Master Index of Archived Threads


The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

roger_that Jan 23 2023 08:12 AM

Who has written the most incisive analysis of the Lenny Dykstra conundrum? That is to say, has anyone analyzed Dykstra's career, and its central Metly moment of June 18th 1989, when he was traded for Juan Samuel? There is much Dykstra data, it seems to me, preceding that trade that made it come about, and much more following that trade that is worthy of analysis. But I'd like to start there, with what the team was thinking they could accomplish with a challenge trade, center fielder for center fielder, that in retrospect was so poorly thought out, and which presaged the collapse of the mid-80s Mets dynasty that never was. It may well be that the collapse was inevitable and that Strawberry and Gooden and the aging of Hernandez and Carter were more directly causal than the Dykstra trade but it is certainly true that the Mets stood in first place briefly for the last time in the 1980s a week after the trade, and would wander around in sub-.500 territory for most of the 1990s. At the time, I'm sure I had my theories, and my own analysis, but I don't really remember many details—retrospect has taken over my brain, and now I just think of it as a colossally misguided trade of a much-needed leadoff batter for a guy who could neither play centerfield nor get on base nearly as skillfully as Dykstra could. The only nugget that sticks with me is Lenny's personality—I think at the time he was regarded as a disaster waiting to happen. He went way beyond brashness, so maybe the Mets felt that they had to deal him off sooner rather than later, and Samuel was the best anyone would offer? Certainly, as bad a deal as it was, in that Dykstra had two monster seasons for the Phillies in the early 90s, his career did blow itself up in spectacular fashion, so if the Mets were hoping to avoid that inevitability, they did accomplish that. Anyway, I'd be interested to hear if anyone—book author, blogger, journalist, or someone on this site—has written about this trade, and/or about Dykstra more generally in a way that satisfied you.

kcmets Jan 23 2023 08:54 AM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

=roger_that post_id=117134 time=1674486736 user_id=128]Certainly, as bad a deal as it was, in that Dykstra had two monster seasons for the Phillies in the early 90s, his career did blow itself up in spectacular fashion, so if the Mets were hoping to avoid that inevitability, they did accomplish that.

Maybe there was no conundrum, after all.



Didn't Lenny want to be traded?

roger_that Jan 23 2023 10:05 AM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

Maybe. But the Mets didn't have to comply, did they? And if they somehow did have to, they didn't need to comply by trading him for a fraction of his value, did they? I think there's more to the story, and I'd like to read it. I also think I'm an idiot for thinking I was being clever and original in my title, when there is another thread, "The Pete Alonso Conundrum," that I participated in a few days ago right here on page one, which made the same literary reference.

cal sharpie Jan 23 2023 10:19 AM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

I do remember the rap on Lenny at the time was that he didn't hit lefthanders. Also, I remember Howard Johnson being all excited about Juan Samuel being on the team. Roger McDowell being in that trade as well made it all the more terrible.

kcmets Jan 23 2023 10:28 AM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

=roger_that post_id=117139 time=1674493504 user_id=128]But the Mets didn't have to comply, did they?

Did they comply?


=roger_that post_id=117139 time=1674493504 user_id=128]And if they somehow did have to, they didn't need to comply by trading him for a fraction of his value, did they?

Maybe your fractions differ from the Mets fractions. Lenny was a total

asshole, hitting like .265 (on base pct had slipped terribly) and as Cal

said he couldn't hit lefties. Juan Samuel hit almost 30 home runs and

had like 100 RBI a year or two before the trade so it wasn't like he had

no value. Turned out he kinda sucked but.... Getting him to play CF is

the biggest conundrum here so far.

batmagadanleadoff Jan 23 2023 10:53 AM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum) Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jan 23 2023 11:00 AM

Among other things, Dykstra, by 1988 or so, was constantly asking to be traded. He wasn't a happy Met insofar as he was being platooned with Mookie Wilson and thought he deserved to be playing every day. Around the time of the Samuel trade, Dykstra came close to being traded for Dale Murphy. Also, his partial 1989 season with the Mets, Dykstra's last as a Met, was in many ways, his best ever. Rate wise, he averaged 1.0 bWAR for every 74 plate appearances, his best rate ever -- even better than what he produced in 1990, his MVP caliber first full season in Philly. Samuel had 100 RBI's? Big deal. RBI's are for kids. As for Dykstra's struggles against LHP, that was certainly true early in his career. But by 1988, he was hitting lefties as effectively as he was hitting righties.

