I prefer to see it as the Angels using the Mets to restock the farm system. Thanks for the draft picks!

I'd like to see Lackey back but if the bidding gets ridiculous then I wish him well as a Met, or Yankee, or Dodger, etc. But curse him if he goes to Boston or Seattle.

The Mets identified K-Rod as their main objective, and with other big-market teams uninterested, they grabbed him with a lower-than-expected three-year, $37-million deal.

Maybe less than some expected, but likely more than he was worth, too.

If the Mets are going to compete in 2010, they need to get Lackey or an equivalent pitcher. That said, being a little patient might be the better strategy.

Which pick would the Mets lose? I know their first round pick is protected.

Their second-rounder.

But with Roy Halladay the only other true No. 1 starter available, Lackey could shoot for the $100-million range.

Do you think this guy knows that Halladay is not a free agent?

Thing A: John Lackey
Thing B: Roy Halladay

These things are not alike.

I like lackey, but he isn't winning them the division.

[8] I don't remember anybody saying that getting Lackey would win the Mets the division.

I prefer to see it as the Angels using the Mets to restock the farm system. Thanks for the draft picks!

The Mets' pick that they'd forfeit for Lackey would be about #70 overall, so that, plus a sandwich pick in the mid-30s, is not going to do a ton for restocking the farm.

If the Mets are going to compete in 2010, they need to get Lackey or an equivalent pitcher.

I think they need rotation depth more than anything. Pushing Oliver Perez out of the rotation might pay dividends. I think Lackey + Perez aren't that likely to outperform two lower-tier free agent pitchers like, say, Joel Piniero and Jarrod Washburn. And it'd cost the same, if not less.

Of course, they could sign Lackey and kick Perez out of the rotation anyway, but I don't see the Mets doing that without the impetus of a crowded rotation.

There's still a lot of talent in the supplemental and 2nd round. Besides, the whole idea is to have as many draft picks as you can, not where they're located.

I understand there's talent there, but having a pick in the 70s instead of the 20s is a pretty big drop off. If you're an Angels fan, you should be hoping that a good team signs Lackey so you get a first rounder.

(9) if the mets are conceding the division already, then whats the point of even going after lackey?


I don't think they're looking for moral victories and that team is a lot more than one good pitcher away ffrom getting a real one.

They need to stockpile assets, and giving lackey 70 million isn't gonna do it.

If the Angels cared solely about talent in the draft, they'd go overslot for guys, but they don't. The Angels usually pick guys that can sign for slot, so it doesn't really make a difference on 'talent', per say.

(9) if the mets are conceding the division already, then whats the point of even going after lackey?

A player not ensuring a win in the division =/= conceding the division.

If the Mets make the playoffs with Lackey, Santana/Lackey would be a very tough 1-2 punch.

(16) if you're thinking of making the playoffs with francouer, tatis, evans, murphy, and castillo getting significant run, we'll I'll take it. The phillies are just getting stronger, and, again, the mets are a lot further away than this.

They need to think bigger than just throwing 70 million at 1 pitcher.

They need to stockpile assets, and giving lackey 70 million isn't gonna do it.

Doesn't seem like $70M is getting it don't either; there was a post here yesterday saying the Angels last in season offer was in the $72M range. I don't see Lackey choosing the Mets over the Angels unless there's a pretty big difference in money.

The Mets getting Lackey will do pretty much nothing to get them in the playoffs-Their problems are much deeper than needing a #2 pitcher, just as last year getting a "closer" did not help. Even if everyone was healthy, I didn't see them beating Phil when it mattered. And I AM a Mets fan- since 1969, through the brutal 77-83 era, the mismanaged 80s(sound familiar?) the sucky 90s until 99-then the aftermath of 2000...

I would do it, crazy as it sounds. Lackey is close to what the Mets need, which is a 2nd frontline pitcher to stick with Johan. When healthy, he gives a lot of innings and he doesn't walk hitters. While the Mets would still need a lot more to catch the Phils and Braves, Lackey is the 2nd best option out there to fill the Mets' #1 need. Furthermore, a real willingness to spend on the part of the Wilpons will go a long way towards reassuring me that this organization isn't bankrupt. (Obviously, an attempt to get Halladay should be made before an aggressive bid for Lackey.)

The Mets getting Lackey will do pretty much nothing to get them in the playoffs-Their problems are much deeper than needing a #2 pitcher, just as last year getting a "closer" did not help.

