I find that most proposals for 'change of scenery' trades are silly. Most fans of teams think that an opposing club will pay full value for their failed prospect in hopes that they may regain their former luster. Fans clamor for their General Manager to pry struggling players from opposing teams for pennies, when no such deal is on the table. (Think I'm kidding? Take a minute to google a guy like Alex Gordon and see what you come up with... here is an example of how he was hotly pursued last year: link)
However, not all proposals to get a player a change of scenery are bad ones -- in fact, there are plenty of scenarios where getting a player out of town might benefit both parties. However, the price for the team dumping the loser or receiving the once-hyped prospect will be steep.
Enough beating around the bush. My idea? The Mets trade Jason Bay to the Red Sox for Carl Crawford and a little cash.
The match could not be better, and I am amazed that it took me so long to see this. Let's start with the basics on the two players.
As you know, Jason Bay has struggled as a Met. He posted a .259 average with 6 HR and an 749 OPS in 2010, and followed that up with a .245 average, 12 HR, and a 703 OPS this year, missing time both years with injuries. Factoring in defense and baserunning, Bay was worth an astoundingly terrible 0.7 WAR this year.
Carl Crawford's welcome to Red Sox Nation may have been even worse. Crawford this year put up a .255 average and 11 HR, but drew almost nothing in the way of walks and posted an OPS of 694. Crawford made up some of the gap with superior defense, but also posted an awful 0.4 WAR.
Jason Bay is owed $16MM in 2012, $16MM in 2013, and has a vesting option for $17MM in 2014 for a total of $49MM over the next three years (or $35 over two years). Crawford is owed the outrageous sum of $122MM over the next six years. Both contracts look like horrible albatrosses.
Why would these teams make the swap?
Why The Red Sox Will Do It
1. Carl Crawford is a dead man walking in Boston. His horrible season for the Sox, combined with his horrific play on the last hit of Boston's season, seals his fate. The gnashing of teeth and wringing of hands in Boston is audible all the way here in Queens.
2. Carl Crawford is not a good fit for Fenway. Why on earth did Boston sign this guy in the first place? In addition to the above, and generic concerns that he may not be cut out for a big market, the Sox took a player who derives a TON of his value from his speed and defense and put him in the smallest left field in the entire baseball universe. They added him to a lineup which already had bona-fide top of the order hitters in Ellsbury, Pedroia, and Gonzalez. Crawford is an afterthought.
3. Jason Bay has already THRIVED in Boston. Maybe Bay is a different player now, but wouldn't it be worth it for them to see if they can roll the dice and at least get some value from Bay, rather than with a guy like Crawford who has been placed in a position where he can do nothing but fail?
Why The Mets Will Do It
1. Jason Bay is a dead man walking in Queens. Back to back terrible seasons. Ending the season on the bench with a "sinus infection," in addition to huge chunks of both seasons. And now the pressure on Bay will become even worse -- all hope for a bounce back is gone, and with back to back losing seasons, the fans will begin to turn on the player with the largest contract.
2. Bay is a terrible fit for Citi Field. The spacious left field, the high fences, and the low-run scoring environment have conspired to make this the worst case scenario for Bay. Granted, Bay did not hit well on the road this season either, but the change of scenery back to Boston may help him.
3. There is HOPE for Carl Crawford, where for Bay there is little to none. As has been pointed out, Carl Crawford was bad, not terrible, for the Sox since starting the season horrendously. After beginning the start of play on May 23rd batting .215/.249/.298, Crawford hit a poor but improved .280/.313/.474 from then until the end of the season, over 352 plate appearances.
Bottom Line?
Both players have enormous contracts and have underperformed greatly. Both players are bad fits for their current clubs, and have worn out their welcomes. And it just so happens that both players play left field.
"But Brian, why would the Sox trade for a player who is older and just as horrible?" The Red Sox, as we all know, are further along on the success cycle right now. If they had Jason Bay in left field instead of Carl Crawford, they may well have won an additional game and made the postseason this year. With that in mind, taking a chance on Jason Bay, with the shorter contract, with the potential that he may regain some of his prior Boston success (where he posted OPSes of 897 and 921), makes sense. It helps, also, that Bay fits comfortably down in the order as opposed to the speedy Crawford. And remember - Bay will only be 33 next year.
"But Brian, why would the Mets take on the longer contract for the player who was worse last year?" A few reasons. As I mentioned above, there is hope that Crawford may succeed in Flushing while there is no such hope for Bay. Furthermore, Crawford is a fantastic fit for Citi Field -- he might even be able to play center field and give the Mets the answer they are looking for at that position so they can open up left field for someone like Lucas Duda, Nick Evans, or someone else. Even moreso, Crawford can hit toward the top of the Mets lineup, where his few talents would not be as wasted as they are in Boston. And he'll fit perfectly in the low scoring National League East... not to mention distract a little from the flurry of negativity that will occur when Reyes departs.
You know you've struck a good deal when people on both sides find it hard to pull the trigger. The one thing that I think the Mets would require to execute this deal is a little financial assistance in years 2014-2017 when Jason Bay's contract is expired and Crawford is still on the books.
Proposal: Mets trade Jason Bay to the Red Sox for Carl Crawford and $5MM in each of the years 2014-2017. The Mets end up with Crawford on a 6/$107MM deal and the Sox get Bay for 3/$49MM plus a future payment of $15MM.
Each team takes on some risk, each team gets an asset from the other that is more likely to succeed for them than for their current team. Neither team wants anything to do with these guys -- so why not put them in a position where they may be able to succeed.
I'd love to hear people's thoughts on this: Is this deal a good match? Would one team love this idea and another team hate it? Are there other factors that I haven't considered?
Friday, September 30, 2011
Friday, September 02, 2011
Marginal Value and Why I Don't Care if the Mets Bring Back Reyes
Quickly, who has been the most valuable Met this year?
Has it been Jose Reyes and his league-leading .336 batting average? Did Carlos Beltran have that distinction while he was here? Has David Wright's surge since coming back put him into the discussion?
No, no, and no -- if you are talking money, that is.
When you take into account the salary they are earning, the most valuable Met this season has been none other than Daniel Murphy. No, he does not have the highest WAR of any Met this year -- that distinction goes to Reyes -- but he has provided the most value at the least cost. That makes him the most valuable.
Below is a table with a majority of the Mets regulars, sorted from the highest WAR per dollar to lowest:
[I really hope you can read that. I will provide the text version of that chart at the bottom of the post.] Anybody with access to baseball-reference or fangraphs or who watches the game can tell you to a reasonable degree of certainty who is the most valuable player on the field. But baseball is a business -- just like the other major sports -- and even though you and I might bleed blue-and-orange and think flags fly forever, for those who make the decisions it all comes down to money. It's not that winning is irrelevant -- but winning almost always depends on having a strong financial position from which you can make moves in the future.
Which brings us to this next example, where the Tigers surrendered the 19th pick in the 2010 draft to sign Jose Valverde to a two-year deal worth $14 million, which would be worth $22 million if the Tigers exercise a 2012 club option. Ignoring the draft-pick compensation, Valverde’s contract would look pretty good ... he would be worth $18.2 million if you ignore the draft picks. However, the 19th pick would ... 3.3 wins over the first six years, which ... is $10.5 million in foregone wins.If you go to fangraphs, you'll see that at the bottom of each page they have a section for each player entitled "value." In that section, there is listed the players salary, right next to a column which says "dollars." The dollars column roughly amounts to how much a player providing that much value would cost on the free agent market. Jose Reyes, for example, has posted 5.3 WAR so far this season, while the market in baseball generally values 5.3 WAR at a price of $23.9 million dollars. Daniel Murphy, on the other hand, has provided 3.2 WAR which is valued at $14.3 million dollars.
Jose has been better, but Murphy has provided more bang for his buck.
