, clueless. So now they're stuck iwth this hopeless dipshit Matsui. Christ, they could have picked up Wigggy on waivers this winter. The Pirates were giving him away. Explain that move to me.

Nymr83 Apr 22 2006 04:25 PM

]Christ, they could have picked up Wigggy on waivers this winter. The Pirates were giving him away. Explain that move to me. show me where you said that this winter, the pirates might have had him on waivers but the other 29 clubs were just as low on him at the time.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 22 2006 04:30 PM

Nymr83 wrote: ]Christ, they could have picked up Wigggy on waivers this winter. The Pirates were giving him away. Explain that move to me. show me where you said that this winter, the pirates might have had him on waivers but the other 29 clubs were just as low on him at the time. You're asking for crap from the past now? I'm not sure I pointed it out here. I may have felt that I'd made the point so many times before, no one was interested. But then again I tend to repeat myself so much, I might have posted it.

Nymr83 Apr 22 2006 04:34 PM

]You're asking for crap from the past now? no, but you're making it sound like the mets are idiots for not picking up over the winter, but obviously all 30 clubs didnt want him, so unless you actually said you did want him at the time its unfair to criticize the Mets on that point now.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 22 2006 04:46 PM

Yeah, that's me. I'm unfairly picking on the poor widdle defenseless Metsies again. I hated their guts for trading Wiggy, I ripped them up, down and sideways ever since the trade, I insisted Wiggy was a better player than Matsui from the day we got Matsui, and I'm still saying that today. The only time I changed my story was that day the Pirates put Wiggy on waivers, when for some reason I didn't object to the Mets letting Wiggy go unclaimed, and if I don't feel like doing a tedious search to prove my consistent hatred for the Mets' arrogance and blindness to satisfy you, I'm stuck with that version of reality. You've really trapped me there.

smg58 Apr 22 2006 07:32 PM

Wiggy's start has been as good this year as last year's was awful. He still finished last year with numbers (at least in terms of BA/OBP/SLG)consistent with his career averages, and I'd assume the same thing will happen this year. That being said, he'd still be an offensive upgrade at second base for the Mets, and he'd be an excellent tenth man on a deep team. The Rays need Wiggy as long as Huff is hurt, and since a healthy Huff will get them something at the deadline I'd assume Ty stays in Tampa all year. (PS The Pirates paid the price for bringing in too many young infielders and not giving any of them enough of a chance, and they gave up on Wigginton far too quickly, but nobody said they were any brighter than the Mets.)

Elster88 Apr 22 2006 08:36 PM

Bret Sabermetric wrote: ="Elster88"]I'd rather have Benson.. Huh.You don't think this club need a powerhiitting 2b man more than they need a starting pitcher? Of course I don't. Who on earth thinks this team needs more hitting instead of more pitching? Shirley not the guy who bet the team would be above average in RS and RA this year. Bret Sabermetric wrote: ="Elster88"]They ain't trading Wiggy for Julio. They don't want Julio. Huh. Why not, do you suppose? Do you think somebody got rubed somewhere along the Wiggy-for-Benson-for-Julio road? Who, oh who, might that someone be, I wonder? All that remains, really, is to trade Julio for a bag of baseballs, and our work here will be done. This has been covered all ready. There was really nothing wrong with the Wiggy for Benson deal on our part. We don't need Wiggy's bat. The part where we got "rubed" was Julio for Benson, because Julio reeks...and because we could use a guy for the rotation so we could drop Zambrano in the scrap heap. I've believed this since the day the trade happened. Both of those points have been discussed in full.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 22 2006 09:01 PM

OK, smartass, if the Orioles cut Benson and the Mets sign him today, who would you drop from the rotation? (hint: they ain't dropping Zambrano for anyone. They've already sidetracked several pitchers' careers to keep him in the rotation. The front office has "I WUV Zambrano" tattooed in hot pink on their genitals*. So who else would go?) And you know I thought that yesterday, a hr hitting 2b man would have come in kinda handy. *Watch that Willie.