Edgy MD Jan 23 2023 11:00 AM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

Lenny was agitating all along for more PT. The platoon with Wilson worked out great for a few seasons, but neither was happy (Lenny agitating more than Mookie), and rather than trade one, they traded both. Davey Johnson, presumably the one who absorbed most of the lobbying, approved the trade. Asking your manager to be a scout probably wasn't the best move at the time, but Frank Cashen tended to run big league deals by Johnson regularly before pulling the switch. Johnson had had enough of Lenny and thought very highly of Samuel's offensive skill set. Samuel had threatened to hit the rare plateau of 20 doubles/20 triples/20 homers for a few years there, and from the opposite bench, looked like an all-around offensive threat similar to Eric Davis. But what a closer inspection might have revealed was that (a) he was very much an astroturf hitter (and the Vet had hard turf), (b) he struck out a lot (like, a lot), (c) was in the midst of a down year that would turn out to be more than a down year, and (d) hadn't fully adapted to his position switch that had only just occurred at the start of the season the trade went down. When a player who has shown a lot of early promise is in the midst of a crappy year, he still may be worth taking a chance on. He may be in the midst of premature decline, or he may quickly turn it around at a new address. He could be Ellis Valentine, or he could be John Olerud. But you sure don't want to put yourself in the position of needing the trade to turn out by (1) overpaying with two guys who were more likely to be sure things, and (2) getting him in the middle of a division race and leaving yourself with no other options if he can't bring it. You probably don't need a whole lot of journalism to get a peek into Lenny's character. The only thing you need to find is if there's anyone out there who is going to write that Dykstra is anything other than a total jerk who has been a total jerk all along. Jim Cramer liked him, I guess.

kcmets Jan 23 2023 11:11 AM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum) Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jan 23 2023 11:18 AM

=batmagadanleadoff post_id=117144 time=1674496405 user_id=68]Samuel had 100 RBI's? Big deal. RBI's are for kids. As for Dykstra's struggles against LHP, that was certainly true early in his career. But by 1988, he was hitting lefties as effectively as he was hitting righties.

Well, show us your lefty/right splits then. It doesn't jibe with what was

written days after the trade in a couple of papers I pulled up. The RBI thing

was a bigger deal in 1989, unless you were hanging out with Doc G writing

letters to Bill James and getting them published in Baseball Abstract. But

I know you had to get a subtle shot [CROSSOUT]it but[/CROSSOUT] in and that's ok.

kcmets Jan 23 2023 11:13 AM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

Edgy MD wrote: Davey Johnson, presumably the one who absorbed most of the lobbying, approved the trade. Asking your manager to be a scout probably wasn't the best move at the time, but Frank Cashen tended to run big league deals by Johnson regularly before pulling the switch. Johnson had had enough of Lenny and thought very highly of Samuel's offensive skill set. Well, if Davey was on board I'm not going to second guess him some 35 years later. Conundrum on, fellas...

batmagadanleadoff Jan 23 2023 11:15 AM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

=kcmets post_id=117146 time=1674497481 user_id=53] =batmagadanleadoff post_id=117144 time=1674496405 user_id=68]Samuel had 100 RBI's? Big deal. RBI's are for kids. As for Dykstra's struggles against LHP, that was certainly true early in his career. But by 1988, he was hitting lefties as effectively as he was hitting righties.

Well, show us your lefty/right splits then.




You need for me to post what's easily available to everybody from, among many many sites, BBRef?

batmagadanleadoff Jan 23 2023 11:18 AM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

=kcmets post_id=117146 time=1674497481 user_id=53] =batmagadanleadoff post_id=117144 time=1674496405 user_id=68]Samuel had 100 RBI's? Big deal. RBI's are for kids. As for Dykstra's struggles against LHP, that was certainly true early in his career. But by 1988, he was hitting lefties as effectively as he was hitting righties.

