Where's that numbnut fanboy who was all over these forums talking about how the Mets had "at least" 40M to spend? and who gave me some sort of flippant comment when I said I had solid information from ownership that Minaya won't be able to spend over 20-25M?

Oh no! Someone on the Internet disagreed with such a credible source as "Phoenixscienter!"

Welcome to BTF. If you just throw out one-liners, and don't provide support, people are going to tell you that you're full of ####.

Numbnut here. You don't have solid information from ownership, and Madden is full of it. Here's the rub:

The Wilpons are already on record as saying the payroll is coming down from $147 million in '09.

Where, Bill?

Has a "second-tier free agent strategy" ever worked in MLB?

As a Yankee fan, my experience with FAs has been that the big-money ones sometimes work out, but the moderate-money ones almost never do. Sometimes you hit a David Ortiz-like jackpot, but more often you sign Tony Womack.

As a Yankee fan, my experience with FAs has been that the big-money ones sometimes work out, but the moderate-money ones almost never do. Sometimes you hit a David Ortiz-like jackpot, but more often you sign Tony Womack.

I think calling David Ortiz a second-tier free agent when the Red Sox signed him is actually being generous, unless you're just claiming there's only two tiers. Ortiz basically fell into the "Flyer" category, the Red Sox famously torn between him and Shawn Wooten.

I'd argue that those guys are, at least in some ways, much better bets than second-tier free agents who are often established mediocrities whereas while you'll probably get 10 (or 100) Wooten's for every Ortiz, at least there's a chance of an Ortiz, and it will cost a lot less cash to find him.

Has a "second-tier free agent strategy" ever worked in MLB?

Occasionally, but only to fill a hole or two, and only if the deal is kept to a reasonable length. For an organization like the Mets, which have a whole pile of holes (C, 1B, at least one corner OF position, the back of the rotation), it's a huge risk.

when I said I had solid information from ownership that Minaya won't be able to spend over 20-25M?

I have solid information from having lived 30 years on this planet that you're pulling #### out of your ass.

Occasionally, but only to fill a hole or two, and only if the deal is kept to a reasonable length. For an organization like the Mets, which have a whole pile of holes (C, 1B, at least one corner OF position, the back of the rotation), it's a huge risk.

I think this may have changed a little bit the last year or so, since the 2nd tier guys aren't getting the big deals anymore. Yeah, Jeff Suppan on a 4/40 deal will kill you; but Jon Garland for 1/6 is just fine.

Given the number of holes the Mets have to fill, and the budget ($20-30M), I don't think they have a choice besides 2nd tier guys. And it might work out. They have enough stars if they are healthy, and as long as they keep the contracts in the 1-2 year range, they shouldn't really get hurt too badly.

Has a "second-tier free agent strategy" ever worked in MLB?

Occasionally, but only to fill a hole or two, and only if the deal is kept to a reasonable length. For an organization like the Mets, which have a whole pile of holes (C, 1B, at least one corner OF position, the back of the rotation), it's a huge risk.

I gather from the article that a "second-tier free agent" is anyone not named Holliday, Bay, or Lackey, while being more attractive, somehow, than Paul LoDuca. So, instead of aiming to fill "a hole or two", why not aim at filling a hole or five, as long as your condition of keeping the deal to "a reasonable length" (which I wholeheartedly agree with), is met? I mean, I don't trust Minaya to get it right, but the gaping wounds on the Mets roster at the moment are C, 1B, the OF corner not manned by Pagan, and 2 SPs. There are cheap, average C's to be had for short deals, Marquis is available and I'd have no problem giving him 2 years with a vesting option; Bronson Arroyo's durable and available for his salary; Cameron can apparently be had for 2/20... so that's 4 of 5 holes and a platoon 1bman shouldn't be impossible to find, or you can take (another) flyer on Delgado. IOW, five holes for short or reasonable deals.

I'd argue that those guys are, at least in some ways, much better bets than second-tier free agents who are often established mediocrities whereas while you'll probably get 10 (or 100) Wooten's for every Ortiz, at least there's a chance of an Ortiz, and it will cost a lot less cash to find him.

But you know who we're going to wind up with? Chone Figgins at 5/45, and Bengie Molina at 2/12.

when I said I had solid information from ownership that Minaya won't be able to spend over 20-25M?