Elster88 Apr 22 2006 09:25 PM

Who would I drop from the rotation? I'd drop Zambrano. What about my post makes me a smartass? That I answered your questions in full and asked some questions that you refuse to answer? Yeah, sure a HR hitting second baseman would come in handy. But a starter would be more handy than such a second baseman right now. So, once again, Wiggy for Benson was a good deal. Benson for Julio was not.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 22 2006 09:33 PM

Elster88 wrote: Who would I drop from the rotation? I'd drop Zambrano. . Like I said, that ain't happening. We've got a better starter in Heilman, and do you notice Zambrano going to the pen for Heilman any time soon? No, I think if we had Wiggy, even the Mets would have given him a shot and turned your little bobo Matsui into extra-fine granules of sawdust by now. Nah, what am I saying? Matsui makes more more money than Wiggy, so they'd have Wiggy as an all-purpose fill-in guy. Make that "Any sensible club would have given him a shot at 2b by now."

Elster88 Apr 22 2006 09:35 PM

I don't understand your point though. Wiggy's not even on the team. They traded him away, and got something more valuable in return. And they can't prove themselves to be an intelligent franchise by giving a shot to a guy that's not on the team anymore. I'd love to see a Wiggy for Julio deal, mostly because Julio is no good. But if you're hoping for that, then you're as foolish as I am in hoping they will drop Zamby.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 22 2006 09:47 PM

There's an etiology to deals. This problem began with trading Wiggy for Benson. It didn't work out, even if they'd kept Benson. If they'd realized that their own young player was adequate at 2B, they never would have signed Matsui, or shoved Reyes out of position, or created a never-ending 2B problem. But because they lacked the imagination that God gave a grapefruit, they had to jump the FA gun to get Benson. Stupid, stupid , stupid, all part of the Zambrano/Matsui mentality--let's win with this fabulous 2004 squad. 2004 was the perfect spot for a halfway intelligent baseball organization to re-tool--but they refused to to rebuiild, they arrogantly thought they were a contending club that needed a quick fix or two, and they've suffered for their arrogance. Just not enough suffering, to my mind, is all.

duan Apr 23 2006 08:03 AM

jesus christ; ty wigginton moved off 2nd base in 2000. Presumably there's a reasons for that. And sure he's got off to a hot start but it's ONLY at 63 AB that he's had here and there are a host of other guys who've raked in 63 at bats only to prove to be pretty useless over the season. I'll bet you this, if he gets to 450 abs his obp will be below .330 and his OPS will be below .750.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 23 2006 09:00 AM

No, but I'll bet you that if either he or Matsui has the edge in ABs, SLG and OBP, it will be Wigginton who does that.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 23 2006 11:32 AM

duan wrote: jesus christ; I don't really go by "Jesus Christ" anymore, duan. Some people were offended by that avatar, so you can just call me "sal", thanks. Or "bret". Or "you fucking liar." Or whatever you like. I'm used to it. ] ty wigginton moved off 2nd base in 2000. Presumably there's a reasons for that. Yes, and I've already told you what those reasons are: The Mets couldn't recognize a second baseman if winning baseball games depended on having a good one. Which some analysts believe they do. Today, the fucking guy is leading the AL in RBIs. He's on track to to hit 80 HRs and 200 RBIs, both of which would be new MLB records. If he has a shitty season from here on out, it will still be a pretty good season. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=6930 But since Julio had a good game yesterday, do we now have anyone who would not swap Julio for Wiggy? Aside from Duan? And hey, KC, I know you're not responding anymore, but I'm curious which word best describes your feelings about expressing the belief here that Wiggy won't have a good season in 2006: Embarrassed? Amnesiac (remember, I've got archives to help you with your amnesia problems)? Defensive? Abusive? Foolish? Persecuted? Smug? Or am I getting you all tangled in my evil webbery of words again?

Nymr83 Apr 23 2006 01:01 PM

he won't have a good season, not he wont have a good April. Get back to us when Aramis Ramirez isn't hitting under .200, The Yankees aren't a .500 team, and the leaves have had a chance to grow back on the trees.

duan Apr 23 2006 01:56 PM

"And hey, KC, I know you're not responding anymore, but I'm curious which word best describes your feelings about expressing the belief here that Wiggy won't have a good season in 2006: " seriously, since when did a decent start to the season make it a good season. Why wouldn't you take up my bet about the 450 ab, 750 ops nature of his season if you're so convinced he's "having a good one"

Bret Sabermetric Apr 23 2006 04:18 PM

because my point is that he's better (and cheaper) than Matsui, so we never needed to go down this whole sick route. But if you won't take me up on my actual point, I'll take you up on yours. What shall we bet?