The RBI thing was a bigger deal in 1989, unless you were hanging out with Doc G writing

letters to Bill James and getting them published in Baseball Abstract.


I wasn't, but I had the RBI thing figured out by the time I was in Junior High School, years before Bill James would publish his first mass market Baseball Abstract in 1982. Which I, obviously, can't prove to you here and in this context. So you'll hafta take my word for it. Or not. Whatever.

roger_that Jan 23 2023 11:45 AM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

Edgy MD wrote: The platoon with Wilson worked out great for a few seasons, The DH woulda solved this entire problem. It's funny, how with the DH, four offensively productive outfielders, two of them (three, counting McReynolds) skilled CFers, is just about perfect. You probably don't need a whole lot of journalism to get a peek into Lenny's character. The only thing you need to find is if there's anyone out there who is going to write that Dykstra is anything other than a total jerk who has been a total jerk all along. No one needs clarification of Dykstra's character--he's a simple man, a simpleton, really, incapable of spelling IQ but ambitious and conceited to the core, but I'm not interested in his character, just in how a major league team assesses his ability, makes the best use of what a talented player with a deeply flawed character can do. Ideally, you want to try to trade toxic players but I've heard it said that you also need a few agitators, assholes, disruptors on your team as well, just to keep things lively. Don't know if I buy that theory myself--I prefer to have a team of Boy Scouts, stable, predictable, low-key if at all possible--but I'd hate to think the Mets traded Dykstra because Davey Johnson got fed up with his BS. Did DJ discuss Dykstra in his book? I never read it.

Edgy MD Jan 23 2023 11:52 AM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

Stop fighting, all grownups. It's 2023 — a new year full of all sorts of wonderful potential — and fights make Tom Seaver cry. Here's your data. https://metsrostercentral.files.wordpress.com/2023/01/screen-shot-2023-01-23-at-1.50.08-pm.png> [TABLE][TR][/TR] [TR][/TR] [TR][/TR] [TR][/TR][/TABLE] [TH][/TH] [TH]1985[/TH] [TH]1986[/TH] [TH]1987[/TH] [TH]1988[/TH] [TH]1989[/TH] [TH]OPS[/TH] [TD].669[/TD] [TD].822[/TD] [TD].806[/TD] [TD].706[/TD] [TD].777 [TH]OPS vs. LH[/TH] [TD].671[/TD] [TD].627[/TD] [TD].614[/TD] [TD].686[/TD] [TD].708 [TH]OPS vs. RH[/TH] [TD].668[/TD] [TD].884[/TD] [TD].847[/TD] [TD].710[/TD] [TD].789

roger_that Jan 23 2023 12:20 PM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

Edgy MD wrote: No more name calling from any party, please. Data up above. Delicious, shiny data. Good job. Thanks. Seems reasonably consistent to me, the usual seasonal up-and-down flux and flow, nothing to get hornets in your drawers about. Has anyone read DJ's book?

Edgy MD Jan 23 2023 12:24 PM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

Which book?

roger_that Jan 23 2023 12:32 PM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

He wrote more than one? Either, then. Any. Has he described or justified the Dykstra - Samuel deal anywhere?

Edgy MD Jan 23 2023 01:42 PM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

Mets manager Davey Johnson said, “Juan Samuel is an impact player. Whenever I thought about the Phillies the last four or five years, I thought about Juan Samuel. He reminds me of Bobby Bonds. People don't realize what kind of impact player he is.” Durso, Joseph. New York Times. June 19, 1989.

roger_that Jan 23 2023 01:52 PM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

Edgy MD wrote: Mets manager Davey Johnson said, “Juan Samuel is an impact player. Whenever I thought about the Phillies the last four or five years, I thought about Juan Samuel. He reminds me of Bobby Bonds. People don't realize what kind of impact player he is.” Durso, Joseph. New York Times. June 19, 1989. Wow. That's one ugly bit of legacy.

