Master Index of Archived Threads


Mets depth chart

roger_that Aug 11 2022 11:31 AM

My question about the Mets' emergency catcher the other day sparked a series of similar questions. In an in-game emergency situation (where no recourse to Syracuse or Brooklyn is a possibility) who do you suppose fills in at various positions? At shortstop, for example, in some logistical or injury-related disaster that renders the Mets without the services of Lindor and Guillorme, who plays short? Escobar? Who's next on that depth chart? McNeil? And after McNeil, who? Likewise, what's the Mets' depth chart in CF? 1) Nimmo, obviously 2) Canha, apparently 3) Marte, seemingly 4) McNeil, by default? 5) Naquin, I guess 6) Ruf?? Escobar? Alonso? 7) Vogelbach, making you wonder who's in RF and LF--see option #6 Hard to imagine the level of disaster that would put Vogelbach in CF, but I'm sure Buck has gamed all this stuff out. Give me your peek into Buck's secret contingency planning at various positions.

Edgy MD Aug 11 2022 11:50 AM Re: Mets depth chart

Naquin is probably ahead of McNeil in center, seeing as he's played 200+ games in center in his career. I feel blissfully certain that we won't see Vogelbach in center. Escobar indeed is the team's third-string shortstop. After that, let's hope not to find out.

Frayed Knot Aug 11 2022 01:11 PM Re: Mets depth chart

Bobby V used to talk about wanting to be 'three deep' at each spot. Not that you'd necessarily Want to see the 3rd guy there but that you'd want to know ahead of time who was your 'Break Glass in case of Emergency' guy. Naquin, Canha, and Marte have all played ML CF before so that's maybe the best covered position on the field. Off the top of my head 1B: Pete, Ruf, Vogelbomb 2B: McNeal, Luis, Escobar SS: Lindor, Luis, Escobar 3B: Escobar, Luis, McNeal LF: Any of the OFs could fill in as can JMcN RF: Naquin appears to have the best arm with the rest of the fill-ins behind him.

roger_that Aug 11 2022 01:27 PM Re: Mets depth chart

Frayed Knot wrote: Naquin, Canha, and Marte have all played ML CF before so that's maybe the best covered position on the field. You'd have to think that 1B is the best covered position. Any infielder could play it, and almost any outfielder too. In fact, I wouldn't totally panic if Buck were to play a pitcher there for a few batters in an emergency. All you really need to play 1B is the ability to field a grounder and a popup, and to catch a thrown ball, which is in every player's skill set.

Frayed Knot Aug 11 2022 01:34 PM Re: Mets depth chart

Frayed Knot wrote: Naquin, Canha, and Marte have all played ML CF before so that's maybe the best covered position on the field. You'd have to think that 1B is the best covered position. Any infielder could play it, and almost any outfielder too. In fact, I wouldn't totally panic if Buck were to play a pitcher there for a few batters in an emergency. All you really need to play 1B is the ability to field a grounder and a popup, and to catch a thrown ball, which is in every player's skill set. I was thinking more that CF is the one where you'd have to get to Def-Con Five before I'd start to worry about being exposed out there even though it's the more important/difficult position. Sure, anyone Can play 1st, but in this scenario I'd feel better about the 4th CF than I would with the 3rd 1B

roger_that Aug 11 2022 03:50 PM Re: Mets depth chart

The really tough positions to speculate on, down to the #4-7 slots, are SS and C, both of which take special skills to do even semi-competently. For emergency purposes you need to be three-deep there, and that seems to be exactly where the Mets are, three-deep but not four. In a sense pitching is the most specialized skill of all, except you always have twelve qualified backups, and another twelve thinking "Yeah, me! Put me out there, Buck! I'd be a great pitcher."

Edgy MD Aug 11 2022 04:10 PM Re: Mets depth chart

The really tough positions are everywhere, because, the Mets have a five-man bench, one of whom they'd rather not put on defense anywhere. So the real issue isn't whether Escobar is the third-string shortstop, but who plays third when he goes in there? Only one guy is backing up all three infield slots. Right now they are platooning Guillorme and Escobar. If they swap one out on a pinch-hit assignment in the seventh (which they've done), then we're gonna see Nido or Alonso or someone at third if McNeil takes a pitch off of his ankle or something. American League managers are used to playing with this miniscule margin of error, so I'm sure Buck is as comfortable there as anybody, but I don't gotta like it.

Marshmallowmilkshake Aug 11 2022 04:11 PM Re: Mets depth chart

The really tough positions to speculate on, down to the #4-7 slots, are SS and C, both of which take special skills to do even semi-competently. For emergency purposes you need to be three-deep there, and that seems to be exactly where the Mets are, three-deep but not four. In a sense pitching is the most specialized skill of all, except you always have twelve qualified backups, and another twelve thinking "Yeah, me! Put me out there, Buck! I'd be a great pitcher." McNeil has been good at second, and you wonder how he'd be in a pinch at short. Probably better than Orosco and McDowell in right field in 1985 -- though Orosco fielded a fly from Tony Perez! He might be the No. 4. Assuming this would all be to finish a game before reinforcements arrive from Syracuse.

seawolf17 Aug 12 2022 05:59 AM Re: Mets depth chart

I would absolutely put Guillorme anywhere on the field, yes. For what it's worth, I am in 100% agreement that "who's eighth on the CF depth chart?" is a patently bananas topic even for a group with discussions as esoteric as ours. If we've lost seven centerfielders, it literally doesn't matter because at that point you have multiple pitchers out there.

metsmarathon Aug 12 2022 07:24 AM Re: Mets depth chart

Also yeah. Luis guillorme is probably at worst fifth on nearly any depth chart we might have.

Lefty Specialist Aug 12 2022 09:00 AM Re: Mets depth chart

Between Guillorme and McNeil, they pretty much have everything covered. Not werried.