duan Apr 24 2006 05:33 AM

A baseball book of your/mine choice via Amazon? [can we cap it at a $25/$30 value - whatever makes sense] and what I am betting is that wiggy will have an ops of less then .750 if he gets to 450 ab (or more)

Nymr83 Apr 24 2006 07:07 AM

450 PA would be fairer to Bret imo, dont penalize the guy if he suddenly starts walking like a madman

duan Apr 24 2006 07:55 AM

well 450 ab/475 pa whichever is fine with me.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 24 2006 07:55 AM

Capping it at $30 is fine, and it's your call if you want to go for 450 ABs or 450 PAs. IOW, you're on.

duan Apr 24 2006 08:48 AM

well why don't we say if he gets over EITHER 450 at bats or 475 plate appearances. That way if he discovers bondsesque plate discipline you don't get caught out by him falling short of the 450 ab,

KC Apr 24 2006 09:38 AM

BS: >>>And hey, KC, I know you're not responding anymore, but I'm curious which word best describes your feelings about expressing the belief here that Wiggy won't have a good season in 2006: Embarrassed? Amnesiac (remember, I've got archives to help you with your amnesia problems)? Defensive? Abusive? Foolish? Persecuted? Smug?<<< I don't think Ty is anything special and neither do most baseball analysts. 2006 is young, I can still be right. If one of the posters here was tooting up their horns about any Mets player after fifteen games they'd look kind of foolish as does someone tootin' Ty's horn (even if it's just to make sport of me).

Bret Sabermetric Apr 24 2006 12:09 PM

So "smug" it is. Thanks.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 24 2006 12:13 PM

duan wrote: well why don't we say if he gets over EITHER 450 at bats or 475 plate appearances. Okay. 25 walks seems pretty easy to me. He's got 5 already.

KC Apr 24 2006 01:02 PM

smug adj - in agreement with most baseball analysts regarding a players skill level

Bret Sabermetric Apr 24 2006 01:49 PM

I'd say that would be "insufferably smug." See also: wrong, stubborn, unwilling to eat dirt if Wiggy plays well in 2006, etc. This is another "you-get-me-coming-AND-going" issue. Until 2006 is in the books, you're all "There's plenty of time left for him to suck, and most baseball analysts says that he will, hahahahaha" and after the season, this is more crap from the past, Bret bragging obnoxiousnessly about how impossibly right he was, etc.

KC Apr 24 2006 02:07 PM

I don't know why anyone should be expected to eat dirt, but I'd have no qualms about acknowledging Ty's breakout season should it happen and giving credit to those who called it.

Nymr83 Apr 24 2006 02:27 PM

lets put 1/3 of the games in the books before we decide who is having a great/terrible season... i still think Wigginton isn't going to be a good player, He's got a nice headstart though so i'd think he can get his final OPS to .750

Vic Sage Apr 24 2006 03:12 PM

Wigginton was moved off 2b in the minors, because he didn't have the range to play the position. They tried him out for some starts in the majors, but weren't impressed. They also gave him starts at 1b and OF. They moved him back to 3b the next season where he had a decent but not great season. He then sucked the following year, and we traded him for a decent SPer because: (1) a decent #3 SPer is better than a mediocre 3bman, and (2) we had a good 3bman in the pipeline. why didn't they move him back to 2b? Because (1) they'd already seen enough of him there to conclude he wasn't the answer, and (2) there was a Japanese MVP-level SS they (and just about every other ML team) had an eye on. Since trading him, he's played only a few games at 2b, so two other teams haven't viewed him in that role either. Ultimately, the team we traded Wiggy to thought so much of him they released him outright. Now that he's had a hot month, we're supposed to gnash our teeth and shake our fists in despair? Puhleez. If we'd kept Benson, or traded him for decent value, or if Aubrey Huff didn't go on the DL thus giving a bench player a shot to start again (at 3b), we wouldn't even be having this conversation. And in a month, when he's back on track for a .260/15hr/70rbi/.750OPS season, with defense still insufficient to convince any of 3 organizations to play him at 2b, he'll end up back on bench once Huff comes back. But by then we'll all be focused on some other specious evidence of Mets incompetence as provided by Bret.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 24 2006 04:11 PM

