Interesting 2011 Non-Tenders, Part 1

No flowery intro today -- just getting straight to work. Below, you'll find a list of a few non-tendered players who I think the Mets should take a look at. Obviously, standard caveats will apply -- if someone goes crazy and offers Edwin Encarnacion $5 million dollars, he should take it. However, I am assuming that most of these guys can be had at or around the minimum salary, and some even on minor league deals. With the Mets needing to buy-low and fill out the edges of their roster, without spending a lot of money, I think that some of these role players could be very, very good fits.


RP Taylor Buchholz: Buchholz is the perfect buy-low candidate, and hence, he is perfect for the Mets in this rebuilding season. Taylor Buchholz was one of the best relievers in major league baseball in 2008, posting a 2.17 ERA in Colorado and striking out almost 8 per 9 innings. He then got hurt and had to undergo Tommy John surgery.

He rehabbed and came back last season, struggling a little but with Colorado's Triple-A affiliate and the major league squad. He was claimed by Toronto and then Boston at the end of the year but didn't see action before being non-tendered by the Sox this offseason.

Buchholz is a great bounce-back candidate if healthy, but it looks like the Red Sox were not willing to take that gamble at the price it would have cost - a raise over the $1.05M he earned last year. One warning sign is that his velocity, which was at 92 in his Rockies days, was down to 89 last season. But you've got to keep in mind that he came back fairly quickly from his surgery.

With that said, I'd love to bring him in, though it appears the Mets have some competition in that regard.

Verdict: If healthy, 1 year/$650K

3B Edwin Encarnacion: It might surprise you to learn that, despite all the abuse he takes from the media and sabermetric types, that Edwin Encarnacion has been worth better than $5M in four out of the last five seasons (source: fangraphs). Even though he's got -44 UZR over those same five seasons, stats like that obscure the fact that he's only been worth -9.5 UZR in the last two seasons, and that third base is a damn hard position to play.

Because of this, he's earned 7 WAR over the last five years despite batting .260/.339/.455. Over his last three seasons, his 162 game average includes 30 home runs (!!) and a 104 OPS+. If he'd play second base, I'd take him. More likely, he'll get a contract to play third base somewhere and it will pay him more than a million dollars. If not - Edwin Encarnacion, come on down, you're the Mets starting second baseman!

Verdict: If he can play second base, 1 year/$1 million

LF Lastings Milledge: Oh, Lastings. I've missed you. I've rooted SO HARD for you to become a star... but alas, it has all been to no avail. What happened to you?

After putting up an OPS of 828 in AAA at the age of 21, and then hitting a nice .272/.344/.446 in the majors as a 22 year old, the world had such big plans for you! I wrote about Milledge last year:

Obviously, Lastings Milledge was never the super-stud prospect that he was made out to be... Both [his minor league seasons] were aided by high batting averages, (for instance, he had a .332 BABIP in AAA) and did not include particularly high walk rates or power... But it is quite possible that he can still be an asset... if he can continue to hit line drives more than 20% of the time (something he has done each year in the majors) and utilize his speed, there is no reason to think he can't be a .300 hitter.

If he can hit .300, and he can steal 20+ bases, and he can hit 15 to 20 home runs, he will be an extremely valuable player. Even moreso if he can continue to establish himself as an excellent left fielder (+16.4 UZR/150 in left field last season). A line of .300/.350/.450 is within reach... and Pittsburgh may have themselves a heck of a ballplayer.

I don't know. I was just wrong on Lastings, then wrong again, then after all hope seemed lost, I was wrong one more time. He stunk last year, split time with Ryan Church, and now, along with Jeff Francoeur, have all been non-tendered. The world can be funny sometimes.

I know Milledge will never come back to the Mets, but Bill James projects for him to have a moderate bounceback season of .284/.347/.413. ZiPS is less optimistic, at .276/.330/.398. Is that good? No. But it is an OPS of 94 from a player who projects as an above-average left fielder, average right fielder, and terrible center fielder. In fact, despite all the haterade, Lastings was worth $2.8M according to fangraphs.

And did you know that a 94 OPS+ would have been 8th among Mets players last season with at least 200 at bats? You could do a lot worse than Lastings Milledge on your squad. With him set to earn around $500K if he was tendered a contract, you can probably assume he'll earn around that number as a free agent. I'd take a gander.

(Side note: Lastings' most similar player on baseball-reference is beloved Met Cleon Jones. Think about that for a second)

Verdict: If we enter an alternate universe where Lastings Milledge coming back to the Mets is possible, 1 year/$650K

SP Ryan Rowland-Smith: You hear people talk about 'changes of scenery' sometimes, and usually it is just an excuse to get someone out the door, or an excuse to take on a player who has no potential to actually help your team. In some rare cases, however, a change of scenery might actually have some real effect (though obviously, no real way to measure such a thing).