So herein lies the problem: once Jose Reyes - or any player - becomes eligible to test the free agent market, they are going to find someone to pay them what they are worth. Or as is often the case, more than they are worth. At that point, unless there is some kind of hometown discount being provided, that player is no more or less useful to your team than any other. In fact, he may be LESS useful to your team specifically because you owned him to begin with -- by not allowing him to leave, you fail to get draft pick compensation that you would otherwise have.
For example, if the Mets were confronted with the ability to sign Jose Reyes or Hanley Ramirez, as free agents this winter, my only preference would become who would provide the better DEAL for our team. I love Reyes, he is my favorite player. But I'd rather see my team win without Reyes than lose with him.[1]
Back in 2005, when the Mets were on the precipice of their ill-fated dynasty, the world belonged to them. In David Wright and Jose Reyes, the Mets had lucked into two all-star position players at almost exactly the same time. Between 2006 and 2008, Reyes posted 6.1, 5.8, and 6.4 WAR. In the same time span, Wright posted 5.2, 8.9, and 7.1 WAR. All of those were All-Star campaigns, and in the case of Wright, what had a good argument as an MVP season.
But why did the Mets win so many games from 2006-2008? It wasn't just because they had Wright and Reyes -- they still have Wright and Reyes. It was because in 2006, Wright and Reyes made a COMBINED salary of less than a million dollars. In 2007, they earned around $4.5 million dollars. In 2008, they raked in less than ten million dollars. As a whole, they earned approximately $15 million dollars while providing the Mets with value equivalent to what they would have to pay a free agent approximately $163 million dollars for. That's $150 million dollars of profit.
So what did the Mets do when they had two, young, cost-controlled mega-stars? They used the extra money that they had to PAY free agents. They brought in Pedro Martinez, and Carlos Beltran, and Carlos Delgado, and Billy Wagner and so many others. And for that stretch of time, the Mets were very, very good. But when the Mets failed to win it all, it wasn't just a sadness that could be remedied next year -- it was the end of an era. The window was, and remains, closed, for the Wright-Reyes Mets to be anything special.
Take an example of another very good team, last year's Texas Rangers. They knew that they had a good, cheap nucleus of talent in Josh Hamilton ($5.5M), Ian Kinsler ($4.2M), Nelson Cruz ($440K), and others. They could afford to pay free agent money to players that they thought would push them over the top -- like Vladimir Guerrero.
Even big market teams like the Red Sox cannot win without cost-controlled, home grown stars. The Red Sox have players like Dustin Pedroia, Jacoby Ellsbury, Daniel Bard and Jon Lester under cost control -- so they could trade for Adrian Gonzalez and give him a lucrative contract extension, and they could pick up David Ortiz' contract option, and they could afford to make moves even with John Lackey's contract burdening them.
As for us, with Reyes and Wright reaching the point in their careers where they need to be paid what they are worth, it doesn't really matter if they are Mets or not-- outside of our weak, silly, baseball-fan hearts. They will still be good players, but they will be no better for us than any other roll of the dice that we make on the free agent market. Can a team built around a Wright and Reyes who are being paid market value still win? Of course they can. But the deck is no longer stacked in our favor.
For the next few years, the Mets are going to have to stand by and watch young, practically free superstars like Stephen Strasburg, Jason Heyward, Domonic Brown, Bryce Harper, Mike Stanton, Logan Morrison, Antonio Bastardo, Julio Teheran, Jonny Venters and a host of others provide All-Star if not superstar value for our rivals. The question is -- do the Mets have reinforcements? Can the Mets reload?
All of this, finally, brings us back to the table that we posted at the beginning of this article. Although the Mets don't have any surefire stud prospects waiting in the wings to be our next Wright or Reyes, the Mets certainly do have a lot of cheap players who can provide value in 2012 and beyond. You don't have to be a stats nerd or sabermatrician to understand that having cheap players who can step into roles on a winning club has value. You just may be surprised to learn how much.
Another way of looking at the above table is to look at the value provided beyond the salary they were paid.[2] Sorting this way, Murphy is again the most valuable Met. In third, however, is Jose Reyes, who has provided over $11 million in surplus value despite earning $11 million on this year's contract. All in all, the Mets have 12 players who have provided more than $2 million in surplus value to the team, and even better, all of whom (except Chris Capuano and Reyes) remain under team control next year.
Add to these names (Murphy, Niese, Tejada, Davis, Dickey, Turner, Duda, Thole, Pagan, Parnell) the list of players we discussed last week in our Organization Report, and you've got yourself an excellent core of players to build around.
Would I like the Mets to resign Reyes? Absolutely. Would the Mets be a better team on the field for doing so? Absolutely -- there is no player out there who can replace the value of a stud, in his prime, All-Star shortstop. Will it make the Mets better suited financially in the future to compete with the other teams in the NL East? Hard to say.
-----------------
[1]
The fangraphs values, and the generally accepted practice of attaching a dollar value to the WAR provided by a free agent, are misleading in that relative to the entire pool of players playing major league baseball, all free agents are overpaid. As the salaries for players with less major league service time are strictly fixed by the rules and by arbitration, they can only wait for their free agent payday.
[2]
The Top 12 Mets in providing value beyond their salary:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Monday, August 22, 2011
The Kids Are Alright
One of the best -- and also most frustrating -- things about baseball, is that over time, things always end up like they should. In that way, baseball is like life.
Over the course of 162 grueling games, the best teams will win, the Albert Pujolses will break out of their slumps, the and the Justin Turners will no longer hit .500 with runners in scoring position. It is not like football, where you only need to get through 16 games and can find a Maurice Jones-Drew out of nowhere. It's not like basketball or hockey where half the teams make the postseason. In baseball, six months will usually allow the best teams to prevail and for just enough time for magical fairy dust to wear off.
This is particularly poignant at this moment, as our Mets crash and burn in spectacular fashion (though personally I prefer this scenario to a late season collapse).
The other night, we all watched Dillon Gee struggle epically in his start against the Phillies. Gee was a great story for a while, but for those of us who were more than causal observers, we knew that he wasn't just an extraordinary kind of "gamer" or that he hadn't figured out "how to win" better than the next major league pitcher. Ultimately, you knew that he was going to gravitate toward his actual talent level. Perhaps, Gee will be quite good in the majors. Perhaps Gee has grown over time to become a better pitcher than he was in the minor leagues. But right now, he's sporting a 4.37 ERA, which is a lot closer to what you'd expect for Gee than the 3.32 ERA he had on July 1st. Most likely, he will become, to paraphrase Dennis Green, "who we thought he was."
The reason for this lengthy introduction is because as the Mets play out the string here in late August and September, most fans, myself included, begin to have their thoughts turn to the 2012 season. Thoughts of stars returning from injuries, discussions about free agents, and analysis of minor league prospects will ensue as we assess the strengths and weaknesses of our organization. We here at Fonzie Forever have always consistently stressed that the most important thing that an organization needs to do before making a plan for the next year is to make an honest assessment of there they are TODAY.
As an example, we all remember the Winter and Spring before the 2010 season. For a few months, the Mets maintained the status quo -- they acted for months as if they thought they had a shot to make the playoffs in 2010 and that all they needed to do was patch the holes. They signed Jason Bay to a large, lucrative contract -- one which I at the time predicted would cost Omar Minaya his job. They signed or acquired players such as Alex Cora, Elmer Dessens, Henry Blanco, Gary Mathews Jr., Frank Catalanotto, and Rod Barajas. Those players were, for the most part, players that you might acquire if you THINK you can contend and you need to fill out your bench, bullpen, or Triple-A roster. However, for the 2010 Mets, each and every one of those acquisitions ranged from mistake to disaster. The Mets behavior that offseason wasn't anchored in reality at all, and we here at Fonzie Forever said it every step of the way:
With the health of Carlos Beltran, Johan Santana, and Jose Reyes all uncertain, there was no way a coherent plan could have been developed for the 2010 season. Under any set of circumstances, they were unlikely to succeed. Even if Santana, Beltran, and Reyes all came back strong, the Mets would also need David Wright to return to form, Mike Pelfrey to continue his growth, and for other players to step up.
