Master Index of Archived Threads


Worries Here, 2007 Edition

A Boy Named Seo Mar 31 2007 02:34 PM

-An outfield defense with Alou and Green at the corners has the potential to be quite bad. I think we'll see plenty of Endy again this year and hope Beltran wears his running shoes in center. -Aaron Heilman's wonky elbow. -Paul Lo Duca. Hit a career-high 39 doubles last year and was well over his career BA last year, maybe benefiting from seeing lots of fastballs with Reyes on in front of him? If he reverts to his career norms, he doesn't really bring much to the team except for his world-renowned heart and his CitySearch-like mastery of the Long Island club scene. -I'm a little worried about second base. Valentin was only really crappy at hitting lefties last year (.599 OPS in 112 PA) and Easley was okay and should negate that (.764 OPS in 124 PA in '06). Both are 37, though, and each could reasonably drop off the face of the earth with who to fill in? Ruben Gotay? Is there someone I'm forgetting about? Hopefully it won't come to that. -David Wright. Something's up with him. The Baseball Forecaster shows he had a 4% decline in fly ball% on balls in play in the second half last year. He also had a 1% decline in line drives, which made his ground ball percentage go up 5%. I thought that might be a clue, but I'm not so sure. He put the ball in play 249 times in the second half (AB+ROE+Sac+SacFly) and the 4% FB decline from those 249 AB's amounts to only about 10 at bats. The Forecaster also makes reference to some Voros McCracken stuff that shows that the rate of HR to flyballs is about 10%, so even if all those fly balls that became grounders in the second half magically became flyballs again, we're still just talking about just one extra homer. So I don't know what the hell happened, but his 1 HR this spring doesn't freak me out any less. What else?

Benjamin Grimm Mar 31 2007 02:37 PM

Glavine and Hernandez show their age, and Pelfrey, Maine, and Perez show their inexperience. Perez may turn out to really suck this year. I know they think he's "figured it out" but in the past on any given day he was more likely to be bad than good.

Kid Carsey Mar 31 2007 02:43 PM

Vegas has the Mets and Yanks in a subway series from what I heard the other day on espnradio.

A Boy Named Seo Mar 31 2007 02:44 PM

Perez might turn out to suck, but to me he's one of the most exciting players on the team this year because of the unknown. He's dazzling when it all falls together. Maine and the gopher balls is an issue.

Edgy MD Mar 31 2007 02:46 PM

If David would get off the catwalk, I'd be a little less worried. Little is more depressing than a guy overexposed and regressing --- with tons of sad jerseys marked down at Modell's. On the ohter hand, he went into a big second-half slump back in 2003 that left him with end-of-year numbers that were fine but hardly justified the scouts' drooling over him. The Mets diagnosis, and the consensus, was that he worked too hard and tired himself out. That may be too much buying into the all-American boy scout crap, but his vicious start the next year supported that. So maybe Willie gives him a little more first-half rest this season.

Nymr83 Mar 31 2007 02:52 PM

i dont want to play the 20/20 hindsight game and blame willie for not resting him, but i'd certainly try to rest him a little more this year.

Edgy MD Mar 31 2007 02:57 PM

Yeah, neither do I. Just a suggested adaptation. My foresight was to keep him the hell away from the homer contest. I'd claim that I was right, but don't ask me to be able to demonstrate a cause-and-effect relationship.

Nymr83 Mar 31 2007 03:04 PM

I can't demonstrate the relationship either, but theres enough anecdotal evidence to make me (if i were Mets ownership/management) want to politely ask Mets players not to participate, even if i had to give them something extra for that purpose ("hey Carlos, you don't really want to go to the HR Derby do you? wouldn't you much rather spend the All-star Break in cancun with your wife and kids on my dime?")

patona314 Mar 31 2007 03:12 PM

could someone tell mr. franco to shorten his swing? he's 47 for gods sake! actually i take that back. the more he swings like that the sooner he's off the team. i love the guy, but............. i'm worried about a righty outfielder off the bench.