One player who might benefit from this 'change in scenery' is Ryan Rowland-Smith. Mr. RR-S was not a bad prospect coming up through the Mariners system from 2004-2007. He always had an ugly WHIP, but he was left-handed and could strike guys out. When he made it to the show in 2007, he pitched effectively out of the bullpen. Then in 2008, he was effective again, split between the pen and the starting rotation. In 2009, he started exclusively and did well. He posted ERA's below 4 in each of those years.

Then, for some reason, the wheels fell off in 2010, and his ERA was north of 6. He stopped striking people out. Lefties hammered him. All of his four pitches were adjudged as negative in value by fangraphs. Why this is is anybody's guess, but I'd give RR-S a look.

Although he doesn't project as a situational lefty, he could always fit in the bullpen anyway if he can't stick in the rotation. and I imagine that he'd be extremely cheap - he was due only a little over 500K when the Mariners released him. Can he imitate Brandon Morrow and see success somewhere else?

Verdict: Minor league deal with the opportunity to start, if he wants it.

UTIL Eugenio Velez: I like Eugenio Velez. It started with my betting big on him in the 2009 fantasy baseball season, but I think he has value. Velez is a plus-plus defender in the outfield (in limited playing time) and can fake it at second base (-15.6 UZR/150). More importantly, he has posted OPS'es of 881, 791, and 792 in AAA in the last three years and has the potential to be a plus basestealer (though he was caught too often last year).

He has totally flopped in the big leagues, though I can't say for sure whether that's a small sample issue or whether major leaguers just knock the bat out of his hands. What I do know, though, is that a guy who can OPS over 800 in Triple-A (even if its the PCL) and who can give us 2B/LF/RF on a minor league or minimum contract is a guy I would like to have. He'll be 29 next season.

Verdict: If the scouts believe he could hit his way out of a wet paper bag, 1 year/$500K

Fonzie Forever's 2009 Non-Tender Candidates Review

Before I start taking a look at the 2010 non-tendered players and trying to decide who might be a good fit for this season's Met squad, I figured it would be instructive to look at a couple of posts from last year to see who I liked and didn't like from that year's scrap heap. Without further introduction:

INTERESTED:

Matt Capps

He was coming off injury last year, and there are a lot of reasons to believe that he was just unlucky. His fastball last year was the best it has ever been... He allowed only 18.7% of hits against him to be line drives... he may have been a little unlucky with home runs...The Mets should scoop this guy up quick.

Matt Capps was an enormously successful pickup for the Nationals last season. Capps signed for $3.5M, with bonuses that could bump it to $3.95M. He had a fantastic season, posting a 2.47 ERA and 42 saves and made the all star team. To add injury to another injury, when the Nationals fell out of contention, they were able to trade Capps to Minnesota for top catching prospect Wilson Ramos.

Ryan Church

He is a great defensive outfielder. His UZR/150 for his career as a left fielder is +3.7, and as a right fielder is a phenomenal +14.2... His average value from 2006-2008, per year, was around $7 million. I think Church... would make an *excellent* fourth outfielder...

Ryan Church took a pay cut to $1.5M last season but absolutely collapsed, hitting only .201 and posting a .265 OBP. He was an minor asset defensively, but was overall worth -0.2 WAR. Man, what happened to Ryan Church?

Jack Cust

Cust is another guy who would be helpful if he could be had cheaply. He could provide late power off the bench, and might want to come to New York to be part of a contender after spending his career in Arizona, Baltimore, San Diego and Oakland on bad teams.

Cust was great last season! He earned $2.8M for his work and batted .272 with a .395 OBP and 13 home runs in only 113 games. According to fangraphs he was worth $9.6M. You may be surprised to know that defensively he graded out as basically even, but only played 105 innings in the field. For his career, he was a negative fielder. Either way, Cust had a great, cheap season.

Ryan Garko: I'm confused about Ryan Garko - he was terrible last season in AAA. There's got to be something we don't know about that story. He earned just above the minimum salary.
Andrew Miller: The former first round draft pick was also a disaster last season.
Neal Cotts: Cotts signed a minor league deal this year but did not pitch anywhere because of injuries. Source.
Jonny Gomes: Jonny Gomes actually had an entire post devoted to him here at Fonzie last offseason:

The Mets absolutely NEED to be in on Jonny Gomes right now, as he is still a free agent. Gomes hit a great .267/.338/.541 for the Reds last season... his career marks are good for a 109 OPS+... he CRUSHES lefties - hitting .307/.369/.545 against them last season... His best offer on the table now is a minor league deal from the Reds. How come nobody will give this guy a major league contract or guaranteed money?

