Tuesday, February 09, 2010

Mets Sign Jacobs to Minor League Deal ... Why?

Not understanding this at all:

The New York Mets are closing in on a one-year, minor league contract with free-agent first baseman Mike Jacobs, a baseball source told ESPN.com.

* * *

Jacobs will receive an invitation to big league camp on a non-guaranteed contract, the source said, and compete for at-bats at first base or off the bench. Daniel Murphy, New York's incumbent first baseman, hit .266 with 12 homers in 508 at-bats last season.
For what purpose? The Mets have made it clear that they are going with Murphy at first. Why would they sign another player who a) only plays first base and b) is left-handed and gets KILLED by lefties?

I always liked Mike Jacobs, and I thought he was going to be pretty good last season[1]. Obviously, he stunk instead. Many of the same reasons for optimism remain, but it may be that he was simply over-exposed last year.

But why would Jacobs choose to come to the Mets rather than a team he has a legitimate chance of starting, or at least platooning, on?

In another conundrum, where are the Mets getting the money for this? They apparently didn't have the money to even entertain the idea of negotiating with Yorvit Torrealba because of financial constraints[2].

I really hope that things turn out well for Jacobs, but I don't see him fitting on the Mets in any way, shape, or form.


[1] He also resembles a young Val Kilmer - hence his nickname of "Iceman."

[2] On a side note, do you think the hypothetical child of Joe Torre and Jessica Alba would be attractive or ugly? Whose genetics would win? And is that how Torrealba got his name (similar to Garciaparra)?


Anonymous said...

I don't understand what the hype is about Murphy. He's just average. Moreover, if the Mets are so excited about him playing 1B, how come the only excitement you really hear is about Ike Davis playing 1B in 2011.

Jacobs might not be such a bad idea for 2010 if Murph is not up to it.

Brian said...

Yeah, I guess I can see Jacobs being a good contingency plan -- would be he willing to play at AAA Buffalo though?

It seems pretty clear that the Mets are committed to Murphy at this point -- I mean, they didn't even go after Garko or any of the other players who might have made sense as a platoon with Murphy. So it looks like Murphy full time for 2010.

I thought Jacobs was going to have a big season away from Marlin Stadium in 2009, but obviously he struggled. I still think he has hope -- and with an even more pronounced split than Murphy, he could be a force if platooned properly.