A Boy Named Seo Mar 31 2007 03:51 PM

Nymr83 wrote: I can't demonstrate the relationship either, but theres enough anecdotal evidence to make me (if i were Mets ownership/management) want to politely ask Mets players not to participate, even if i had to give them something extra for that purpose ("hey Carlos, you don't really want to go to the HR Derby do you? wouldn't you much rather spend the All-star Break in cancun with your wife and kids on my dime?") I don't know, it didn't seem to slow down Ryan Howard any. I'd say rest is definitely something he could've used more of, so skipping the HR derby would absolutely fall under that umbrella, but aside from Bobby Abreu, is there anyone else who stopped hitting homers after a home run derby?

Edgy MD Mar 31 2007 04:24 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Mar 31 2007 04:26 PM

I don't get what the hate is about with Franco. He is what he is, but the idea that he's been suckin' it up is just unfounded. He was better in the first half than in the second, but that job is hard. I won't sit here and tell you he was good, but rooting for him to fail is right out.

holychicken Mar 31 2007 04:25 PM

This thread makes me worry. . .does that count?

Edgy MD Mar 31 2007 05:43 PM

See, chicken loves Franco.

TheOldMole Mar 31 2007 05:52 PM

Edgy MD Apr 01 2007 08:53 PM

Wagner heat doesn't scare righthanded batters anymore, and Duaner and Bradford aren't around to help him out with them.

metirish Apr 01 2007 08:55 PM

I don't know if Wagner even thinks much of his heat anymore....

iramets Apr 02 2007 07:25 AM

Edgy DC wrote: I don't get what the hate is about with Franco. He is what he is, but the idea that he's been suckin' it up is just unfounded. He was better in the first half than in the second, but that job is hard. I won't sit here and tell you he was good, but rooting for him to fail is right out. It's not hate--it's worries, and well-founded ones. I worry about someone's future when he gets to an advanced age in general, because you're usually paying a big salary for someone who can no longer do the job, but it far more severe a problem when that elderly player is coming OFF a bad season, and doubly troubling when he's coming off a bad second half. We all understand that players will, at some point, lose the ability to compete on a MLB level, and that sometimes the loss of ability is sudden. When it comes in-between seasons, maybe you can ask "Well, who knew?" (though you can generallly get a pretty good clue from looking at the player's birth certificate), but worry alarms go off when a very elderly player has a brutal August and September and you've still got him under contract. Not good. Probably it's even worse when the player, like Franco, (actually either Franco) is regarded as a clubhouse leader, because that means the club will find all sorts of rationales for continuing to give him playing time. My main problem is the roster spot, and the key situations you're using him in, when he can't do the job anymore and everyone on earth recognizes that, but still he gets into games that you desperately need to win.

metirish Apr 02 2007 07:32 AM

I have faith that if Willie thinks Franco can't help the team then he'll be gone,not sure about Omar though.

Edgy MD Apr 02 2007 07:38 AM

I'm speaking to the notion of hoping he fails. It wasn't a comment of yours. I don't think you'll find, "Well, who knew?" attached to any comment I made. I don't think his salary is an issue. When his roster sport becomes an issue, I hope it's not a lingering one.

iramets Apr 02 2007 09:23 AM

Edgy DC wrote: I'm speaking to the notion of hoping he fails. It wasn't a comment of yours. Understood. Edgy DC wrote: I don't think you'll find, "Well, who knew?" attached to any comment I made. No, it's not. But often when a disaster occurs, with plenty of signs well-advertised in advance, people do use this as an excuse for having let it happen. I'm extending my neck a bit, and saying, before the fact, that Franco fulfills all of the descriptors of a trainwreck about to happen (if you consider a wasted roster-spot a potential trainwreck) and that people who are worried about the wisdom of keeping him (as opposed to keeping as a coach) at this point have something going, and that if the disaster happens, some people felt comfortable in dealing with the problem pre-emtively. The "Who knew?" argument comes up when Franco's suipporters say, "Yeah, sure, you say nthat now--but where were you beforethe season started?" I'm just saying I'm right here, and willing to be called "wrong" if Franco has a great season. I don't think he will. That's what this thread is for. Edgy DC wrote: I don't think his salary is an issue. When his roster sport becomes an issue, I hope it's not a lingering one. Salary's much smaller than the roster spot, but now that the season's underway, it is an issue anytime you need a pinchhitter and Franco comes up short. Already, it's an issue because of the limited value you're getting in terms of defensive versatility and running speed. Unless he hits better than a much more versatile, much more speedy player, it's an issue the first time you want some sub to do something that Franco can no longer do.