He plays a poor outfield, but did post a +2.2 UZR/150 in left field last season over 253 innings. Maybe we can slap a first baseman's mitt on him and have him back up 1B, and LF. Either way, he would be a strong option to pinch hit off the bench late in games, could grab an occasional start against lefties, and occupy the last spot on our roster.

He actually had an interesting season, did Gomes, as he got to play almost every day for the first time and posted 86 RBI with a 758 OPS. He had a down year offensively - probably a result of playing every day despite his platoon split - but was atrocious with the glove. Who knows, with these things?

Anyway, he was worth -0.1 WAR, which I believe could have been a decent sized positive WAR had he been used properly -- he actually had a 856 OPS vs lefties last year and a 709 OPS vs righties. He probably has a future career as a part-time DH as a Marcus Thames type. He earned 800K last season.


NOT INTERESTED
Garrett Atkins

For what it's worth, I think Atkins is done. Atkins' OPS has decreased steadily over the last four years, from 965 to 853, to 780, and then bottomed out at 650 last year. His career statistics away from Coors Field have been terrible. He is only 30 years old, but he was never the most physically fit player. Finally, he experienced a drastic jump in walks last season (from 40 in 664 ab to 41 in 339 ab) -- which is usually a bad sign for players at the end of their careers.

Get this - Atkins was the highest paid player on this entire list and was absolutely awful last year. He earned $4M for the Orioles to post a 562 OPS, hit .214, and butcher the ball defensively. He was actually worth NEGATIVE $4.4M.

You may remember that Atkins was a Metsblog obsession for a while -- good thing we dodged that one. And as for the Orioles, well, that's why they're the Orioles. It's interesting to note, however, that Fangraphs actually endorsed the move and that the fans were also wrong, projecting Atkins at $5.8M in value.

-----------

So where does that leave us? Certainly, I'd say there were more hits than misses, and especially big hits on Capps, Cust, and Atkins. Another lesson, if there is any, is that projecting a bounce-back for a hitter who is in a pattern of decline wasn't a good bet last year. Garko, Atkins, and Church were all bad. And those with big platoon splits, which would include Gomes, might not be as valuable as they appear to be on paper before they are exposed as every day players.

All in all, it appears that Capps, Cust, and Gomes, were worth their investments, while Church, Atkins, Cotts, Miller, and Garko were not. All in all, there are some big dividends to be reaped in the non-tender market with relatively little risk. I hope the 2010 Mets take a few chances.

Tune in soon for my review of the 2010 non-tender candidates!

It's Crazy, But..... Part 1: Aaron Heilman

From azcentral.com's Nick Piecoro:

[Aaron] Heilman’s agent, Mark Rodgers, said earlier today they haven’t made a decision yet, but it sounded as though Heilman was leaning toward declining the offer [of arbitration] and testing free agency.

Part of the thinking, it appears, is that Heilman might get a chance to do what he’s always wanted to do: try his hand as a starting pitcher.

The Mets and the Success Cycle

When you run a baseball team, the first thing that you should do (and I doubt the Mets have done this in a while) is to take a look at where you are on the success cycle. I haven't been able to find much reference online to this concept as it relates to baseball, but it's an enormously important concept in business. In business, however, it is referred to as the life cycle.

In business, products and even companies as a whole participate in some general permutation of this cycle. A business or product will debut, will grow, and will hit their initial peak. From that point, they can adapt and make changes which will bring them to a new, higher plateau, or they can be allowed to decline until they no longer exist. Where you are on that cycle determines what kinds of decisions you will make - whether to invest in R&D, whether to make capital improvements, etc.

In baseball, however, all 30 teams exist and will continue to exist regardless of their success or failure. One look at the Pirates or Royals will assure you that no matter how bad you are and for how long, you won't go out of business (contraction talk aside). What does remain true, however, is the fact that teams are better or worse equipped to "make a run" at the playoffs or to "rebuild" depending on factors as plentiful as the ages of their star players, the condition of their facilities, changes in ownership, changes in the economy of their surrounding area, and the relative strength or weakness of their farm system.

As far as the success cycle and baseball goes, it appears the most prominent article on it was written years ago by Jonah Keri over at Baseball Prospectus. Although he never explicitly defines the success cycle, he takes an in-depth look at the 2002 Pittsburgh Pirates and discusses the importance of determining your place on it:

The cycle is a baseball continuum on which every team resides. To measure a team's place in the cycle, assess its talent in the majors and minors. Can the players in the organization, mixed with a few trade acquisitions and free agents the team could reasonably sign, yield a competitive team? More precisely, can the team expect to compete while its current core of major-league players remain productive and under contract?