Frayed Knot Jan 23 2023 03:10 PM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum) Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Jan 23 2023 03:17 PM

My thoughts on the trade at that time as best as I can remember them: - I regretted the loss of McDowell more than I did Dykstra; Lenny was never a fave of mine. - a game where he faced Frankie V. shortly after the trade. Viola, as I'm sure most here remember, was dominant for a season or two during his early years as a NYM and I was convinced the crafty lefty was going to make Lenny look stupid (I now, not hard, right?). But as the AB unfolded Dykstra started fouling off borderline outside change-ups down the LF line. Either totally frustrated or thinking he had him set up, Viola eventually came in with an inside fastball and I watched slack-jawed as Lenny jumped all over it and yanked it hard into RF. 'Who are you', I thought after the AB, 'and what have you done with Lenny Dykstra?' He had somehow transformed himself, seemingly overnight, into a different animal than he was as a Met. And though he's still as dumb as a doorknob, he wasn't when it came to baseball IQ as Billy Beane wrote* in MONEYBALL. Beane had the size, the talent, and athleticism all over his minor league teammate, plus a scholarship offer to Stanford, but not, as it turned out, in baseball smarts or especially the temperament to deal with baseball's failures and still think you're the best hitter on the field. In Lenny's five-plus years with the Mets he had a more than respectable .350 OBA. In seven with the Phils (not including that first half season) he never had an OBA as low as .350 and peaked at a stunning .420 in his very first full season. Samuel's lone season in Queens, meanwhile, was the worst of his career to the point where I think Darrin Ruf says to him, "Man you sucked as a Met". In retrospect it's odd that Davey, the math maven who was into statistics before almost anyone, would dismiss those .300-ish OBAs of Samuel's as a counterpoint to his "impact". *I know Beane didn't write the book but I said that anyway just in case Joe Morgan is reading this

kcmets Jan 23 2023 03:15 PM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

=roger_that post_id=117171 time=1674507147 user_id=128]Wow. That's one ugly bit of legacy.

If we were to construct a numbered bullet list of Davey's Mets legacy items

I imagine it would hard for "dude liked Juan Samuel' to crack the top 30.



(submitted before reading FK's post)

Edgy MD Jan 23 2023 04:03 PM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

In fairness to Johnson, that article has him more mealy-mouthed about the deal than the excerpt I posted. It also includes the following: ''I don't make the trades here,'' Davey Johnson said, sounding shocked himself. ''In the fourth inning, Joe came down the runway leading to the bench and told me: 'I got you a new player.' ''I'm happy and I'm sad. It's bittersweet. Roger has been a mainstay of the bullpen, and Lenny's been a hustling center fielder. They've been a big reason for our success." The interesting part here, to me, is whether the trade goes down on Cashen's ledger or McIlvaine's. Cashen was still GM, but Mac seems to own the transaction.

Johnny Lunchbucket Jan 23 2023 04:34 PM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

I can remember being excited about Samuel. Partly because of that 20/20/20/20 thing Edge mentioned but because the Mets still had a lot of leeway with me as traders. I heard about the trade driving on the new jersey turnpike and listening to wean callers as excited as I was. We'd know soon Cashen had jumped the shark as a dealer

roger_that Jan 23 2023 05:44 PM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: listening to wean callers as excited as I was. Just pull the nipple out of their mouths. They cry for a while, but eventually it works.

nymr83 Jan 23 2023 09:46 PM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

Juan Samuel was an average at best player who had one good year. Lenny Dykstra was a fucking headcase who was clearly the better player at all times throughout their careers, unless you squinted really hard after the 1987 season, when maybe they looked about the same. The Mets seemingly made the decision that Dykstra had to go, and Samuel was the best they could get in return.

batmagadanleadoff Jan 23 2023 09:53 PM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

=nymr83 post_id=117190 time=1674535602 user_id=54] Juan Samuel was an average at best player who had one good year. Lenny Dykstra was a fucking headcase who was clearly the better player at all times throughout their careers, unless you squinted really hard after the 1987 season, when maybe they looked about the same. The Mets seemingly made the decision that Dykstra had to go, and Samuel was the best they could get in return.