Edgy MD Apr 02 2007 09:30 AM

I don't think anyone will be surprised when Franco fails. Everybody else has by his age. I think what happened to him the second half of last year was mostly about his strike zone judgment going to hell. Not him overswinging.

metirish Apr 02 2007 09:37 AM

Franco's Mets legacy might well be encouraging Beltran to take that curtain call,personally I would like to see him have a few more good moments,he might not be done yet folks.

Benjamin Grimm Apr 02 2007 09:46 AM

I'm hoping that if it becomes apparent that he really is wasting a roster spot (and I suspect that will happen unless the Mets jump to another 10 game lead) that the Mets will do whatever they need to do to replace him. Making him a coach would be nice, but aren't they at their limit for coaches? I know the Red Sox just had an issue where they had to get Johnny Pesky out of uniform and off the bench during games because of that limit. I don't know what the number is. Maybe the Mets have room to expand the coaching staff, but maybe they don't. Anyone know the answer?

Centerfield Apr 02 2007 09:47 AM

He'd be allowed to sit on the bench if he grew a pony tail, pretended he was a girl and massaged the other players.

Edgy MD Apr 02 2007 09:59 AM

The Pesky story stated that uniform personnel in dugouts during games was limited to players, managers, and six coaches. Now, there's plenty of ambiguity there. (1) They don't mention trainers, and (2) they don't specify bullpen personnel. The Mets currently have seven guys listed as coaches, with five stationed in the dugout during the games, and two --- plus the bullpen catcher --- stationed in the pen. Dugout: Jerry Manuel: Bench Coach Sandy Alomar Sr.: Third Base Coach Howard Johnson: First Base Coach Rick Peterson: Pitching Coach Rick Down: Hitting Coach Bullpen: Guy Conti: Bullpen Coach Tom Nieto: Catching Instructor That implies that there's room for one more, but, as I said, there's ambiguity. Plus, Franco wants to play, and if someone claimed him off of waivers, he might well continue --- not that fear of losing his coaching services should scare the Mets away from cutting him loose if otherwise necessary.

iramets Apr 02 2007 10:08 AM

I'm just saying you got a .700 OPS, a ton of Ks and GIDPs, no position, no pinchrunning ability, and very little chance that he's going to rebound, and a strong indicator (second half of last season) that's he's completely done--the time to address this is now, not 50 or 75 ABs from now. Some of those ABs will mean ballgames. This is like a challenge trade. Willie is saying in effect, "He's not done. All of yuz think he is, but I know better, and I'm willing to risk some ballgames that I'm right." We will see. If the Mets finish a few games out and Franco has an awful year, I like us to recognize that this was one place they could have picked up a few key ABs from the git-go.

metirish Apr 02 2007 10:18 AM

I really have a hard time thinking that if the Mets finish a few games out it might be because of Franco,aren't we putting too much stock into a bench player?

Edgy MD Apr 02 2007 10:18 AM

Sure. But they've won a few standing by while many wanted a player dispensed with --- Oliver, Valentin pop to mind. And lost a few --- Matsui, I guess, and Danny Graves. They might again. Certainly players have performed after a team (or several teams) bet definitively on them being done. Every team goes through this. It's tough. When Franco flails and some Greg Turtletaub starts burning it up in AAA, may he become our pinch hitting specialist. I still think Milledge was a better choice than Tucker for the playoff roster. But Franco hasn't had his first at-bat this season.