Perhaps, but the Mets do need another starting pitcher, and they are a better team if they add Lackey as a free agent than if they do not. Therefore I see no reason for the Mets not to make a reasonable effort to sign Lackey this off season.

As to the Mets playoff chances, if they should be fortunate enough to sign both Lackey and Matt Holliday, and get good health from their core of Santana, Beltran, Wright and Reyes, they'll be contenders for a playoff spot in 2010. Not world beaters, but contenders.

DB

Full seasons out of Reyes and Beltran will help, as well as more production out of first base (be it Murphy or someone else).

What do people think happened with Wright's power this year? Ballpark? Fluke? Change in skill level?

As to the Mets playoff chances, if they should be fortunate enough to sign both Lackey and Matt Holliday

I would think that would be far beyond their (or anybody else's) budget. That would be close to $40M p.a. for the two.

The Mets getting Lackey will do pretty much nothing to get them in the playoffs-

Nonsense.

Their problems are much deeper than needing a #2 pitcher, just as last year getting a "closer" did not help. Even if everyone was healthy, I didn't see them beating Phil when it mattered. And I AM a Mets fan- since 1969, through the brutal 77-83 era, the mismanaged 80s(sound familiar?) the sucky 90s until 99-then the aftermath of 2000...

Why do you bother to follow the team if you have little good to say about their last 40 years? What a waste of time.

Also, regression among Victorino, Werth, Howard, Lee, Happ, etc. among the Phillies should level the playing field. Also, I'm not going to assume that Hamels is going to improve from his 2009 numbers significantly. His BABIP spiked in 2009, but even a more normal BABIP level would basically make Hamels a mid-tier starter, not the elite guy he was in 2008.

What do people think happened with Wright's power this year? Ballpark? Fluke? Change in skill level?

I will say I'm completely stumped. I don't think it's the park, though, the ballpark factors show it basically average.

Also, I'm not going to assume that Hamels is going to improve from his 2009 numbers significantly. His BABIP spiked in 2009, but even a more normal BABIP level would basically make Hamels a mid-tier starter, not the elite guy he was in 2008.

I don't know about that. 8K/9 and 2BB/9 are far from mid-tier peripherals.

If you look at his average performance over the last three years, you're looking at about 200 IP at a 3.65 ERA, 3.75 FIP with a .295 BABIP. That seems like a pretty reasonable bet, and is an top-flight SP.

There were whispers about Wright not being healthy (something to do with his knees), but who knows?

Also, regression among Victorino, Werth, Howard, Lee, Happ, etc. among the Phillies should level the playing field. Also, I'm not going to assume that Hamels is going to improve from his 2009 numbers significantly.

Howard had a .931 OPS last season and has a career .961 OPS. How much is he going to "regress to the mean"?

Snapper already addressed Hamels.

Werth had an .862 OPS in 2007-2008 and a .879 last year. Victorino had a .803 OPS in 2009 after a .799 in 2008. Again how much regression can we expect?

Happ probably isn't as good as he has shown. Lee might regress a little bit but any regression will be countered by increased playing time as he was with the Phillies for only half the season.

Also, the Phils probably can expect more out of Lidge and Rollins than they got from those two in 2009.

The Mets getting Lackey will do pretty much nothing to get them in the playoffs-Their problems are much deeper than needing a #2 pitcher,

Why in the world is everyone carrying on this discussion as if the only relevant issue in signing Lackey is how much he does or doesn't change the Mets' competitive chances in 2010? The Mets should be trying to build a winning team for the next several seasons. It's not like they're going to sign Lackey to a one-year deal, after all, so one would hope that if they are going to sign him to a multi-year deal it's part of a plan to build a strong rotation for the next few years. And given what the farm system is likely to produce to supplement Johan, it's pretty obvious to me that a top-shelf pitcher is a damn good idea, even if he doesn't (by himself) make them a likely winner in 2010.

As for 2010, they have zero chance with the starting pitching currently on hand. Lackey and Johan, if healthy, would give them some chance. They would then have some hope that from among Maine, Niese, Perez, and Pelfrey they might somehow piece together 600 innings of something approximating league average pitching for the middle and back of the rotation. If they need 800 innings from those guys and assorted nobodies whom Omar collects, there is no hope at all.

Why do you bother to follow the team if you have little good to say about their last 40 years? What a waste of time.

Hey, I follow the Angels, who did nothing for their first 40+ years. When they finally do win, the emotional payoff is indescribably satisfying.