Wally Backman Continues to Prove Mets Management Correct

Over the last thousand posts here at Fonzie, you could probably count on one hand the number of entries devoted to discussing managerial issues. Why? It's not that I don't think managers are important -- but rather, we as outsiders really have no way of knowing which human being will do the best job managing our baseball club. We can dislike moves in isolation, or we can have broader complaints (bullpen management is a good example) but in general, we just do not have much information on which to base our opinions.

With managerial *candidates*, we know even less. In most cases, we haven't actually seen them manage. Most of what we know will come from published media, a few games a couple of years ago when they were a generic opposing manager, and perhaps some quotes from former players. And for candidates like Wally Backman who have never managed in the major leagues? We - and when I say we, I mean fans - know basically nothing.

What Would YOU Pay Jeter to Join the Mets?

Over on Amazin Avenue, the epicenter of rational thought in the Mets blogosphere, they had a poll this morning [1]asking readers the following:

Would you sign Derek Jeter to play for the Mets? To my surprise, the responses were overwhelmingly negative. By a margin of 76% to 23%, respondents voted no.[2]


I would most certainly sign Jeter if he was willing to play second base rather than shortstop. The real question, as far as I'm concerned, is "how much would you be willing to pay him?" I imagine that most of the people that voted "no" in the above poll did so because they took ancillary factors into account, such as price.

As far as I can tell, the question breaks down into two parts. One, what is Jeter's on-field value likely to be? And two, what is his off-the-field value to the Mets?

Toby Hyde is Keepin' It Real

I've always enjoyed reading Toby Hyde. Despite being affiliated with the SNY Network of blogs, Toby, the writer over at Mets Minor League Blog, seems to have pretty free reign on his content and does a good job with it.

Yesterday, Toby did a good job calling out Fangraphs on a couple of silly comparisons they made between Mets prospects and current or former major leaguers.

I think Marc Hulet, the author over at fangraphs, does a very good job usually. This is not his best work. The list itself seems pretty poor and disordered, but it's really the comments on the players that make you shake your head.

I don't have the time nor the experience with the Mets minors to take Hulet to task, but Toby does, so if you are interested in Mets prospects, I'd encourage you to click through and take a look at what he has to say. And while you're at it, read the original article as well. Hulet is off the mark a few times, but overall, fangraphs is a great resource and it'll serve as a useful primer on some of our more promising minor leaguers.

Happy Birthday-arino Keith!

It's somebody's birthday today! It's my favorite mustachioed Metsies announcer's big day! In honor of Keith Hernandez's birthday let's take a look back at some of his best Keith-isms in 2010:

"LOL" means "Lots of Laughs!"

If Los Marlins are male, is LAS VEGAS feminine?

I want to grow a "3 Musketeers D'artagnan style mustache."

What happens with the tattoos when you get a big scrape on your arm. When the skin grows back do you lose the tattoo?

I know a bar when I see one!

Yanks Lost! Phils Lost! Why Am I Not happier?

So yesterday was like a wet dream for us Metsies fans. Not only did the Rangers actually hold onto their lead and slaughter the Yanks but The Freak and the Giants beat the Phils too! I mean I should be really happy about this. Logic would dictate this. And you know what I'm thrilled the Yanks and the Phils got their asses handed to them and evil didn't triumph on two occasions yesterday but still I just feel kind of sad. As much as I get my jollies out of seeing Texas and the Giants win I just wish I was watching my beloved NY Metropolitans in the NLCS. I thought I had accepted the fact that the Metsies 2010 season was just an utter nightmare that I had moved on from BUT the playoffs keep reminding me that is not the case. I just keep thinking Dickey could have been starting against Lincecum or Halladay last night if things could have been different. But really it's wrong to think like this because it gets me nowhere. I need to just take pleasure in what I can and really that's seeing the Giants and the Rangers dominating their series at this point. So yep I can do this!

Every Single Time I Channel Surf In October, My Surfing Leads To The Mets!

So folks it's October and well as much as I'm trying to move on and forget about the Mets for a while, television is making this quite an impossible feat. Of course if I go to ESPN or SNY I'm gonna hear all about the Mets hiring and firing moves and that's totally fine but when I watch "Gossip Girl" and the woes of the Mets are mentioned this is just too much. Seriously I watch crap like that to forget about the Metsies! My worlds should not be colliding! Yeah I totally stole that "worlds colliding" business from "Seinfeld."