The Mets, as we've said here before, were very fortunate in 2010. Out of nowhere, we discovered a quality major league center fielder in Angel Pagan; a high quality starter in RA Dickey; David Wright returned to form as an all-star caliber third baseman; Ike Davis had a wildly successful rookie year; and Carlos Beltran returned from his surgery and showed that he had a chance to contribute in 2011.
The 2011 edition of our Mets has been similarly successful, though their successes have been subtle, or modest, or in far away cities such as Binghamton or Port St. Lucie. Leaving aside any discussion of Madoff and the Wilpon's financial trouble -- about which no independent blogger can truly say make any predictions -- the Mets organization as a whole is in a much stronger place today than it was at this time last season.
Obviously, the major league roster now is not as talented as the one we fielded in April -- Davis and Reyes are hurt, while Beltran and K-Rod have been traded -- and not every prospect has advanced his standing. However, from the low minors to the major leagues, there have been a great deal of successes.
Below, I am going to take a look at some of the players who have made significant gains or significantly improved their stock in the last year. Undoubtedly, some of these names will be familiar to casual fans -- and others only to statheads. For space reasons, I'm not going to be able to go over everyone in the low minors, but limit myself to those players already on the major league roster or in the higher minor leagues.
I am proud to report that, for the first time in a while, I am very happy about the strength of the organization in general. An organization does not need to consistently produce super stars in order to be useful -- and in fact, in New York, it is even less important that they do -- because the development of useful, cheap, cost-controlled young players allows you the financial flexibility to make moves elsewhere. Now, on to the players:
Stock Up
Lucas Duda: You can count me as one of the many observers who did not think that Duda would amount to too much in the majors. Before 2010, Duda was a defensively-challenged corner outfielder who at the age of 23 posted an 808 OPS in Double-A. Then, something clicked. People have speculated that Duda had gotten over an injury, but since the bell rung in 2010 -- over 800 at-bats later -- he's been a very, very good hitter. He put up a 999 OPS in Triple-A last year, a 1011 OPS in Triple-A this year, and has hit .275/.345/.464 in the majors this year. In the last 45 games -- a decent proxy for since he's gotten regular playing time -- he's hit .300/.376/.531, which is outstanding.
Nobody is going to project Duda to post a 900 OPS over the course of a full season, but it's pretty clear now that Duda can hit, and that I was wrong about him. It remains to be seen whether Duda's glove will be good enough for the outfield (fangraphs has his career UZR/150 in the outfield at an atrocious -32.9 over a small sample size), but it is clear that Duda's stock is WAY WAY up and that he is a major leaguer.
Kirk Nieuwenhuis: Another player who took his enormous strides of 2010 and solidified them in 2011 was Captain Kirk Nieuwenhuis. Considered an overachiever by many, Kirk was not highly regarded even after posting an 847 OPS in Double-A at the age of 22. Scouting Book called him a fourth outfielder, while Keith Law, who strongly weighs scouting and tools in his ranking, did not place Kirk in his Mets Top 10 before the 2010 season.
The Captain, however, improved on his great 2010 season with a stellar 2011 season before going down with an injury. In 53 games, he batted .298/.403/.505 -- a batting line that will play anywhere, but is fabulous for a 23 year old center fielder. He underwent labrum surgery on his non-throwing shoulder in midseason, and there are substantial questions about how he will recover, but he has shown that, if healthy, he has a bright future.
The Big Three Pitching Prospects -- Matt Harvey, Jeurys Familia, Zack Wheeler: Much virtual ink has been spilled already on these three, so I will be brief, but suffice to say that each of these three have taken big steps forward this year. All three have good "stuff" according to scouts, and have backed it up with their performance on the field.
Harvey, my favorite of the three, has struck out 59 batters in 51 innings in Double-A, including 7 shutout innings yesterday. He's been a little unlucky with balls in play, but with a strikeout to walk ratio of 59-15, he is having one of the best pitching prospect seasons I've seen. Familia may have been even better, with 63 strikeouts in 48 innings and an 11 inning shutout streak of his own in Double-A. Finally, Wheeler, the project of the three, is also striking out more than a batter per inning for the Single-A St. Lucie Mets. Toby Hyde was very impressed with his last start:
His fastball sat 94-96 mph with a few 93 mixed in later and one 97 as well early. He showed both the ability to throw it down with run and sink and throw it shoulder-height to change batters’ eye-level and produce swings and misses. Early on, his curveball was 77 mph with bite, by the end of his outing he was throwing it in the low 80s. It was nasty.I try not to engage in hyperbole, but this is the best crop of Mets pitching prospects that I can recall seeing. All of them, in my opinion, compare favorably to Pelfrey (who, in his own right, was an impressive minor leaguer) and even to Jon Niese (who I was a big fan of from even the beginning).
Josh Satin: Although he doesn't profile to be an impact player any time soon, Satin has transformed himself from a non-factor into a player who can contribute on a major league team. After a relatively unremarkable minor league career, where he posted good-not-great numbers at each minor league level while being a little old for each level, Satin has exploded at the dish this year. He posted a 962 OPS at Double-A before his promotion to Triple-A. While with Buffalo, he's put up a respectable OPS of 808. That mark includes a .392 on-base percentage.
Zach Lutz: Similarly, organizational soldier Lutz made it to Triple-A and has posted an OPS of 933. It was just two seasons ago that Lutz was a non-factor, posting an 822 OPS in High-A. He's been quite good in Buffalo this year, and may find a way to be a useful major leaguer.
Chris Schwinden: Although Schwinden is not as good as his stats would indicate this season, he's taken a big step forward this season for Triple-A Buffalo. Schwinden last season posted a 5.56 ERA in Double-A, and the year before spent the majority of the season in Low-A Savannah. This year, however, Schwinden has handled his promotion to Triple-A with aplomb, posting a 3.60 ERA, 1.22 WHIP, and striking out 8.2 batters per nine innings -- all of which are career bests. The former 22nd Round draft pick may make good.
Jordany Valdespin: The 23 year old Valdespin was featured here a year and a half ago where we said:
There are a lot of reasons to like Valdespin. Obviously, his Savannah performance was good. More importantly, being rated the "best athlete" in the system...ahead of the likes of Wilmer Flores, Jefry Marte, Kirk Nieuwenheis and others says a lot about his tools...In addition, he had a very strong Winter League performance...All of these things point to a bright future for Jordany. Although it could be seen as an indictment of his talent that he has not yet reached High-A ball entering his age 22 season, his physical abilities and variety of talents (speed and defense) make him an intriguing prospect.Jordany is a project, but this year has taken a huge stride forward. After ending the 2010 season with a poor 698 OPS between Single-A and Double-A, he hit a robust .297/.341/.483 for Double-A Binghamton earlier this year. I think that the talk of Valdespin as a potential major leaguer next season is premature, but he is still only 23 and may still have room to grow.
Reese Havens: Back in 2009, when Reese Havens and Ike Davis were coming off their first full seasons in the minor leagues, we here at Fonzie Forever could not understand why Davis was being held in higher regard than Havens. We pointed out here that they were picked only four selections apart in the 2008 draft, both had hit well in the minors, and Havens had the positional adjustment advantage (second base versus first base). However, Havens has been plagued by injuries since then, and his stock -- through early this year -- had dropped substantially.
However, I am glad to report that Havens has come back strong in the last two months, and has upped his batting line in Double-A to .287/.370/.420. Even better, he's gained momentum as the year has gone on, posting a line of .323/.402/.430 since the All-Star Break. Granted, he will have to prove that his injury problems will not derail his once promising career, but Havens stock has certainly risen since April. He's a second baseman capable of posting an OPS of 800 or better, and those are exceedingly rare.