I have solid information that a meteor is about to strike your house. Better step away from the computer.

First the Giants, now the Mets?

"2nd-tier" FA's are the new mark of inefficiency.

I have solid information that a meteor is about to strike your house.

But is your solid information from ownership?

I have solid information that a meteor is about to strike your house.

But is your solid information from ownership?

Of the house? Or of the meteor?

DB

At least the Mets are shopping at Wal-mart. The A's just filled their basket with some Dallas McPherson at the Dollar General.

Has a "second-tier free agent strategy" ever worked in MLB?

2005 White Sox. They traded Carlos Lee and let Magglio Ordonez walk to help clear salary for Dustin Hermanson, Jermaine Dye, Tadahito Iguchi, A.J. Pierzynski and Orlando Hernandez, all of whom played a big part in the season.

I don't take phoenixscienter's inside information claim seriously, but on the other hand, that other guy is in fact a numbnut.

If the payroll is in fact this limited, then I don't even want Arroyo/Marquis types. Let's get Harden/Nick Johnson types. Adding $25M of averageness to this team is not going to be enough to beat the Phils and Braves. We would need to add $25M that is capable of yielding $50M. (Or, of course, $0M, but that's the chance you take.)

the gaping wounds on the Mets roster at the moment are C, 1B, the OF corner not manned by Pagan, and 2 SPs

I would be extremely surprised if the "OF corner not manned by Pagan" were not manned by Francoeur. We could have a "what I would do" discussion, of course, but in terms of what actually will happen in 2010, I am pretty sure that is it.

I don't take phoenixscienter's inside information claim seriously, but on the other hand, that other guy is in fact a numbnut.

Thanks, #########.

I mean, I don't trust Minaya to get it right, but the gaping wounds on the Mets roster at the moment are C, 1B, the OF corner not manned by Pagan, and 2 SPs. There are cheap, average C's to be had for short deals, Marquis is available and I'd have no problem giving him 2 years with a vesting option; Bronson Arroyo's durable and available for his salary; Cameron can apparently be had for 2/20... so that's 4 of 5 holes and a platoon 1bman shouldn't be impossible to find, or you can take (another) flyer on Delgado. IOW, five holes for short or reasonable deals.

Well, now. First of all, the Mets (unfortunately) don't view "the OF corner not manned by Pagan" as a gaping wound. They view it as a spot to give Francoeur either an arb raise or a multi-year deal. Second, if the Mets acquire Bronson Arroyo, there goes most of the $20M Madden is positing Minaya has available to spend. He and Cameron (for example) would exhaust the pot of cash, and you would have done nothing to deal with 1B, C, and 2B, and little if anything to add power. No way the Mets could add Marquis, Arroyo, and Cameron for that amount, much less the decent, additional second-tier FAs for other positions.

Facts are facts. Unless the market collapses even worse than it did last winter, the Mets simply won't be able to fill ALL or even most of the holes for the dollars they appear to be willing to spend. Period. It might take upwards of $50M to do it, and certainly at least $40M. The question is whether you want to fill ALL the holes with dreck, or follow my advice, which is to give up on the idea of filling all of them, and fill some of them with something that resembles high-quality players, and wait for next off-season to deal with the others. Use three criteria to decide which holes to attack now: (1) where does quality present itself now, v. where can you reasonably project it will be next off-season; (2) if you must fill Position A or Position B with cheap dreck, which one are you more likely to be able to get by with in 2010, or with what you already have internally; (3) if you don't fill one or two positions, and suffer for it 2010, which ones can you most hope to have an actual GOOD internal solution by 2011 to make the waiting worth it?

Making it a two-year plan is the way to deal with this and get away from the illusion you can contend (a) on a (relative) shoestring (by which I mean when you have neither the $$$ to spend on this year's class, nor -- it can be argued -- are the ideal players there to spend on, at least at some of the positions, such as C, 1B, and 2B) and (b) with a GM who is not the best-equipped to make six good decisions and get them all right, but is less likely to mess up two relatively simple decisions.

Well, now. First of all, the Mets (unfortunately) don't view "the OF corner not manned by Pagan" as a gaping wound.