Why in the world is everyone carrying on this discussion as if the only relevant issue in signing Lackey is how much he does or doesn't change the Mets' competitive chances in 2010?

Because fans want the team to compete next year. They have a limited payroll room, although we don't know exactly what it is, probably in the $20-30M range.

Lackey would be a big chunk of that, and would likely preclude a Holliday signing, so people are weighing his impact on playoff chances vs. some other combination of signings.

Lackey would be a big chunk of that, and would likely preclude a Holliday signing, so people are weighing his impact on playoff chances vs. some other combination of signings.

I have no great dog in that fight. They need both a bat and a starting pitcher, and the chances of getting either from the farm system anytime soon aren't great. If Fernando Martinez lives up to his potential, then they can put him in the corner not being manned by Holliday. So either one would be fine. And there is no reason whatsoever not to be in on both; indeed, that would be the smartest thing Omar could do so as to create some bargaining leverage, of the "Hey, if you don't want our money, I've got a call in to Holliday's agent. Do we have a deal?" variety.

Get one or the other, and do some other minor stuff. Have a healthy, relatively competitive 2010, and then go all in for 2011.

(16) if you're thinking of making the playoffs with francouer, tatis, evans, murphy, and castillo getting significant run, we'll I'll take it. The phillies are just getting stronger, and, again, the mets are a lot further away than this.

^^^
This is a guy who thought it was outrageous that anyone would think the Yankees had a prayer against the Phillies.

if you're thinking of making the playoffs with francouer, tatis, evans, murphy, and castillo getting significant run, we'll I'll take it.

Well, the fact is that on the team that the Mets will have if they are healthy and Omar has any sort of an off-season at all, Tatis and Evans certainly won't have significant playing time. At most, one of them would have the smaller half of the platoon at first base.

Nevertheless, truth be told, the Met need some damn upgrades. This should not be news to anyone who is paying attention. This should be an argument FOR trying to sign a Lackey or a Holliday, THIS year, in a season when it wouldn't cost them a # 1 pick. It certainly is not an argument for standing pat with all the holes just as they are.

Lackey will get 5/90 from either the Angels or a mid-size market team looking to make a "splash" (Brewers, Mariners).

If you're making a splash, why not try to sign Chapman?

What do people think happened with Wright's power this year? Ballpark? Fluke? Change in skill level?

2008:
Home(Shea) - .336/.437/.618
Road - .271/.345/.455

If I'm reading them right, the CHONE projections don't make me very optimistic about the Mets lineup. I would probably go for Lackey and try to sign Nick Johnson or Russell Branyan if you think Delgado is done or won't accept a incentive-heavy contract. I don't think you can get a #2 starting pitcher and a top outfielder for what the Mets are willing to spend, first base is as big a hole as the corner outfield for the Mets, and I am not optimistic about Murphy developing into much of anything.

C:
2009 .671 OPS - 11th in NL
2010 .678 OPS (Thole, 328 PA. I didn't see Omir Santos on the list)

1B:
2009 .787 OPS - 12th in NL
2010 .751 OPS (Murphy, 481 PA. Delgado listed as a free agent at 0.770 OPS in 482 PA)

2B:
2009 .740 OPS - 9th in NL
2010 .700 OPS (Castillo, 544 PA)

SS:
2009 .618 OPS - 16th in NL
2010 .805 OPS (Reyes, 595 PA)

3B:
2009 .823 OPS - 5th in NL
2010 .870 OPS (Wright, 649 PA)

LF:
2009 .763 OPS - 9th in NL
2010 .758 OPS (Pagan, 316 PA - Also lists 421 PA of .701 OPS Cory Sullivan)

CF:
2009 .860 OPS - 1st in NL
2010 .853 OPS (Beltran, 514 PA)

RF:
2009 .749 OPS - 12th in NL
2010 .736 OPS (Francoeur, 631 PA)

2009 .763 OPS - 9th in NL
2010 .758 OPS (Pagan, 316 PA - Also lists 421 PA of .701 OPS Cory Sullivan)

I'd take that OPS from Pagan over a full season if he's really as good a defender as UZR says he is. He really had a fine season in 2009 (2.8 WAR in 88 games played).

[38]:

David Wright, Career through 2009:

Home: 1788 PA: .315/.399/.534
Away: 1877 PA: .303/.379/.503

David Wright, 2009:

Home: 296 PA: .298/.378/.434
Away: 322 PA: .314/.401/.458

Slugging and isolated power below career averages at home and away. Cause? Got me. Maybe he played hurt and was lucky to have above normal BAbip. Having no protection in the lineup and adjusting to a new stadium didn't help either, but it wasn't just the ballpark.