Justin Turner: Although by no stretch would I ever want Justin Turner starting on my contending team, my man @redturn2 has finally gotten the opportunity to show that he deserves to be in the major leagues. Turner hasn't hit a lick since his third week in the majors and his OPS is now down to 678 -- however, he plays decent defense and is fun to be around and can be a piece on a winner. ZiPS projected Turner for a 697 OPS in preseason, which is on the money as usual, but that is fine for organizational depth.
Stock Down
As I mentioned, not everyone in the Mets organization has been all puppies and rainbows in 2011. It's been a tough year for Fernando Martinez, while we watched Jenrry Mejia undergo Tommy John surgery. Stephen Matz, the Mets first pick (second round) of the 2009 draft has had some soreness in his recovery from his own Tommy John. I still believe that these players have a chance to contribute (particularly Mejia, who observers believe can still be a big impact pitcher) but their fortunes have dimmed somewhat since this time last year.
But in general?
A hallmark of a good organization is not just in the superstars at the major league level or super prospects in the minors, but in the depth of the rosters at each level. If you trade a Beltran, do you have a Duda to fill in? If Davis gets hurt, do you have a Daniel Murphy to take his space or do you need to pay a Mike Jacobs?
In that sense, it's been a very, very strong year for the organization. Aside from the one big question mark surrounding the Mets' financial situation, this is a team that could probably start making some noise as early as next year. Provided that the majority of players come back reasonably healthy, this is what the Mets squad could look like next year without a single addition from free agency.
1B Davis
2B Murphy
SS Reyes
3B Wright
LF Bay
CF Pagan
RF Duda
C Thole/Paulino
SP Santana, Niese, Dickey, Pelfrey, Capuano
RP Parnell, Beato, ...
The team as constituted above is not going to win the National League East. The Mets still have significant weaknesses when it comes to the starting rotation and the bullpen, and the Jason Bay contract will haunt the organization for another two years, but given average health that team will not be terrible. And more importantly, it's not constituted so poorly that it makes me want to run to the Mets offices at Citi Field and say "Are you mad?! Trade everything that's not nailed down!! You guys are crazy for keeping up this charade!"
Generally speaking, the players mentioned above have shown that the Mets are going to be less likely to suffer should they be befallen by a major injury. The days of Alex Cora and Miguel Cairo seem to be past, for now. And even better, the above guys, if we need them to play, are going to be making the minimum salary. That is why Angel Pagan and RA Dickey have been the most valuable Mets over the last couple of years -- they are providing value and barely costing anything.
These kids are alright. Luckily, all the trading of stars and doom and gloom at the major league level hasn't done anything to dampen the future prospects of our minor leaguers. Granted, reinforcements would have been nice in 2009, or 2008, but once again, that's part of the beauty of baseball.
Prospects, or major leaguers, or injuries, or luck, don't develop because you NEED them to at that moment. That's one of the beautiful things about baseball. Tragically, Daniel Murphy got injured again this year, just when we needed him. The Mets made silly moves in advance of 2010 because they thought they needed to compete, and damn the fact that the roster just wasn't good enough at that point. Where are we on the success cycle?
These kids are alright. The ones above -- and many others, who I did not get a chance to mention -- had a good year this year. I am excited to watch our boys play out the string here in late August and September, and hopefully, they'll be here contributing to the major league team very soon.
But not because we need them to. Because they are ready.
Tuesday, August 02, 2011
Is Zack Wheeler Overrated?
On my way to bed tonight, I took a quick look over at Metsblog to see is there were any interesting stories I missed today while in the midst of work and riveting debt-ceiling talk. Turns out that this afternoon they posted a link to the new Baseball America Top 10 Prospects list, which considers the state of the farm system as it is today post-trade and post-draft. Here's the list:
Zack Wheeler ascends to the top spot on the list, surpassing even Matt Harvey, the Mets highly-touted draft pick from last season. And for what reason, you may ask? Well, apparently, Wheeler has a really high ceiling. People like him a lot. Some of the good stuff?
--Project Prospect said that his curveball "has elite, two-plane break and is a no-doubt swing-and-miss offering."
--Baseball America in 2011 ranked him as the Giants #2 prospect and said that he "threw an easy 94-97 mph fastball" and called his changeup "functional."
--Here is a clip of Wheeler pitching this season which has been linked a few times, but may be worth another look:
But so far, none of this has translated to professional success for young Mr. Wheeler. So far this year, despite a decent enough 3.99 ERA, he has posted a 1.37 WHIP and walked 4.8 batters per nine innings for High Class-A San Jose in the California League. He's striking out a lot of batters as well, with 10.0 K/9, but for reference, he's walking the same amount of batters per nine innings as Oliver Perez did in 2008, when he was making everybody into a mental patient. His 3.99 ERA also checks in as the fourth highest ERA among regular starters on that team although, once again, his strikeout rate is elite.
But at this point, all the scouting accolades have not manifested in his actual pitching. And for those of you who would point to the fact that being drafted by the Giants portends success, Tim Lincecum dominated at San Jose (1.95 ERA, 0.90 WHIP) as did Matt Cain (1.86 ERA, 1.03 WHIP), as did Madison Bumgarner (1.48 ERA, 0.98 WHIP). All those pitchers were kept, while Wheeler was traded.
Does Wheeler stand a chance to be great? Sure, I hope so. And of course, I am no professional scout. However, you heard a number of similarly glowing things about other Mets farmhands, yet the hype machine doesn't care about them because they were not involved in a big trade.
How about Matt Harvey? His fastball "sits in the 92-96 mph range and touches 98," similar to Wheeler (link). He's 6-foot-4 with a "power curve" and flashes of above average breaking stuff. Just as importantly, Harvey dominated at High Class-A this season when Wheeler struggled, posting a 2.37 ERA and 1.19 WHIP with 10.9 K/9 and only 2.8 BB/9. Harvey has struggled somewhat in Double-A, but his fantastic strikeout to walk ratio has remained the same and he is only 29 innings into his stay there. So far, Harvey has been a tremendous success.
How about Jeurys Familia, who was a forgotten man after his struggles in 2010? He is seven months older than Wheeler, but he is putting up almost identical stats to Wheeler but is doing so in Double-A rather than Single-A. Familia has put up a 3.38 ERA, which is good, but his secondary stuff is a little rougher, with a 1.36 WHIP, 4.0 BB/9 and 10.3 K/9. When he was in High Class-A to begin the year, he dominated with a 1.49 ERA and a strikeout per inning.
Here is a clip of Jeurys Familia striking out ten batters in a minor league start on June 18th of this year.
I don't mean to lose you with all the numbers, but Familia, who also throws 92-96 with the fastball (link) has been projected by some as a "bullpen guy" while Wheeler has been touted as a potential ace. I certainly hope that Wheeler does well, but until he shows me something in the minor leagues, or until the scouting reports of his actual pitches improves -- rather than forecasts of future improvement -- I don't think he deserves the #1 spot in any Mets prospect ranking.
Zack Wheeler ascends to the top spot on the list, surpassing even Matt Harvey, the Mets highly-touted draft pick from last season. And for what reason, you may ask? Well, apparently, Wheeler has a really high ceiling. People like him a lot. Some of the good stuff?
--Project Prospect said that his curveball "has elite, two-plane break and is a no-doubt swing-and-miss offering."
--Baseball America in 2011 ranked him as the Giants #2 prospect and said that he "threw an easy 94-97 mph fastball" and called his changeup "functional."
--Here is a clip of Wheeler pitching this season which has been linked a few times, but may be worth another look:
But so far, none of this has translated to professional success for young Mr. Wheeler. So far this year, despite a decent enough 3.99 ERA, he has posted a 1.37 WHIP and walked 4.8 batters per nine innings for High Class-A San Jose in the California League. He's striking out a lot of batters as well, with 10.0 K/9, but for reference, he's walking the same amount of batters per nine innings as Oliver Perez did in 2008, when he was making everybody into a mental patient. His 3.99 ERA also checks in as the fourth highest ERA among regular starters on that team although, once again, his strikeout rate is elite.