Edgy MD Apr 02 2007 10:21 AM

metirish wrote: I really have a hard time thinking that if the Mets finish a few games out it might be because of Franco,aren't we putting too much stock into a bench player? Maybe.

iramets Apr 02 2007 12:56 PM

I'd say that your #1 bat off the bench (cuz what other function is Franco serving?) will get some disproportionately big ABs. If Franco bats 10 times this month, 8 of them might be in the ninth inning when a hit means a ballgame.So it's not just any 8 at bats, it's 8 ABs with a man in scoring position in a close game with two outs in the 9th. It's a luxury to have a bat on the bench, a Rusty Staub, a Dick Stuart type who can't do much but hit., but it's a gross luxury if he can't even do that.

Benjamin Grimm Apr 02 2007 01:05 PM

The Mets didn't miss the playoffs by much in Rusty Staub's last season. I don't recall contemplating this at the time, but I wonder if having a more versatile player on the bench instead of Staub might have made a key difference. Four additional wins (or just two against the Cardinals) would have given the Mets the division title.

Edgy MD Apr 02 2007 01:05 PM

I agree with all that.

Johnny Dickshot Apr 02 2007 01:10 PM

A more effective shortstop playing every day would have done more than a more versatile pinch-hitter.

metirish Apr 02 2007 01:13 PM

Is Franco the # 1 bat of the bench,I really would have thought of him as the second to last option.....Glavine being the last.....well Castro then.

Benjamin Grimm Apr 02 2007 01:15 PM

I think what Ira is saying is that if you carry a guy solely for his bat it ought to be a good one. Franco isn't only a bat, though. For better or worse, he's been Delgado's primary backup. I think that may change this year: Green can play first and Milledge can play right.

Edgy MD Apr 02 2007 01:17 PM

Franco's the number one bat off the bench because he's the first pinch-hitting option in a game-turning situation in the eighth or ninth. The primary pinch-hitter is like the closer. You get fewer spots because they're saving you for the biggest ones.

metirish Apr 02 2007 01:19 PM

We're fucked then....

iramets Apr 02 2007 01:23 PM

The difference, I think, is that a good-hitting, good-fielding shortstop is pretty rare. Raffy was the best we could find at the time, and we had some reason to hope he'd have a good year. But Staub could have been replaced easily. His last few years were nothing special, he was fat, he was old, he was ineffective, and he was taking up space (a LOT of space)on the roster.

Edgy MD Apr 02 2007 01:29 PM

I don't agree that Staub was ineffective, nor that there were other guys ready to do it. Staubs OPS+'s in his second tour as a Met 1981: 147 1982: 79 1983: 122 1984: 84 1985: 127

iramets Apr 02 2007 01:36 PM

The last figure is a little misleading, in that , yes, he had a very good OPS but he only got 45 ABs and was on the roster the entire year. That's sorta my point. You know if you add those five seasons together, you get about one full year's worth of ABs. Considering that he was batting against disproportionately righthanded pitchers (I'd assume), and batting with a disproportionate number of men on base, his RBI (and HR) numbers look pretty sad. (His RS totals are pretty low, but about what you';d expect from a slow runner.)

iramets Apr 02 2007 01:44 PM

102 RBI 13 HR 29 RS (pinch-run for a lot) 169 for 612 (.276) In five years, that's not a lot to show for a guy who can't run, can't field, and can't fly. It ain't nothing, but five years of a roster spot ain't nothing either.

Edgy MD Apr 02 2007 01:47 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 02 2007 01:47 PM

I'd expect his runs scored totals to look a lot like his home run totals, as he was lifted for pinch runners after every hit. Your point that I was responding to was that he was ineffective. Did you and Davey Johnson talk about this in your dream?

Benjamin Grimm Apr 02 2007 01:47 PM

I think Rusty pretty much had to hit the ball over the fence in order to score a run. Virtually every time he got on base he'd come out for a pinch runner. Which means he was really burning roster space: when he'd get a hit or a walk Davey would have to go to his bench yet again.

Edgy MD Apr 02 2007 01:50 PM

No, because he used a starting pitcher that wasn't getting into the game anyhow. As for power. You know, singles are inportant in ninth inning situtations too. I don't get this at all. Every team has a primary pinch hitter who doesn't do much else. I'd beat up on Chris Jones or Matt Franco or Lenny Harris first.