[40] I would be happy if the Mets started Pagan. He is very talented, even if he showed extremely little baseball smarts last year esp. on the basepaths.

Wright's power drop-off was far more pronounced at home. Citi Field may (may) be a pretty neutral power park overall, but it isn't for David Wright. His power is and has always been disproportionately to right-center field, and the Mets designed a park with a death valley power alley to . . . where? Right-center. You literally could not draw dimensions if you were given the task of neutralizing David Wright and had that as your only priority and done much better than what the Mets did with their new yard. Presumably, that wasn't their purpose, which makes what they accomplished by accident all the more . . . well, impressive in its own wacky, Mets blundering the way they always have sort of way.

Wright said before the season when he saw the park and its walls and distances that he would alter his swing because he wasn't going to be a stubborn idiot and try to hit the home runs that he used to hit at Shea only to have them go to die in deep right-center in Citi Field. And he said you can't have one home swing and one road swing. So it's pretty obvious to me what happened: his adjustment didn't work. Whether he can get back to what he was doing, and whether it can succeed in a park built to kill his production, I guess we'll all find out together.

David had a weird season. His overall numbers were pretty good before he got hit in the head (.324/.414/.467) even though he wasn't hitting homers. He was awful after he came back from the beaning (.656 OPS). I don't really know what to expect from Wright next season. Any OPS between .700-.950 wouldn't be a shock to me.

The Mets 2009 team and their penchant of playing hurt to the point of absurdity was a point of gallows humor. Johan pitching with a bum elbow for half the year, David Wright with his concussion, both Beltran, and Reyes trying to rush their rehabs in order to get on the field. Even Jeff Francouer played with a bum thumb.

Again, Wright's BABIP was off the charts. He could have easily hit .270 or something. The strikeouts went through the roof ... he did not reinvent himself as a slap hitter. He just had a crappy year all around.

[43]

His power is and has always been disproportionately to right-center field

From bb-reference:

David Wright Hit Location

Split
Pulled-RHB    678 PA, 54 HR:     0.502/0.499/0.880 0.455 BAbip
Up Mdle-RHB 1352 PA, 62 HR:   0.341/0.336/0.554 0.304 BAbip
Opp Fld-RHB  546 PA, 24 HR:   0.347/0.339/0.591 0.308 BAbip

Am I missing something?

Am I missing something?

Formatting?

Seriously, I think those stats make my point. Those numbers show Wright has substantially more homers either up the middle or to the opposite field (86) than he does pulled (54). I just selected Torii Hunter at random. He has 112 homers pulled, and 122 up the middle or to the opposite field. I bet you that Wright has one of the lowest ratios of pulled:non-pulled homers of any home run hitter in the majors today.

EDIT:

Another example -- Chase Utley has 98 pulled home runs, 62 non-pulled.

Sam, I was going to make the same point as #47. What you said is correct - his power is in fact "disproportionately" towards the opposite field gap. But that means he hits 8 homeruns over that wall instead of 4. He is still, like every hitter in baseball, strongest when he pulls the ball, and hits the vast majority of his homers to LF.

If you want to get silly with those numbers you can say that the overwhelming advantage he has in SLG when pulling the ball means that it is nonsense for him to ever try and go the other way, and that Citifield's long RF alley if anything ought to improve his performance by discouraging him from doing so.

On edit - clearly "vast majority" is incorrect but the SLG advantage proves my point.

On double edit - just looked up Aramis Ramirez at random - he has 148 pulled homers, 110 up the middle, and SIX (!) opposite field. Now I'm getting confused. Will just shut up now.

He is still, like every hitter in baseball, strongest when he pulls the ball, and hits the vast majority of his homers to LF.

No, he really doesn't. He hits the majority of his home runs, a significant majority, either to center or right-center. Citi Field is a seriously difficult park to do either of those things in. Right-center in particular, but center is no picnic either, with a deep and high wall.

EDIT:

If you want to get silly with those numbers you can say that the overwhelming advantage he has in SLG when pulling the ball means that it is nonsense for him to ever try and go the other way, and that Citifield's long RF alley if anything ought to improve his performance by discouraging him from doing so.