Am I the only Met fan on the Frenchy bandwagon? Because if I am and he does have a good year, I am going to be insufferable (even more than usual). I am willing to eat crow if he has a bad year.

I'm not "on the Frenchy bandwagon", or even confident he'll be acceptable, but I am willing to give him a year and see what happens. There are too many other holes to worry about. If he's 320 OBP/425 SLG, that's probably no worse than whoever else we would have gotten (unless there really are no significant budget constraints.) If he's 300/350, you pull the plug. One year would not be a big deal.

What's a good year? Give a slash-line prediction.

I'm not "on the Frenchy bandwagon", or even confident he'll play well, but I am willing to give him a year and see what happens.

That makes you more of a bandwagon member than most.

Good year for Frenchy: Plays 150+ games, plays average to above defense, hits .290/.325/.475.

I guess that's not too outlandish.

Am I the only Met fan on the Frenchy bandwagon?

This is more a reflection of your insufferable -- oops, I mean, eternal -- optimism than it is anything else.

I'm with the D.A. As long as it's a one-year arb thing, it would be palatable, largely because it would be consistent with my view they just can't hope to fill every hole this off-season, and doing a one-year French Toast patch in RF would postpone having to deal with that one (and let us all hope that F-Mart will prove in 2010 that he will be a good internal answer by 2011). More money to devote to other problems, and hopefully to real-live strong solutions.

A multi-year deal for Francoeur would make me scream with unadulterated rage.

A multi-year deal for Francoeur would make me scream with unadulterated rage.

Oh, I agree 100% with that. Even my optimism only goes so far.

I'm not "on the Frenchy bandwagon", or even confident he'll be acceptable, but I am willing to give him a year and see what happens. There are too many other holes to worry about.

If he was making $1M next year, that would be a reasonable position.

But he's going to make something like $4M. That's a big chunk of the Mets available budget.

If they use $4M on Francoeur, and push Pagan to the bench with another acquisition, that's a horrible use of resources. Pagan can almost certainly outproduce Francoeur at a fraction of the cost.

Good year for Frenchy: Plays 150+ games, plays average to above defense, hits .290/.325/.475.

Even at his best Francoeur has never put up an 800 OPS over a full-season. That would be a phenomenal year.

But he's going to make something like $4M. That's a big chunk of the Mets available budget.

According to snapper.

According to snapper.

He made $3.4M last year, he ain't getting much less. Even if the Mets have $30M to spend, $4M is a nice chunk of change.

Bobby Abreu got $9M. You can probably get a real nice player this off-season for $5-6M.

Even at his best Francoeur has never put up an 800 OPS over a full-season. That would be a phenomenal year.

He hit .340/.440 in 2007 which is probably better than what I am hoping for.

Bobby Abreu got $9M. You can probably get a real nice player this off-season for $5-6M.

He also got another year at 10 million. Usually good players can expect more than one year on the free agent market although there will always be one or two who end up getting team friendly contracts.

Marlon Byrd is an example of a guy who could probably be had for 6 or 7 million. Of course, he was someone who was a bad baseball player before he figured out things some the last 2 or 3 years with Texas. The same could happen with Frenchy.

There's really no reason to have the same argument over and over. Snapper isn't very optimistic about Frenchy, some agree, some disagree. No need to have the same discussion every Met thread.

I'm more amused by his claimed knowledge of the Mets' offseason budget. I expect Frenchy to fail.

If he was making $1M next year, that would be a reasonable position.

But he's going to make something like $4M. That's a big chunk of the Mets available budget.

If they use $4M on Francoeur, and push Pagan to the bench with another acquisition, that's a horrible use of resources. Pagan can almost certainly outproduce Francoeur at a fraction of the cost.

I totally understand what you're getting at. But, to an extent, Francoeur is an example of the high upside/high downside strategy I'm advocating. We all agree he has high downside, anyway ;) And I do think it's plausible that he could do better for the Mets than he has in a couple of years. I could see him possibly doing what Cody Ross does. (I honestly have no clue what Ross would get if he were a FA, but just for the sake of pulling an answer out of my butt, $4M seems either about right, or a little low.)

What chance does Francoeur have to reach that level? Your answer to that probably ends up depending on how much you think his problems were caused by immersion in the "let's build up the local boy... whoops, built up the wrong guy, let's tear him down" saga in ATL. I think there might be something to that theory.