But at this point, all the scouting accolades have not manifested in his actual pitching. And for those of you who would point to the fact that being drafted by the Giants portends success, Tim Lincecum dominated at San Jose (1.95 ERA, 0.90 WHIP) as did Matt Cain (1.86 ERA, 1.03 WHIP), as did Madison Bumgarner (1.48 ERA, 0.98 WHIP). All those pitchers were kept, while Wheeler was traded.
Does Wheeler stand a chance to be great? Sure, I hope so. And of course, I am no professional scout. However, you heard a number of similarly glowing things about other Mets farmhands, yet the hype machine doesn't care about them because they were not involved in a big trade.
How about Matt Harvey? His fastball "sits in the 92-96 mph range and touches 98," similar to Wheeler (link). He's 6-foot-4 with a "power curve" and flashes of above average breaking stuff. Just as importantly, Harvey dominated at High Class-A this season when Wheeler struggled, posting a 2.37 ERA and 1.19 WHIP with 10.9 K/9 and only 2.8 BB/9. Harvey has struggled somewhat in Double-A, but his fantastic strikeout to walk ratio has remained the same and he is only 29 innings into his stay there. So far, Harvey has been a tremendous success.
How about Jeurys Familia, who was a forgotten man after his struggles in 2010? He is seven months older than Wheeler, but he is putting up almost identical stats to Wheeler but is doing so in Double-A rather than Single-A. Familia has put up a 3.38 ERA, which is good, but his secondary stuff is a little rougher, with a 1.36 WHIP, 4.0 BB/9 and 10.3 K/9. When he was in High Class-A to begin the year, he dominated with a 1.49 ERA and a strikeout per inning.
Here is a clip of Jeurys Familia striking out ten batters in a minor league start on June 18th of this year.
I don't mean to lose you with all the numbers, but Familia, who also throws 92-96 with the fastball (link) has been projected by some as a "bullpen guy" while Wheeler has been touted as a potential ace. I certainly hope that Wheeler does well, but until he shows me something in the minor leagues, or until the scouting reports of his actual pitches improves -- rather than forecasts of future improvement -- I don't think he deserves the #1 spot in any Mets prospect ranking.
Friday, July 29, 2011
Daniel Murphy is KILLING the Baseball
Hey everyone.
Can we talk Daniel Murphy for a second? I for one cannot believe that the tear he's been on recently has gotten such little press. I realize that Reyes was having an MVP-caliber season, and that trading Beltran is a huge story -- but almost nobody in baseball has been as good as Daniel Murphy in the last couple of months.
For the year, Murphy is hitting .319/.360/.458. That's pretty good. And stop, for a moment, and consider JUST how good that is. As it is, he's THIRD in the National League batting race. Did you know that? He's sandwiched between Ryan Braun and Joey Votto.
In the year of the pitcher, part deux, his 818 OPS is good for an OPS+ mark of 128, which is phenomenal. To put that in perspective, his 871 OPS in 2008 was only good for an OPS+ of 129 -- essentially equivalent. So even when viewing the season as a whole, he's had a truly awesome season thus far.
But when you take a look at his numbers from the middle of May onward, you will be stunned by how good he's been.
For the last 30 days, Daniel Murphy is hitting .373/.400/.573 for an OPS of 973. NINE-SEVENTY-THREE. Think that's just a hot month? It's not. In the last 60 days, Murphy has hit .358/.383/.491 for an OPS of 873. He hit .349 that month. He's been this hot since two weeks after we found out Osama Bin Laden had been killed. South Sudan wasn't a country yet. We still had a Space Program. Kate Middleton had been married less than a month. He's been doing this day in and day out for a while.
He's been getting better. And it's for such a period of time now that you have to take a step back and really take it seriously. This isn't a good two week stretch -- this is an enormous sample. In his last 240 at bats, Daniel Murphy has hit like Wade Boggs in his prime. Want to know what the full season pace is for that kind of performance?
232 hits, 56 doubles, 93 RBI, 54 strikeouts, .363/.390/.504
Obviously, Daniel Murphy is not Wade Boggs. In addition, Murphy has been aided by somewhat fortuitous luck on balls in play, with a BABIP of .384. But at this point I think it's appropriate to step back and actually ask: How good is Daniel Murphy?
Even if you were to shave off a generous amount of luck from his batting line -- say his BABIP is around .330 rather than .380 -- he'd still be hitting .313/.340/.454 over this period of time.
Oh -- and one more thing that I almost forgot to mention. His last 14 games? They have been his best. Not only has he posted an OPS of 1039 in those games while hitting .390, but in those last 59 at bats, Murphy has been pretty hard to strike out. Want to guess how many strikeouts he's had in those last 59 at bats?
a) 10 strikeouts
b) 8 strikeouts
c) 6 strikeouts
Ready for the answer? The correct answer is ONE strikeout. Daniel Murphy in the last two weeks has ten doubles and one strikeout.
The point of this exercise is not to say that I think Daniel Murphy is going to hit .400 for the rest of his career. I don't think that tomorrow he is going to hit 40 home runs or win a gold glove at second base. But I think it is long past due for the fans to acknowledge his incredible run of success -- and to contemplate what it might mean for the future.
Can we talk Daniel Murphy for a second? I for one cannot believe that the tear he's been on recently has gotten such little press. I realize that Reyes was having an MVP-caliber season, and that trading Beltran is a huge story -- but almost nobody in baseball has been as good as Daniel Murphy in the last couple of months.
For the year, Murphy is hitting .319/.360/.458. That's pretty good. And stop, for a moment, and consider JUST how good that is. As it is, he's THIRD in the National League batting race. Did you know that? He's sandwiched between Ryan Braun and Joey Votto. In the year of the pitcher, part deux, his 818 OPS is good for an OPS+ mark of 128, which is phenomenal. To put that in perspective, his 871 OPS in 2008 was only good for an OPS+ of 129 -- essentially equivalent. So even when viewing the season as a whole, he's had a truly awesome season thus far.
But when you take a look at his numbers from the middle of May onward, you will be stunned by how good he's been.
For the last 30 days, Daniel Murphy is hitting .373/.400/.573 for an OPS of 973. NINE-SEVENTY-THREE. Think that's just a hot month? It's not. In the last 60 days, Murphy has hit .358/.383/.491 for an OPS of 873. He hit .349 that month. He's been this hot since two weeks after we found out Osama Bin Laden had been killed. South Sudan wasn't a country yet. We still had a Space Program. Kate Middleton had been married less than a month. He's been doing this day in and day out for a while.
He's been getting better. And it's for such a period of time now that you have to take a step back and really take it seriously. This isn't a good two week stretch -- this is an enormous sample. In his last 240 at bats, Daniel Murphy has hit like Wade Boggs in his prime. Want to know what the full season pace is for that kind of performance?
232 hits, 56 doubles, 93 RBI, 54 strikeouts, .363/.390/.504
Obviously, Daniel Murphy is not Wade Boggs. In addition, Murphy has been aided by somewhat fortuitous luck on balls in play, with a BABIP of .384. But at this point I think it's appropriate to step back and actually ask: How good is Daniel Murphy?
Even if you were to shave off a generous amount of luck from his batting line -- say his BABIP is around .330 rather than .380 -- he'd still be hitting .313/.340/.454 over this period of time.
Oh -- and one more thing that I almost forgot to mention. His last 14 games? They have been his best. Not only has he posted an OPS of 1039 in those games while hitting .390, but in those last 59 at bats, Murphy has been pretty hard to strike out. Want to guess how many strikeouts he's had in those last 59 at bats?
a) 10 strikeouts
b) 8 strikeouts
c) 6 strikeouts
Ready for the answer? The correct answer is ONE strikeout. Daniel Murphy in the last two weeks has ten doubles and one strikeout.