Vic Sage wrote: And in a month, when he's back on track for a .260/15hr/70rbi/.750OPS season, with defense still insufficient to convince any of 3 organizations to play him at 2b. There are three facts that, despite that impressive barrage of bullshit and bluster, you aren't even trying to deny: 1) Matsui hasn't yet, and probably never will, put up an offensive season as good as .260/15hr/70rbi/.750OPS, 2) Wiggy's defensive stats at 2B are every bit as good as Matsui's have been 3) Wiggy makes under a tenth of what Matsui makes. Then there are other facts that you might add to that list: 4) Wiggy's more than halfway to 15 HRs already. If he hits his career numbers from here on in, he'll have a great season. if he has a bad season from here on in, he'll still have a pretty good season, certainly better than Matsui's. 5) The fact that the Mets "weren't impressed" with him is exactly my point. They don't know how to judge talent, and so understandably prefer buying it at inflated prices in the hope that no one will find out they have no idea what a MLB 2b man looks lilke. 6) The Mets might have been no smarter than every other major league club about Matsui's magnificent abilities, but I've got to think they felt just a bit more strongly about their consummate scouting skills on account of the 24 million they spent to back up their belief in Kaz Matsui, superstar. That's usually a hint as to the belief in their own acumen, the actual spending money part, which none of the other clubs felt inclined to do. Or didn;t you notice that? Did Selig issue some statement about MLB's collective guilt in signing Matsui? I didn't see that. Also the "moving your young star shortstop to a different position so the lordly No-Trade-Clause Kaz can play the position granted him by God" part. And finally 7) Do I understand you correctly that the team that played Kaz "Concrete Feet" Matsui and Joel "Fucking" Cairo at 2b last year is now presuming to pass judgment on any living secondbaseman as to his lack of range? I must be misunderstanding you on this. Even the Mets couldn't be so arrogantly unperceptive as to make that argument. Could you bellow obnoxiously a bit more directly into the microphone, please?

Bret Sabermetric Apr 24 2006 04:25 PM

="KC"]I don't know why anyone should be expected to eat dirt I see young men, my townsmen, whose misfortune it is to have inherited farms, houses, barns, cattle, and farming tools; for these are more easily acquired than got rid of. Better if they had been born in the open pasture and suckled by a wolf, that they might have seen with clearer eyes what field they were called to labor in. Who made them serfs of the soil? Why should they eat their sixty acres, when man is condemned to eat only his peck of dirt? Thoreau, WALDEN, "Economy"

KC Apr 24 2006 04:31 PM

1Chris Brown (956) 2 Wes Helms (950) 3 Mike Cuddyer (949) 4 Bill Serena (949) 5 Matt LeCroy (948) 6 Ed Lennox (941) 7 Wes Chamberlain (938) 8 Joe Crede (938) 9 Felix Torres (935) 10 Tommy Glaviano (934)

Bret Sabermetric Apr 24 2006 05:28 PM

Your faith in Sim scores seems to have improved since the time I showed what Piazza's future held for him according to Sim scores. Back then, they were the work of the devil, and utterly unreliable, as I recall. Guess their reliability depends on if they're being used for or against the Mets. Piaza had a much larger sample size to go on, then, of course. Even if the Mets only had a 2b man who performed at the average level of those pretty poor Sim scores, they'd still be getting Matsui-level play at bargain basement prices. Keep trying, though. Always a pleasure to be in fruitful communication with you.

KC Apr 24 2006 05:41 PM

Instead of posting more on dirt, I looked up the scores because I remembered that you have in the past used them to make a point. Ty's guys have one all-star appearance in the whole lot of ten is all I'm pointing out.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 26 2006 09:11 AM

Bit of a slump here. Ty's 1 (non-RBI single) for his last 7 ABs . http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=6930 Season's projections down to 71 HRs, 178 RBIs. He's slipped just behind Bonds' record and Hack Wilson's. Bummer.