Francoeur's upside is limited, though, because he will never have an above-average OBP. He has less than a 50% chance to become Cody Ross, which, when you put it that way, is a pretty sad statement. And $4M is not super-duper-cheap. So I do see what you're saying. It's not the chance I'd have freely chosen to be taking, but now that we're here, I'll go for it. I guess this is all just a long-winded way of saying something very simple, which is that it all depends on 1) how likely you think it is that Francoeur can be decent, and 2) how big a deal you think $4M is.

Pagan of course would presumably still be on the team, and if Francoeur reverts back to '08-Braves '09 Frenchy, the switch could be made. Of course, we might lose enough games in the meantime to cost the pennant. But to me, that's something you worry about more when you figure you're the favorites going in. That is certainly not the Mets' situation.

Well, now...

Sure, Sam. In this hypothetical, if you only give me $20-25m to play with, I'll do things differently than if I had c. $45m to play with.

What I don't understand is why the fanbase (at least the fanbase here and on the various blogs and sites related to the Mets) isn't screaming bloody blue murder at the idea that the payroll is going to be substantially under $150 million. The Mets are a largest-market team in the middle of a running PR nightmare, who apparently didn't get particularly scalded in Madoff's scam, and who were just given an $800 million stadium. And this is time to reduce payroll? And that's acceptable? Particularly in what is largely a buyer's market, and with a core of stars it is not difficult to fill around? [voice escalating to high pitched squeak]

Pagan had an outstanding year last year at age 27 in about 60% of a full season of ABs, but we have literally no data on what he would do in a full season of big league at bats. Considering that he had virtually no success as a hitter in the minors, I'm not going to get too bent out of shape over him losing ABs to anybody -- and I assume he'll get his 300 regardless, filling in for Beltran, spelling Frenchy against tough righties, etc.

What I don't understand is why the fanbase (at least the fanbase here and on the various blogs and sites related to the Mets) isn't screaming bloody blue murder at the idea that the payroll is going to be substantially under $150 million.

It's because the ownership hasn't said that - Madden and phoenixscienter made it up. The last word from ownership is that the payroll will be "whatever Omar needs." If it is substantially under $150 million, I and many other fans will be upset.

Ladies and Gentleman, playing first base for your 2010 New York Mets: Daniel Murphy.

I don't think the Mets bring back Delgado and they will not offer or fail to make an incentive-laden deal with him.

Since we're talking about the Mets, I predict the other holes will be filled with Marquis, maybe one other F/A SP (so not Arroyo), Frenchy (or one of Minaya's geriatic cases), and an overpaid F/A catcher. Unfortunately.

The option I'd like to see them pursue is a deal for Harang. He's not much worse than Lackey, and if they can pull somebody from the Garland/Marquis/Piniero/Wolf tier, that's a substantial upgrade to the rotation that doesn't cost $100 million.

As for the 20 million dollar question, as much as I hate the premise, it's an interesting one (which, if I'm going to accept, I'll assume is above and beyond what Francoeur gets). I might just go ahead and pick up two starters. I'm not going to propose which two, at the moment, but let's say for the sake of argument I can get two guys who are likely to throw around 200 innings and are going to be average, probably a hair above, and whose upside isn't Rich Harden. Let's also say I don't have to roll the dice much past 2010--in other words I don't have to pay Joel Piniero 3/30 and hope that Dave Duncan's Magic Pixie Pitching Dust travels well. And let's say that leaves me with a couple of million to pick up an average-for-the-position catcher.

That strikes me as a team with at least some shot at making the postseason; at least some reasonable chance of reaching 90 wins. It's a team with a chance to be average or close enough at LF, RF, 2b, 1b, and C; very good to great at ss, 3b, and cf, and above average for each slot in the starting rotation. It moves one of Niese or Maine and perhaps both, to the pen, strengthening it. And it doesn't completely piss away yet one more year of the Mets core, nor does it trade any minor leaguers.

It's because the ownership hasn't said that - Madden and phoenixscienter made it up. The last word from ownership is that the payroll will be "whatever Omar needs." If it is substantially under $150 million, I and many other fans will be upset.