The point of this exercise is not to say that I think Daniel Murphy is going to hit .400 for the rest of his career. I don't think that tomorrow he is going to hit 40 home runs or win a gold glove at second base. But I think it is long past due for the fans to acknowledge his incredible run of success -- and to contemplate what it might mean for the future.
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Baseball's Foolish Realignment Plan
I know I'm late to the party on this one, but as they say, better late than never, right? I'd like to give a brief treatment to the potential realignment plan that was first reported by Buster Olney and debated as of late. I know that many others have written longer, and better, about this idea, but I'd like to give it the once-over myself.
The idea, for anyone who doesn't know, would be to have 15 teams in the American and National Leagues, to eliminate divisions, and to simply have the teams with the five best records make the playoffs. I for one think this would be a huge mistake.
First, it is important to note that aside from Buster Olney, several very well-respected baseball writers have come out in favor of the realignmnent plan. Dave Cameron and Jeff Passan, in particular, do excellent and thoughtful work, and are both strongly in favor of the plan. This means that, despite being originally brought to light by Olney, that this idea must have some credence.
Cameron, in particular, feels that the proposed plan makes for a fairer sport. He points out the disparity between the four-team AL West and the six-team NL Central, and also the fundamental disadvantage that the rest of the AL East has when faced with the Yankee and Red Sox behemoths. Essentially, Cameron concludes that "While I’ve been trained to believe that nearly every “improvement” MLB suggests is probably a bad idea, this actually seems like a pretty fantastic idea to me, in large part due to my desire to see increased fairness in the sport."
Fairness. Fairness? For those in favor of realignment, fairness really does seem to be the main sticking point. And who could disagree? I think we all should hope for a system where the best teams make the playoffs, where all fan bases can have the opportunity to root for a winner, and no team need be structurally disadvantaged. However, I don't think that this drastic realignment plan truly addresses these issues -- and if it did, the downsides far outweigh the advantages.
For the sake of brevity, I'll present the following reasons in list format:
1. If you're concerned about the AL West and NL Central being imbalanced -- which I have been for a decade -- why not just move a team?
Let the Astros, or whomever, go to the AL West. Then, you've got equal divisions everywhere. Will there be the "constant interleague" problem? Sure. But it's no more or less than with the other plan.
2. Getting rid of division races would be terrible for the regular season, and for the sport in general.
Watching division races down the stretch is the best thing about baseball. Would you rather watch the Mets and Phillies battle head to head down the stretch, or watch the Marlins and Padres jockey for the fifth and final playoff spot?
I think we've all seen what it's like when a sport has most of its field battling it out in a vague homogeneous mix. In hockey, the regular season is practically irrelevant. It's the same in basketball. In those sports, all the top teams get to coast to the finish while a few battle it out for the last few playoff spots.
Take, for instance, the National League in 2007. Down the stretch, we were treated to an incredible division race in the NL East ... I need not remind any of you what happened, but it was incredibly exciting and memorable for all of baseball. In the proposed realignment plan, that never happens. The Mets make the playoffs without any dramatics at all.
3. This doesn't solve the problem of competitive imbalance.
What baseball should be striving for is a good competitive balance, and an environment where every team can truly compete. They shouldn't be realigning the sport in order to provide a wimpy excuse where they can say "Hey, there were five playoff spots and you didn't make it! You have nobody to blame but yourself."
Would realignment in any season have helped the Pirates or Royals make the playoffs? Are we really so hung up on the Rays and Red Sox that the entire sport has to have a detrimental make-over? We've already got a wild card -- if the advantage that the Yankees and Red Sox have is, in fact, so steep to the point when it ruins the game, why not address it substantively rather than passive-aggressively?
This realignment plan sounds to me like MLB is conceding that the Yankees and Red Sox will make the playoffs every year, and they need to figure out a way to make it seem fair for the other teams to fight for the scraps. That, to me, is the real problem.
4. What is truly fair? And should the "best teams" making the playoffs even be a concern? And even if the teams with the five best balanced records made the playoffs, would that make them the best?
Ultimately, we all agree that there should be fairness in the sport. But I believe that should be as a result of policy and rule changes to the competition side, not the playoff method.
Was it fair for the Mets to miss the playoffs in 2007 while the Cubs made it with an inferior record? I think that it was. Chicago won it's division, and the Mets did not, even when they had the chance to. Was it fair for the Cardinals to make the playoffs in 2006 with 83 wins, while Philadelphia (85) and Los Angeles (88) went home? I submit to you that it was. We all know what the Cardinals went on to do that season in winning the World Series -- doesn't that make them the best?
Baseball is a game. It's not a scientific study to determine which team is "best" in a given year. I imagine that if there even were a way to determine the "best" team, that they probably don't win the World Series more than a third of the time.
I agree that there are issues in our sport that need addressing. However, radically reshaping the sport and creating a host of other issues (interleague, travel, DH, 15th place teams) is not the way I believe we should be addressing them.
The idea, for anyone who doesn't know, would be to have 15 teams in the American and National Leagues, to eliminate divisions, and to simply have the teams with the five best records make the playoffs. I for one think this would be a huge mistake.
First, it is important to note that aside from Buster Olney, several very well-respected baseball writers have come out in favor of the realignmnent plan. Dave Cameron and Jeff Passan, in particular, do excellent and thoughtful work, and are both strongly in favor of the plan. This means that, despite being originally brought to light by Olney, that this idea must have some credence.
Cameron, in particular, feels that the proposed plan makes for a fairer sport. He points out the disparity between the four-team AL West and the six-team NL Central, and also the fundamental disadvantage that the rest of the AL East has when faced with the Yankee and Red Sox behemoths. Essentially, Cameron concludes that "While I’ve been trained to believe that nearly every “improvement” MLB suggests is probably a bad idea, this actually seems like a pretty fantastic idea to me, in large part due to my desire to see increased fairness in the sport."
Fairness. Fairness? For those in favor of realignment, fairness really does seem to be the main sticking point. And who could disagree? I think we all should hope for a system where the best teams make the playoffs, where all fan bases can have the opportunity to root for a winner, and no team need be structurally disadvantaged. However, I don't think that this drastic realignment plan truly addresses these issues -- and if it did, the downsides far outweigh the advantages.
For the sake of brevity, I'll present the following reasons in list format:
1. If you're concerned about the AL West and NL Central being imbalanced -- which I have been for a decade -- why not just move a team?
Let the Astros, or whomever, go to the AL West. Then, you've got equal divisions everywhere. Will there be the "constant interleague" problem? Sure. But it's no more or less than with the other plan.
2. Getting rid of division races would be terrible for the regular season, and for the sport in general.
Watching division races down the stretch is the best thing about baseball. Would you rather watch the Mets and Phillies battle head to head down the stretch, or watch the Marlins and Padres jockey for the fifth and final playoff spot?
I think we've all seen what it's like when a sport has most of its field battling it out in a vague homogeneous mix. In hockey, the regular season is practically irrelevant. It's the same in basketball. In those sports, all the top teams get to coast to the finish while a few battle it out for the last few playoff spots.
Take, for instance, the National League in 2007. Down the stretch, we were treated to an incredible division race in the NL East ... I need not remind any of you what happened, but it was incredibly exciting and memorable for all of baseball. In the proposed realignment plan, that never happens. The Mets make the playoffs without any dramatics at all.
3. This doesn't solve the problem of competitive imbalance.
What baseball should be striving for is a good competitive balance, and an environment where every team can truly compete. They shouldn't be realigning the sport in order to provide a wimpy excuse where they can say "Hey, there were five playoff spots and you didn't make it! You have nobody to blame but yourself."