Rotblatt Apr 26 2006 10:05 AM

I like Wiggy as a utility infielder. I think he'd probably have worse range at second than Matsui and probably about the same range as Cairo. He'd probably be better at turning DP's than Matsui but worse than Cairo. I have nothing to base this on, although if I think about it when I get home, I'll take a peek at the Defense Bible to see what they say about Wiggy. In short, though, while I kind of agree with Bret here about Wiggy's upside, I'm not convinced he has the defense to be an every day 2B. He probably wouldn't be much worse than what we got last year, however. I'm still intrigued by what a healthy Matsui is capable of. However, I have no confidence that he'll stay healthy. Anyway, since y'all were discussing comps: Wiggy (via PECOTA) 2006 weighted mean: 424 AB, .261 AVG/.325 OBP/.419 SLG/.744 OPS, 12 HR. They're fairly confident in their predictions here. Comps (all caps = similarity based on minor league stats): 1. Sean Berry (57) -- career OPS+ of 105; Age 28: 106; Age 29: 132; Age 30: 122 2. Benny Agbayani (50) -- career OPS+ of 109; Age 28: 126; Age 29: 103; Age 30: 60 3. CASEY BLAKE (50) -- career OPS+ of 103; Age 28: 42 (22 PA); Age 29: 95; Age 30: 118 4. Glenn Braggs (49) -- 98; Age 28: 108; Age 29: 107; Age 30: out of baseball 5. Marty Cordova (49) -- 103; Age 28: 85; Age 29: 107; Age 30: 66 6. Vance Law (49) -- 94; Age 28: 123; Age 29: 73; Age 30: 101 Not bad comps.

Bret Sabermetric Apr 26 2006 10:26 AM

One reason I think the Mets got rubed on the Kris Benson deal (one of several) was that they tried to leverage our huge bankroll to take on salary in exchange for young talent, and they overestimated the level of talent they were getting back, and underestimated Ty's value. IOW, we were giving Pittsburgh something they badly needed--a cheap and competent regular player for at least several more years. They needed that like they needed air to breathe, and so did the Mets. Not that 12 HRs from a 2b man is going to win any MVP awards, but if you can play a young cheap guy regularly and he does a competent job, that's one less position you have to worry about. if they had put Wiggy at 2b in 2004, they didn't need to sign Matsui in the first place, but Matsui still had some trade value in July of 2004--if they had dealt him off for a pitcher, they'd have done about as well as they did at 2B the last few years and spent his salary on another pitcher, maybe even Benson in the off-season 2004-5. And I don;t mean to get ahead of myself here, but Wiggy';s already 2/3s of the way to 12 HRs in April, so I'm pretty sure he's going to have a better year than PECOTA is projecting. Unless you're the Yankees you need a core of competent cheap young players to keep your budget in line, so you can acquire veterans who will perform. That's Wiggy's real value--a place-holder, a decent everyday ballplayer who does an okay job (and maybe better than okay) and doesn;t cost a lot of cash. I think the Mets evaluated that as close to worthless, and it's not. I also think not having enough cheap young talent encourages the Mets to stick with their expensive mistakes. Again, I'm not advocating chopping Matsui and Zambrano up for dog food, but their demonstrated talent level suggests more like "utility player" and "long-relief guy" than it does "front-line starter," but they already feel they're paying front-line salaries so they're stubbornly keeping the zhlubs in the front lilne. Maybe that's a whole nother error in their thinking, but I think one cause might be the shortage of cheap young talent, Wright and Reyes notwithstanding..

Rotblatt May 02 2006 12:27 PM

BP's [url=http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=5032]Jeff Erickson[/url] weighs in on Wiggy. ]A week ago on Sunday I was trading IM's back and forth with my friend Dan Quon, and Ty Wigginton's name came up. He's cooled off in the week since we've talked, but even after a fairly slow week, he's hitting .281/.323/.607 for the Devil Rays entering Monday's play. Is he in over his head right now? Absolutely--clearly, he's not going to slug .600 or anywhere close to that for the remainder of the year. That said, there were signs that he was a better hitter than what we saw with the Pirates. The first thing that jumps off the page is the pronounced difference between his stats before and after his demotion to Triple-A Indianapolis. Pre-demotion: .204/.261/.398 At Indianapolis: .293/.390/.507 After return: .365/.441/.596 Ron Shandler, in his excellent Baseball Forecaster, pointed out that Wigginton was exceptionally unlucky over the first half of the season, with a 19% hit rate on balls in play. Wigginton's playing time was sporadic, as he first split time with Bobby Hill and then Freddy Sanchez, who was given the job when Wigginton went to Indy. Finally, the power he showed with Indy and upon his return also was apparent in previous seasons, when he slugged .487 in 312 at-bats with the Mets in 2004, as Dan mentioned. He's 28 now, so he's in his peak years, and as a college draftee, has had less time at the professional level to develop. Going forward, if he were to play regularly the rest of the year, it's reasonable to expect him to slug .475 or better, which should translate into some bankable fantasy stats.