Good point.

Since we're talking about the Mets, I predict the other holes will be filled with Marquis, maybe one other F/A SP (so not Arroyo),...

My understanding is the Reds will let Arroyo go for nothing (2 D prospects is the usual cover in a deal like this), and may even wind up picking up some small part of his $11m salary--so unless the grapevine is way off, Arroyo's effectively a FA since he can be had for the price (or less) of his contract. Of course, whether you want his contract ($11m in 2010, $11m club option for 2011, don't recall the buyout--$1 or $2 million, probably) is another matter entirely

Pagan had an outstanding year last year at age 27 in about 60% of a full season of ABs, but we have literally no data on what he would do in a full season of big league at bats.

He's put up a 100 OPS+ in 829 career PAs, so we have some data. He's a switch hitter without a terrible split (802 OPS vs RHP, 717 vs LHP), so his performance to date should project fairly well.

I think he's a really good bet to give you at least a 100 OPS+. UZR has him as an average CF, and an excellent LF/RF which makes sense for a CF.

I think he's an excellent bet to give the Mets above average production in a corner, something like 2.5-3.0 WAR, at almost no cost.

I'm surprised Mets fans aren't more excited about him.

Madden is far from the only person who has some "access" and who doesn't expect the Mets to shell out much money this offseason. Newsday's Ken Davidoff has written the same. Pretty sure others have, too; if you're that curious to research it, I'm sure you can do so by looking up Freeballin's posts, since apparently his purpose on this board is to be obnoxious about this issue. The point, simply put, is that ownership might be BSing. The proof will be in the pudding. Since there is no reason why the team should either announce or leak its true intentions at this time, I am skeptical of anyone who claims to know for sure either way. So, when discussing potential moves, I guess we should either state our payroll assumptions up front, or assume the smaller payroll so that we can be pleasantly surprised ;)

No need to have the same discussion every Met thread.

HERESY! STRANGER TO THE INTERNETS! BURN THE WITCH!

The option I'd like to see them pursue is a deal for Harang. He's not much worse than Lackey

Wait... I mean... wait, what?

I'm surprised Mets fans aren't more excited about him.

I am a little excited about him but it's important to remember, as is the case for Frenchy, that his BABIP was pretty high (.350). And he his never going to hit a lot of homers so it's hard to get too excited about him as a corner outfielder. Still, I think he has a decent shot of being an average regular in 2010.

At least the Mets are shopping at Wal-mart. The A's just filled their basket with some Dallas McPherson at the Dollar General.

Woo Hoo!

Oh, and the A's tried the Mark Kotsay, Jason Kendall, Esteban Loaiza route and it was a very bad idea. Kendall wasn't even that cheap.

I am a little excited about him but it's important to remember, as is the case for Frenchy, that his BABIP was pretty high (.350). And he his never going to hit a lot of homers so it's hard to get too excited about him as a corner outfielder. Still, I think he has a decent shot of being an average regular in 2010.

Sure, but he doesn't have to repeat his 2009 production to be a really nice player.

If he can put up his career average 100 OPS+, and be a +10-15 fielder in LF or RF, which is what his career UZRs indicate, and which makes sense for a converted CF, he'll be above average at minimal cost. It's really hard to believe that he's the OF the Mets are looking to replace.

Oh, and the A's tried the Mark Kotsay, Jason Kendall, Esteban Loaiza route and it was a very bad idea. Kendall wasn't even that cheap.

The A's didn't sign Jason Kendall, they traded two of their own tier-two free agents (Arthur Rhodes and Mark Redman) for him. All three turned out to be bad contracts of course.

The A's didn't sign Jason Kendall, they traded two of their own tier-two free agents (Arthur Rhodes and Mark Redman) for him. All three turned out to be bad contracts of course.

The A's also traded for Kotsay (and then signed him to an extension after his career year). Of those 3, only Loaiza was a complete waste though he did have a nice stretch in 2006 to help them to the division. Thanks much to the Dodgers for taking the last year of the Loaiza contract.

Pretty sure others have, too

Howard Megdal doesn't put a dollar amount on it:

Ultimately, the Mets have a fairly small amount of money to spend.

Is a Mets thread really getting hijacked by Athletics talk?