Benjamin Grimm Apr 02 2007 01:56 PM

Edgy DC wrote: No, because he used a starting pitcher that wasn't getting into the game anyhow. Sometimes he'd use Ron Darling, but there were many times when he used Lenny Dykstra. Does every team have a guy who only pinch hits? I'd think that most of them can probably stay in a game in the event of a double switch. Franco can do that, he's played first and third. He's certainly more useful than Staub in that regard.

Edgy MD Apr 02 2007 02:23 PM

Rusty was an extreme case, but somehow we got away from Franco.

SteveJRogers Apr 02 2007 06:24 PM

I'm a bit worried that we are a few bad Maine-Perez-Pelfrey starts away from Chan Ho Park and Aaron Sele making 15-20 starts this year. Not that the starters have short leashes, but I'm concerned about the Mets taking a "lets win now" approach and plug in veterans like Sele and Park at the first sign of ineffectiveness with the back end of the rotation. While I do agree with the notion that bullpens by nature are transient in this day and age, but what if the current crew doesn't measure up to last year's standards? I'd put last year's pen right up there with the 99-00 and 86-89 pens as the best in Met history; and while Heilman, Feliciano and Wagner are still there, and Mota and Sanchez will return (though major question marks with them both when they make their returns) it seems too much of the pen has turned over for my taste.

iramets Apr 02 2007 07:15 PM

Edgy DC wrote: Rusty was an extreme case, but somehow we got away from Franco. Yes, I did hijack this thread in Rusty's direction. Franco's only a little less extreme than Rusty was, my little tiny point being that, like Yancy, I value the guys at the end of the bench being able to do more than one task. Admittedly, hitting is no small task, but you've got to be able to actually, you know, hit. By being pretty powerless, and pretty speedless, their ability to hit league average is minimized. I'd imagine many utility players who could pinch-run sometimes couldn't be that much worse than a .270 BA and an OPS between .7 and .8. And that's the upside! I've probably told you Bill James observation that Manny Mota, an honest-to-Cobb .400 hitter for Lasorda's Dodgers at the end of his career, had to be let go because, while he could hit .400, he could only hit against certain pitchers, and needed a pinchrunner any time he got on base, and almost never hit the ball beyond an outfielder, and never walked, and could play the field with about the mobility of an ashtray and--well, he lost his job while hitting .400. And no one picked him up. Because he wasn't worth the roster spot. I'm just saying....

metirish Apr 02 2007 07:19 PM

That's a hell of a story about Mota.