Except that you have to factor into the equation the fact that his opposite-field power is a weapon that makes it far tougher for pitchers to deal with him. It takes away, or seriously limits, their ability, to use the outside part of the plate. You also have to keep in mind that a hitter like Wright is more likely to go the opposite way when he's behind in the count, so the comparative numbers are going to be skewed (it's going to look like he's not as good when he goes that way). Things would look a lot different if you controlled for where he was in the count in the comparison.

I'm not a big fan of spending too aggressively this offseason. I would try to sign Lackey as he fits into our needs so well, but I wouldn't be too disappointed if we missed out. The same goes for Holliday. I would not spend for both.

The big prizes are in the 2010 offseason, where there are some potential *great* players hitting free agency - guys that the Mets should break the bank for. Also, I suspect some potentially great players would be available for trade as well, so budget flexibility will be critical.

Is Jeter the most extreme on opposite field HRs?

59 pulled, 81 up the middle, and 70 opposite field.

[48] Your point about pulled:not pulled is taken, as clarified from [43]. Maybe the Wilpons' recently announced bullpen redesign actually camouflages a right-center field redesign.

[52] How about Ryan Howard: 46 pulled, 119 up the middle, 57 opposite field

I think they need rotation depth more than anything. Pushing Oliver Perez out of the rotation might pay dividends. I think Lackey + Perez aren't that likely to outperform two lower-tier free agent pitchers like, say, Joel Piniero and Jarrod Washburn. And it'd cost the same, if not less.

Agreed. The Mets can probably pick up two very durable, slightly above average pitchers such as Bronson Arroyo + Jason Marquis for around what it sounds like Lackey will get, and I've even heard the Reds might have to pick up some small part of Arroyo's $11 million contract for 2010 if they want to unload him. The odds of those two being better than Lackey + Perez have to be substantial.

Of course, they could sign Lackey and kick Perez out of the rotation anyway, but I don't see the Mets doing that without the impetus of a crowded rotation.

The Mets have to go into 2010 (and 2011) assuming that Perez will be worthless. Is there anyone in this thread who wouldn't accept a 95+ ERA from Perez in 150 innings in 2010 it that was offered right now?

As for 2010, they have zero chance with the starting pitching currently on hand. Lackey and Johan, if healthy, would give them some chance. They would then have some hope that from among Maine, Niese, Perez, and Pelfrey they might somehow piece together 600 innings of something approximating league average pitching for the middle and back of the rotation. If they need 800 innings from those guys and assorted nobodies whom Omar collects, there is no hope at all.

Perez shouldn't be counted on for anything, imo, and if Maine, Niese, and Perlfrey give us 400 innings I'll be pleasantly (if mildly) surprised. The Mets will probably make the mistake of thinking they need to add only one 200 inning guy for 2010. They need to add two.

With a $150 million budget it won't be difficult to sign Holliday, two good, durable starters, an average catcher, a bullpen arm, and either pick up a righty-mashing 1bman or replace Castillo at 2b. I'd bet on that club over the Phillies in 2010.

There were whispers about Wright not being healthy (something to do with his knees), but who knows?

I heard late in the Year on ESPON radio, someone (not a caller) "casually" mention that Wright had lingering leg issues that prevented him from driving the ball, I assumed it was just random BS speculation and the guy really didn't know anything.

I think only Wright knows what went on, as a fan I just have my fingers crossed, but the combo rising Ks and less power scares me. Also as a guy with terrible eyesight- whose prescription after being stable for 20+ years has started to see a change- maybe he needs to get his eyes checked was my thought.

and oh, I don't think the Mets are really after Lackey/Holliday or anyone who will cost them $, nothing to date has convinced me that the Wilpons both have cash and the willingness to spend it.

That being said, this

Their problems are much deeper than needing a #2 pitcher, just as last year getting a "closer" did not help. Even if everyone was healthy, I didn't see them beating Phil when it mattered.

is simply wrong, IF everyone was healthy and IF they added a #2, they'd win around 85-95, and would beat Philly a decent chink of the time, Philly is a good team, but they're not some unstoppable juggernaut, and if you think that something magical in the air that means the Mets will always choke and the Phillies never, well then what's the point of watching anyway?

Of course I think it's very unlikely that everyone will be healthy

The Mets should be trying to build a winning team for the next several seasons.

Minaya may not have that luxury.

-- MWE

Minaya may not have that luxury.