Ultimately, the Mets have a fairly small amount of money to spend.

It could be that people are repeating the same original theory. We won't know for sure until we see them chase the big name free agents or not.

What I don't understand is why the fanbase (at least the fanbase here and on the various blogs and sites related to the Mets) isn't screaming bloody blue murder at the idea that the payroll is going to be substantially under $150 million.

Well, I think they should be willing to go there, but I'm not sure the players are available in the market to make it worth going there. Depending on where the market goes, I'm not sure it will be worth paying any of the first basemen who are available what they will cost, especially not if it takes more than a one-year deal to sign them, if that would mean spending money unwisely in 2011 and having less money available then -- a year I expect the Mets would be in a better position to contend if they manage things wisely. And I'm just about positive there are no catchers worth a damn, except maybe as a teacher for Thole (depending on your opinion of Thole as a prospect, and the best way to see to his development). Given that this is just not that strong a year for free agents, a strong case could be made to reduce the major league payroll on a number of levels:

1) take $15M or so and spread it around on amateur player acquisition, a rainy-day fund for mid-season trades in case you are in contention, and/or spillover for 2011;

2) not spending on players who are marginal-at-best acquisitions, particularly at positions where you might then block a kid in the system who comes on and proves himself ready;

3) demonstrate that you are not just driven by a desperate need to please the radio jocks and the tabloids, who scream bloody murder every time you don't "make a splash" and "try to win now like you have to in New York." It would actually be somewhat refreshing if the Mets said, "Screw you" to the whole culture and said instead, "We're going to take this our way, and if the NY Post doesn't like it, and decides to call us cheap, the hell with the NY Post."

[39] I'm surprised Mets fans are way more excited about Daniel Murphy than Angel Pagan.

Usually there's a bias against 28-year-old prospects. Although Murphy himself at 24 is almost too old to inspire real excitement.

It would actually be somewhat refreshing if the Mets said, "Screw you" to the whole culture and said instead, "We're going to take this our way, and if the NY Post doesn't like, and decides to call us cheap, the hell with the NY Post."

This might be the best thing to do, but the Madoff thing cost the Mets any shot at doing it. A lot of people wouldn't believe it--I'm not sure that I would believe it--and all they'd accomplish would be pissing off the media.

I'm surprised Mets fans are way more excited about Daniel Murphy than Angel Pagan.

Even I am not excited about Murphy any more. I am excited about neither of them. At best, they are guys who can make a nice contribution in a good season, as Pagan did in 2009. Neither is a significant part of building a contending or championship baseball team.

Neither is a significant part of building a contending or championship baseball team.

I guess that depends how you define significant. Pagan is very,very likely be at least 2 WAR player next year if he plays full time.

That's better than Melky Cabrera. Was he a "significant part" of the Yankees. It depends on your definition.

Was he a "significant part" of the Yankees. It depends on your definition.

As if often the case, I will simply let Bruce speak for me on this point.

The A's didn't sign Jason Kendall, they traded two of their own tier-two free agents (Arthur Rhodes and Mark Redman) for him.

Well technically yes. Even more technically, they traded Mike Neu and Bill Murphy for Redman, allowed him to become a free agent, then immediately signed him. The point is that FA dollars were not best spent on aging tier two guys.

Where's that numbnut fanboy who was all over these forums talking about how the Mets had "at least" 40M to spend? and who gave me some sort of flippant comment when I said I had solid information from ownership that Minaya won't be able to spend over 20-25M?

Can we just fast forward to the point after which the Mets spend $33 million and we have a 150 post flame war about who was right?

As if often the case, I will simply let Bruce speak for me on this point.

Fair enough; that's a reasonable definition.

I will say that in terms of priority of positions to be upgraded on the Mets, I'd put Pagan in LF as 6th behind 1B, C, RF, and 2 SPs.

I consider myself to be on the Frenchy bandwagon in that I would be perfectly happy if the Mets brought him back through arbitration but consider:

1) As a shell shocked Mets fan, I'm likely overvaluing the ability to stay in the lineup.

2) The other available options are completely uninspiring.

3) Francouer was possibly the only Met untainted by the vortex of negativity that consumed the entire franchise last year, so I just assume that the combination of Francoeur and Mets blue and orange is some sort of magical alchemy.