Edgy MD Apr 02 2007 07:48 PM

Yeah, and the Mets aren't in that situation, yet. I agree that he'd be more useful on another team, and only as long as he hits. I looked up Staub's 1985. The only extra hitter the Mets burned as a pinch runner for him was three appearances by Terry Bocker, who really was a waste of a roster spot --- going 1-15 filling in for injured Mookie until they realized that Dykstra was more ready to help. Staub's Pinch-Hit Successes in His Last Season: 4/9: With the score tied at nine, Staub bats for Orosco with two out in the ninth and a runner on first. He walks and Darling runs for him. Wilson flies out with the bases loaded, but Carter wins it with a walkoff homer in the 10th. 4/17: With the Mets up 9-6 in the seventh, Staub bats for Champman with one out and a runner on second. Staub doubles the runner home, and Backman --- who was going in anyhow --- pinch-runs for him and dies at second. Mets win. 5/13: Staub pinch-hits for Lynch, down 1-0 and with two out in the bottom of the eighth. He singles and Blocker runs for him, failing to advance, as the Mets go on to lose. 5/18: In a 2-2 game, Staub leads off the eighth, batting for Lynch and singling. Blocker runs, fails to score and big sad late rally by the enemy causes the Mets to fall 8-2. 6/1: Mets are up 3-2 in the seventh. Staub bats for Chapman with a runner on second and one out. He singles home the runner. Blocker runs for him and the Mets win 5-3. 6/22: Down 2-0 in the seventh, Staub pinch-hits for Dykstra with two out and two on and hits a three-run homer to put the Mets on top. They go up 4-2 after that, but Orosco and McDowell give it back and they lose. Ouch. 6/25: Mets up 3-2 in ninth. Staub pinch-hits for Backman with runners on second and third with with two out. He walks and is pinch-run for Chapman, who is coming in anyway. Dykstra fans to end the rally but the Mets hang on and win. 7/4: Game is tied at 11 in the bottom of the 19th. Runner on second with one out, and Staub pinch hits for Gorman, where he is walked intentionally. He runs for himself and comes around to score as the rally continues and the Mets go up 16-11. Darling comes in for the bottom of the inning and yields two before the Mets win 16-13. 7/9: Mets up 10-2 in the ninth. Staub pinch-hits for Gooden with a runner on third and is walked. He runs for himself as Dykstra drives the run in and Backman grounds out. 7/12: Game tied at twosies in the top of the tenth. Straw walks but is caught stealing. Foster whiffs. HoJo doubles and Santana singles him home, going to second on the throw. Staub is walked intentionally batting for Darling and stays in as Dykstra flies out. McDowell seals it in the bottom of the inning. 7/20: Mets up 12-1 in the sixth, Staub pinch-runs for Gooden and runs for himself. 8/14: Mets down 2-0 with a runner on and no out in the ninth. Staub pinch hits for Santana and walks, putting the tying run on. Aguilera pinch-runs, but the Mets score only once as a Hernandez double-play ends it. 8/16: Mets are down four in the seventh. Staub pinch singles with one out. Darling runs for him and is on third when the inning ends. 8/25: Mets are up by three in the seventh. Staub bats for Santana with two out and singles home Straw. Bowa, going in anyhow, pinch-runs. McDowell doubles him home before Dykstra grounds out. 8/29: Game tied in the seventh, Staub pinch-singles for Aguilera with one out. Darling runs for him and is on third when the third out is made. 8/30: Tie game in the ninth. Heep scores the go-ahead run on a one-out double by HoJo. Hurdle is walked and Staub bats for Santana. After a wild pitch advances the runners to second and third, Staub is walked and pinch-run for with Bowa, entering the game anyhow. Johnson --- p[laying gutsy --- leaves Foster and Knight (among others?) on the bench and lets Darling bat for himself with the bases loaded. Darling flies to center, but gets them in the ninth after runners reach second and third. Wow, what a nail-biter. 9/1: Mets down by two in the ninth, Staub doubles in a run batting for Santana. Bowa, who was going in at short anyway, runs for him, and is thrown out going from first to third on a Mookie Wilson single. Mookie scores the tying run and Keith Hernandez the go-ahead on a pinch homer by Hernandez. 9/20: Mets down by two n bottom of seventh. Staub pinch-singles for Backman to bring the Mets within a run. Gardenhire, who was going in at second anyway runs for him, and scores the tying run. 9/21: Singled, stayed in to run for his fat self in a Mets blowout. 9/28: Mets up 3-1 in the ninth. Staup pinch-walks with one out and runners at first and second. Billy Beane runs for him before Mookie grounds out forcing Beane at second. Billy Beane's appearance is hardly a waste as the Mets would have had a deep bench on 9/28.

iramets Apr 02 2007 07:52 PM

Well, technically he did get one more AB, two years after being released with a .429 BA. But look at his last few years--from age 37 through age 44, he never batted 60 times in one season, and he had years of .395, .357, and 429, at which point they let him go.

metirish Apr 14 2007 09:29 AM

Kinda wondering where Wrights power has gone...everything else seems in place except that..

iramets Apr 14 2007 09:37 AM

How much power do you need from your #2 hitter?

Kid Carsey Apr 14 2007 10:01 AM

You're chewing on that like a puppy on a old chocolate-dipped slipper. Wright's been batting fifth, give it up already.

iramets Apr 14 2007 10:19 AM

You sure? I thought he was batting #2 in ST for a reason. Guess not. Chocolate slippers. Yum.