Would realignment in any season have helped the Pirates or Royals make the playoffs? Are we really so hung up on the Rays and Red Sox that the entire sport has to have a detrimental make-over? We've already got a wild card -- if the advantage that the Yankees and Red Sox have is, in fact, so steep to the point when it ruins the game, why not address it substantively rather than passive-aggressively?
This realignment plan sounds to me like MLB is conceding that the Yankees and Red Sox will make the playoffs every year, and they need to figure out a way to make it seem fair for the other teams to fight for the scraps. That, to me, is the real problem.
4. What is truly fair? And should the "best teams" making the playoffs even be a concern? And even if the teams with the five best balanced records made the playoffs, would that make them the best?
Ultimately, we all agree that there should be fairness in the sport. But I believe that should be as a result of policy and rule changes to the competition side, not the playoff method.
Was it fair for the Mets to miss the playoffs in 2007 while the Cubs made it with an inferior record? I think that it was. Chicago won it's division, and the Mets did not, even when they had the chance to. Was it fair for the Cardinals to make the playoffs in 2006 with 83 wins, while Philadelphia (85) and Los Angeles (88) went home? I submit to you that it was. We all know what the Cardinals went on to do that season in winning the World Series -- doesn't that make them the best?
Baseball is a game. It's not a scientific study to determine which team is "best" in a given year. I imagine that if there even were a way to determine the "best" team, that they probably don't win the World Series more than a third of the time.
I agree that there are issues in our sport that need addressing. However, radically reshaping the sport and creating a host of other issues (interleague, travel, DH, 15th place teams) is not the way I believe we should be addressing them.
Monday, April 25, 2011
Food for Thought
As Mark Simon of ESPN New York pointed out yesterday:
Obviously, I'm a fan of Gee. Around this time last year, I featured Gee in my "Don't Forget About" series on underrated players.
Now, here is your food for thought.
Regardless of what you think Gee's ceiling is -- is he better than Mike Pelfrey is right now? If you had a one game playoff to determine the winner of the NL East or Wildcard, who would you rather have starting for you: Mike Pelfrey, or Dillon Gee?
With Gee on the cusp of being bumped for the rotation for Chris Young, I can't escape the thought that if one of the Mets starters needs to get skipped, it should be Pelfrey. I'm a huge fan of Niese and Dickey, and Young and Capuano have both pitched well enough to deserve additional starts.
Just a thought.
In those seven starts, Gee has a 2.22 ERA and a 1.19 WHIP. He’s allowed three home runs in 44 2/3 innings. The one thing that would classify as shaky is his strikeout-to-walk rate -- 26 to 18. But in two starts this season, he’s walked only three in 11 2/3 innings.
In his seven starts, Gee’s xFIP is 3.99. His Batting Average on Balls in Play (BABIP) is .234, abnormal for a pitcher, but partly explainable by Gee’s ability to avoid batters hitting line drives against him. (His rate is 10 to 12 percent, depending on which source you use, which would rank very high if maintained for a full season.) That figures to increase as big league hitters figure him out.
Obviously, I'm a fan of Gee. Around this time last year, I featured Gee in my "Don't Forget About" series on underrated players.
Gee might never have the ceiling of an ace or #2 starter, but if he keeps pitching like this, he is going to get himself on the radar really fast. According to Toby Hyde, Gee "tops out around 91 with strong control and mixes in his breaking ball for strikes."
With the great performance yesterday indicating that his injury woes are behind him, Gee has a tremendous opportunity to continue developing. If you can throw 91 and strike out two or three times as many guys as you walk, you can have a great career in the major leagues.
Now, here is your food for thought.
Regardless of what you think Gee's ceiling is -- is he better than Mike Pelfrey is right now? If you had a one game playoff to determine the winner of the NL East or Wildcard, who would you rather have starting for you: Mike Pelfrey, or Dillon Gee?
With Gee on the cusp of being bumped for the rotation for Chris Young, I can't escape the thought that if one of the Mets starters needs to get skipped, it should be Pelfrey. I'm a huge fan of Niese and Dickey, and Young and Capuano have both pitched well enough to deserve additional starts.
Just a thought.
Saturday, April 09, 2011
It Wasn't Pretty But More Importantly The Mets WON!
Game 2: Mets 8 Nats 4
Capuano's Metsies debut vs Gorzelanny
First night game at Citi field aka the battle of the Hairston bros at Citi Field! Both brothers shamed their family name because they just can't hit but Scott's team is victorious! Btw any "Mad Men" fans out there, does Terry Collins at all remind you of Roger Sterling?!
Ok enough of my celebrity doppelganger theories, let's get to the recap!
Bottom of the 1st, Reyes singled to lead off this ballgame (and now he has a 6 game hitting streak)! Pagan then popped up. Wright was then up with 1 out and Reyes stole 2nd! But ugh David Wright struck out and it was up to Beltran to bring Jose home with 2 outs and he homered! This was the first Citi Field homer this season and the Mets took a 2-0 lead over the Nats. But sadly Scott Hairston took the early I will shame my baseball family name lead by flying out to Jerry! Ugh why couldn't he at least fly out to an outfielder who doesn't share his surname!
3 run homer by Espinosa in top of 2nd, 3-2 boo, the Nats take the lead.
Bottom of the 4th Wright struck out and seriously that was his 10th K in 30 at bats, wtf. I thought this was a different David!? But hooray for Beltran who homered again and the game was tied at 3-3 and who doesn't love the Bel-ly 2 homer games! 28th career multiple homer game for Carlos, wahooo!
But ugh how soon the lead again disappeared in the top of the 5th! 4-3 after Desmond's lead off solo home. But then Capuano struck out Werth! 7th K of the game for Chris! Then Zimmerman singled to give the Nats their 6th hit of the game, boo. But phew, Morse then flew out and there were two outs, Zimm was on 1st for Wilson Ramos who doubled and thanks to a great play by Pagan in the outfield Zimm had to stay at 3rd and then Ankiel grounded out and the inning was over. Further danger averted!
Capuano's Metsies debut vs Gorzelanny
First night game at Citi field aka the battle of the Hairston bros at Citi Field! Both brothers shamed their family name because they just can't hit but Scott's team is victorious! Btw any "Mad Men" fans out there, does Terry Collins at all remind you of Roger Sterling?!
Ok enough of my celebrity doppelganger theories, let's get to the recap!
Bottom of the 1st, Reyes singled to lead off this ballgame (and now he has a 6 game hitting streak)! Pagan then popped up. Wright was then up with 1 out and Reyes stole 2nd! But ugh David Wright struck out and it was up to Beltran to bring Jose home with 2 outs and he homered! This was the first Citi Field homer this season and the Mets took a 2-0 lead over the Nats. But sadly Scott Hairston took the early I will shame my baseball family name lead by flying out to Jerry! Ugh why couldn't he at least fly out to an outfielder who doesn't share his surname!
3 run homer by Espinosa in top of 2nd, 3-2 boo, the Nats take the lead.
Bottom of the 4th Wright struck out and seriously that was his 10th K in 30 at bats, wtf. I thought this was a different David!? But hooray for Beltran who homered again and the game was tied at 3-3 and who doesn't love the Bel-ly 2 homer games! 28th career multiple homer game for Carlos, wahooo!
But ugh how soon the lead again disappeared in the top of the 5th! 4-3 after Desmond's lead off solo home. But then Capuano struck out Werth! 7th K of the game for Chris! Then Zimmerman singled to give the Nats their 6th hit of the game, boo. But phew, Morse then flew out and there were two outs, Zimm was on 1st for Wilson Ramos who doubled and thanks to a great play by Pagan in the outfield Zimm had to stay at 3rd and then Ankiel grounded out and the inning was over. Further danger averted!
Friday, April 08, 2011
Fernando Martinez will be starting for the Mets in June
You heard it here first.
And not because we're desperate. But because we won't be able to deny him.