I will say that in terms of priority of positions to be upgraded on the Mets, I'd put Pagan in LF as 6th behind 1B, C, RF, and 2 SPs.

Agreed. Of course, it is also true that Pagan may be one of their few tradeable assets (decent player, not costly), so factor that into the mix. If they can sign a LFer, and use Pagan to bring in a guy at a position for which a viable solution doesn't otherwise present itself, that would not be a bad use of their current assets. The devil, obviously, is in the details . . . .

I will say that in terms of priority of positions to be upgraded on the Mets, I'd put Pagan in LF as 6th behind 1B, C, RF, and 2 SPs.

Is that in order? I'd go

1) SP
2) SP
3) RF (or LF if Pagan is slotted into RF)
4) C
5) 1b
6) RP
7) 2b
8) LF (if Pagan)

Is that in order?

No. I'd say SP, RF, 1B, C, SP, LF.

I would say SP, SP, 1B, C. I wouldn't worry about the other positions.

-- MWE

I'm with Mike.

Also, on the Frenchy side, he played the last month with torn ligaments in his thumb, so those numbers could have been even better.

1B and C only need to be stopgaps, IMO.

1B and C only need to be stopgaps, IMO.

Agreed. Thole and Davis have a shot at turning out to be major leaguers and there's no FA out there I'm dying to sign in any case. One interesting thing is that if you take their major league performance, Daniel Murphy against RHP (775 OPS) and Nick Evans against LHP (872), weight by PAs, then project upwards for age, you've got a league average 1bman. Throw in what looks to be Murphy's above average defense and you have a perfectly good platoon at first. Of course, that's all based on a combined 702 PAs, so a grain or two of salt comes with any predictions.

if you're that curious to research it, I'm sure you can do so by looking up Freeballin's posts, since apparently his purpose on this board is to be obnoxious about this issue.

Yeah, same to you pal.

One interesting thing is that if you take their major league performance, Daniel Murphy against RHP (775 OPS) and Nick Evans against LHP (872), weight by PAs, then project upwards for age, you've got a league average 1bman. Throw in what looks to be Murphy's above average defense and you have a perfectly good platoon at first. Of course, that's all based on a combined 702 PAs, so a grain or two of salt comes with any predictions.

I was thinking more along the lines of a Nick Johnson or Carlos Delgado, with Daniel Murphy being the fallback option. We also have Chris Carter down below who I think should get some ABs. At least Johnson and Delgado have some upside, and we can move them whenever Davis is ready.

The catchers this winter stink. I'd rather wait and see what's available next winter.

I'm also not too concerned about the OF. If Holliday or Bay come aboard, I'm very happy, but part of me would rather keep the financial flexibility. There's Fernando and Neuwenhuis to fit into the OF in the not distant future.

Actually, one guy that I would resign would be Gary Sheffield, who should be able to adequately serve 1B/corner OF.

The catchers this winter stink. I'd rather wait and see what's available next winter.

I don't see it quite as an either/or. There aren't any I would sign to long-term deals, but there's also no way I would go into 2010 with Omir Santos as my starting C. (Beginning the season with Santos and Thole as the starters is demented, imo. One or both is very likely to have real struggles, in which case what's the fall back position? I'd even bet that the "fall back" position is actually the main position, considering it's the most likely outcome). If Omir Santos puts up an 80 OPS+ next year in 400+ PAs I'll buy BTF a pony--his career AAA line in 500+ PAs is a magical .256/.311/.325/636. But if you keep him away from LHP he's not the worst part-timer out there. Putting together a time-sharing arrangement of Santos with a guy like Greg Zaun is essential (and a hell of a lot less chilling than inking Bengie Molina to a 2/10 deal. The Drays didn't pick up Zaun's 2 mil option. He'll be available for about that. Granted, he's a million years old, but he had no signs of dropoff last year, there were no worrisome indicators, he's been the same guy forever ( a slightly above average hitter for a C and averagey on defense), and he's cheap. He's exactly the kind of player that, over the last 3 years, the Mets haven't had at various positions: an inexpensive, average major leaguer who keeps you from having holes in your lineup that render David Wright's production meaningless.

And nephew of Rick Dempsey - I did not know that.