Samuel sucked big time and I hated that trade from the instant I heard about it. That guy could barely on-base .300. That is bottom of the barrel shit. He would've had to hit 45 HR's a year to make up for that. His big 20/20/20 whatever year was in 1987, the biggest juiceball year in the history of baseball up to that point. And even then, he on-based just .335. That guy couldn't carry Dykstra's jock strap and that was before Lenny entered his superstar prime during his first few Phillies years.

Johnny Lunchbucket Jan 24 2023 12:35 PM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

The other thing that happened that day was the Phillies traded Steve Bedrosian to the Giants for Terry Mulholland, Dennis Cook and Charlie Hayes. All 3 guys plus Dykstra would be a part of their 93 world series team. The Giants went to the 89 series

Bob Alpacadaca Jan 24 2023 01:55 PM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

Hey, Tom Edens was part of that deal, too! I never understood why McDowell was part of that deal. I don't know if they were trying to change the chemistry of the team. I imagine McDowell might have been a little challenging after a while. I don't know at what point Dykstra went from "difficult" to "addition by subtraction difficult." I didn't realize how close we were to getting Dale Murphy for him! Looks like we were willing to give up HoJo in that deal, too. The New York Mets, at that point the kings of the National League East with a World Series in 1986 and a division title in 1988, wanted Murphy the most. They offered Howard Johnson and Len Dykstra straight up for Murphy, but Cox held out for the Mets' best pitching prospect, left-handed David West. West was a 6-foot-6 left-hander who had been 12-4 with a 1.80 ERA in the minors in 1988. He was considered one of the top pitching prospects in baseball. Cox was focusing his rebuild on pitching, and if he was going to trade his best player, he wanted a pitcher in return. Mets' GM Joe McIlvaine did not want to part with West. He wanted Murphy, but only for Dykstra and Johnson. The talks went on for the entire winter meetings but went nowhere with both sides sticking to their demands. [url]https://www.si.com/mlb/braves/news/trade-rumors-from-1988-with-dale-murphy-going-to-the-mets-or-padres

stevejrogers Jan 24 2023 02:20 PM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

Bob Alpacadaca wrote: Hey, Tom Edens was part of that deal, too! I never understood why McDowell was part of that deal. I don't know if they were trying to change the chemistry of the team. I imagine McDowell might have been a little challenging after a while. I don't know at what point Dykstra went from "difficult" to "addition by subtraction difficult." My guess is that it was similar to the Dykstra/Wilson battle. So it turned out Randy Myers won out. Even though FROM OUT OF NOWHERE RKM would be performing in Cincy during the off-season in the deal for Franco.

Edgy MD Jan 24 2023 02:24 PM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

Hard to say, but it would seem that the Murphy deal woudn't have worked out much better. It would have opened up third for Gregg Jefferies, but HoJo still had two Silver Sluggers ahead of him and Murphy had about 95% of his career productivity behind him. You're killing me, McIlvaine.

roger_that Jan 25 2023 01:08 AM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

Edgy MD wrote: It would have opened up third for Gregg Jefferies Which would have made their choice to unload Wally Backman (for a bag o' bupkis) the previous winter seem rather foolish.

batmagadanleadoff Jan 25 2023 10:42 AM Re: The Dykstra Conundrum (by Robert Ludlum)

Bob Alpacadaca wrote: Hey, Tom Edens was part of that deal, too! I never understood why McDowell was part of that deal. I don't know if they were trying to change the chemistry of the team. I imagine McDowell might have been a little challenging after a while. I don't know at what point Dykstra went from "difficult" to "addition by subtraction difficult." My guess is that it was similar to the Dykstra/Wilson battle. So it turned out Randy Myers won out. ... I dunno. I think that the Mets traded Dykstra for, among other things, several reasons that probably havent still been fully or honestly disclosed. They made some tremendous trades in the 80s but they weren't perfect. For one', they could've had an entire outfield of strong MVP candidates in Dykstra, Straw and Mitchell and thus, might have won more divisions.