4-for-5 with a double tonight against Syracuse. He hit .364 with more walks than strikeouts in limited time this spring. Sure, it's a gut call, but it's one I'm comfortable making.
He's 22 this year. I think this is his year.
And not because we're desperate. But because we won't be able to deny him.
4-for-5 with a double tonight against Syracuse. He hit .364 with more walks than strikeouts in limited time this spring. Sure, it's a gut call, but it's one I'm comfortable making.
He's 22 this year. I think this is his year.
Sunday, April 03, 2011
So far so good...
Game 3: Mets 9 Marlins 2
Dickey vs Vazquez
I'm not gonna give a recap of this game but let's instead take a look at what we've learned about Terry Collins' 2011 Mets before they head on over for some Philly Cheesesteaks:
K-Rod may be going to anger management but he's still rocking the goggles and he's still having an extreme difficult time saving games. Okay it was just one game so far but he looked awful against Florida. But again it was one game, and even that Mariano Rivera messes up from time to time so I'm not turning on Frankie just yet.
Isaac Benjamin Davis got off to a rocky start with a few hiccups at first base which was and is shocking since he was the man last year that would make incredible plays diving into the stands. But since that first not so hot game he appears to have his hitting and defensive prowess back. He definitely has the potential to hit 20 homers (perhaps 30), bat .300 and rack up 100 ribeye steaks.
RA Dickey probably is our ace with Johan on the DL. No matter how many times he gets into trouble, he's the one Metsies pitcher I can watch without half covering my eyes when the bases are loaded. He has no trouble keeping his cool and he gets out of jams. Plus his post game locker room interviews are always worth watching. This man is brilliant and it's always just nice to hear his take on a game.
Beltran is hitting. That is what counts. Plus he's Duda's Yoda. According to Burkhardt, Carlos keeps an eye on Lucas and gives him advice to improve his hitting. They also have had dinner dates!
Eamus or Murphy at second?! The biggest fear with Daniel Murphy at second is the fact that he won't be able to turn double plays. He really didn't get a chance to do that yet during his one start but he looked absolutely fine at second. Eamus got his first hit in game 2 and he's looked pretty great defensively. It's a tough call.
Reyes and Pagan are still fast as can be and defensive badasses.
David Wright is looking like pre-getting hit in the head Davey. He's hitting, okay his defense hasn't been perfect but his swing is looking marvelous. I am thinking this could be a season where Wright doesn't strike out in consecutive games, gasp.
Willie Harris is proving to be a great pickup. So far he's pinch hit successfully, he's homered, he's played great defense and he's proven he can actually help the Mets and not just rob them of victories like he did as a National.
Jonathan Niese has had the tendency in the past to pitch great but to start out a little rusty. He does give up first inning runs but he also can then bounce back and give the Mets 6 scoreless innings.
Big Pelf looks like he is just picking up where he left off last season and that's no good. If he can get himself centered and back into his early 2010 form we really could have a pretty good pitching staff that could give a lot of teams trouble.
The Mets as a team have proven so far that just like last year they can fight back. They don't give up and that's great to see. Even when K-Rod blew the save game 2 they bounced right back in that top of the 10th and regained the lead. Does that mean we might see another 20 inning game, perhaps?!
Run support has been an issue with the Metsies. So many games last year we saw great pitching outings but the squad couldn't hit. Dickey for some reason was the one pitcher who seemed to always get run support and that has continued thus far.
In general Florida just kicks the Mets asses. Last year it was no picnic playing the fish so taking a series on the road from them is a great start.
On the road the Mets just couldn't win and they already have one road series under their belts so that's pretty neat and promising.
SNY still is all about the Geico and Fiberama commercials....
Keith hasn't fallen asleep or made that many funny comments yet but he has said "Cheese" so I think there's no reason to fear he's lost his unpredictable/very entertaining booth mojo. Just for now he seems very professional and that's great but we need some random tangents about authors or musicians or Sag Harbor just in case this season gets really ugly.
I know we don't have big expectations for the Metsies but you know what maybe they'll surprise us. A 2-1 start is not that shabby at all and I guess the real test is coming up. Philadelphia and that ridiculous pitching staff will be quite hard to defeat but you know what anything is possible in the world of sports. So for now let's just take it game by game and hope Collins' Metsies surprise us this year!
Dickey vs Vazquez
I'm not gonna give a recap of this game but let's instead take a look at what we've learned about Terry Collins' 2011 Mets before they head on over for some Philly Cheesesteaks:
K-Rod may be going to anger management but he's still rocking the goggles and he's still having an extreme difficult time saving games. Okay it was just one game so far but he looked awful against Florida. But again it was one game, and even that Mariano Rivera messes up from time to time so I'm not turning on Frankie just yet.
Isaac Benjamin Davis got off to a rocky start with a few hiccups at first base which was and is shocking since he was the man last year that would make incredible plays diving into the stands. But since that first not so hot game he appears to have his hitting and defensive prowess back. He definitely has the potential to hit 20 homers (perhaps 30), bat .300 and rack up 100 ribeye steaks.
RA Dickey probably is our ace with Johan on the DL. No matter how many times he gets into trouble, he's the one Metsies pitcher I can watch without half covering my eyes when the bases are loaded. He has no trouble keeping his cool and he gets out of jams. Plus his post game locker room interviews are always worth watching. This man is brilliant and it's always just nice to hear his take on a game.
Beltran is hitting. That is what counts. Plus he's Duda's Yoda. According to Burkhardt, Carlos keeps an eye on Lucas and gives him advice to improve his hitting. They also have had dinner dates!
Eamus or Murphy at second?! The biggest fear with Daniel Murphy at second is the fact that he won't be able to turn double plays. He really didn't get a chance to do that yet during his one start but he looked absolutely fine at second. Eamus got his first hit in game 2 and he's looked pretty great defensively. It's a tough call.
Reyes and Pagan are still fast as can be and defensive badasses.
David Wright is looking like pre-getting hit in the head Davey. He's hitting, okay his defense hasn't been perfect but his swing is looking marvelous. I am thinking this could be a season where Wright doesn't strike out in consecutive games, gasp.
Willie Harris is proving to be a great pickup. So far he's pinch hit successfully, he's homered, he's played great defense and he's proven he can actually help the Mets and not just rob them of victories like he did as a National.
Jonathan Niese has had the tendency in the past to pitch great but to start out a little rusty. He does give up first inning runs but he also can then bounce back and give the Mets 6 scoreless innings.
Big Pelf looks like he is just picking up where he left off last season and that's no good. If he can get himself centered and back into his early 2010 form we really could have a pretty good pitching staff that could give a lot of teams trouble.
The Mets as a team have proven so far that just like last year they can fight back. They don't give up and that's great to see. Even when K-Rod blew the save game 2 they bounced right back in that top of the 10th and regained the lead. Does that mean we might see another 20 inning game, perhaps?!
Run support has been an issue with the Metsies. So many games last year we saw great pitching outings but the squad couldn't hit. Dickey for some reason was the one pitcher who seemed to always get run support and that has continued thus far.
In general Florida just kicks the Mets asses. Last year it was no picnic playing the fish so taking a series on the road from them is a great start.
On the road the Mets just couldn't win and they already have one road series under their belts so that's pretty neat and promising.
SNY still is all about the Geico and Fiberama commercials....
Keith hasn't fallen asleep or made that many funny comments yet but he has said "Cheese" so I think there's no reason to fear he's lost his unpredictable/very entertaining booth mojo. Just for now he seems very professional and that's great but we need some random tangents about authors or musicians or Sag Harbor just in case this season gets really ugly.
I know we don't have big expectations for the Metsies but you know what maybe they'll surprise us. A 2-1 start is not that shabby at all and I guess the real test is coming up. Philadelphia and that ridiculous pitching staff will be quite hard to defeat but you know what anything is possible in the world of sports. So for now let's just take it game by game and hope Collins' Metsies surprise us this year!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)