-- MWE

I think he's dead man walking, the Wilpons have pretty methodically canned his friends...
I don't think they are giving him $ either, I think he's telling anyone with a pen or atwitter account that he's "in on" Figgins and Holliday and Lackey... as an attempt to put pressure on the Wilpons to loosen up the purse strings, he's hoping that if the media decides the Mets HAVE to get someone... they might give him the money to get that guy...

Basically his fate right now is almost wholly dependent on:
A: Perfect health; and
B: Everyone who dropped off from 2008 to 2009 reverting to 2008; and
C: No one else significantly dropping off from 2009...

is simply wrong, IF everyone was healthy and IF they added a #2, they'd win around 85-95, and would beat Philly a decent chink of the time

Wow, I don't agree with that. If you take the current team and add Lackey, who's a clear #1, not a #2, they still aren't a good bet to be competitive.

Your lineup would include Santos, Francoeur, Pagan and Murphy as regulars. I like Pagan, but he's far from proven that he can sustain an OPS+ over 100 playing every day. The other 3 are really good bets to be far below average for their positions. Even with Wright, Beltran and Reyes at full strength, and Castillo sustaining his bounceback, that's a below average lineup. Certainly much worse than Philly.

Your #3-5 SPs would be some combination of Pelfrey, Maine, Parnell, Perez and Niese. What's the likely projection for them, 500 IP of 90 ERA+? Even with Santana and Lackey that won't cut it on a pennant contender.

The Mets need a 1B, C, OF and 2 SPs.

Wow, I don't agree with that.

The 2007 team won 88
The 2008 team won 89

In 2007 Delgados OPS+ matched Murphy's career OPS+
In 2008 Castillo had a 77 OPS+
In 2007 LoDuca had a 79 OPS+

etc etc
stuff happens, you will almost always have a schmoe hit well above his established level, and you will almost always ahve someoens hit well below tehre established level.

assuming health (which I don't), then I don't see how 90 wins isn't a good forecast- you seem to be doing the opposite of a fanboy projection- you are taking the worst of everyone's performance and assuming THAT will be repeated


What will Maine/Perez/Pelfrey do? All 3 have shown that they can clear a 100 ERA+ with some room to spare, all three have also shown that they really stink up the joint. My guess? one, matches his career, one does better one does worse in 2010.

WRT Ollie, we are all used to the good/bad Ollie bit, but 2009 viewed objectively it appears that his performance was injury related virtually from day one- but NO ONE gives him the benefit of the doubt on that- it's just assumed he's an unreliable headcase

WRT Ollie, we are all used to the good/bad Ollie bit, but 2009 viewed objectively it appears that his performance was injury related virtually from day one- but NO ONE gives him the benefit of the doubt on that- it's just assumed he's an unreliable headcase

I don't know if he's a headcase, but his career has nearly defined unreliability.

I think Sam's point wasn't just that the park cut out a bunch of HR that Wright would've had at Shea but that Wright was aware of the potential problem and altered his approach. Fundamentally, he became a different hitter. Given the wackiness of his stats in relation to those of his previous seasons, I think there is some credibility to this theory.

And, if that is the case, he's a huge, huge, huge expensive question mark. Can he go back to the old way? If not, can he find a new approach that works for him and fits the park? It's an enormous question.

I'm assuming Beltran and Santana are back and healthy next year. But the two big questions for the Mets are: Is Wright 2009 the new Wright or an anomaly? Will Jose Reyes' hamstring go boing during the 2010 season? If the answer to those two questions are: anomaly and no, then the Mets, with a second ace are competitive for the division.

Everyone seems to be acting like they can project with accuracy. Basically, you can project: hope/no hope. Right now, with nothing added, the Mets have no hope, no matter how healthy they get. If they add Lackey and a bat (not necessarily Holliday) they have hope. Sure, things have to break right for them but that is true of all teams. Even (perhaps especially) the Phillies. Will Rollins and Hamels bounce back? When does Cliff Lee's arm fall off (could be 2015, could be March 2010)? Will Howard keep being productive with the high K rate? Who replaces Moyer and Martinez?

Basically, we can say the Phils are favorites, the Braves will be in the mix. If the Mets add some pieces they could be in the mix. Without those pieces, they may as well start jettisoning payroll. Yes, they need several pieces. But the way to collect several pieces is to first get one. If you never pick up the first piece because you need several, you never fix the problem.

The 2007 team won 88
The 2008 team won 89

Both teams had 4 average or above SPs and 3-4 good RPs. This team doesn't seem a good bet to have either.

If they add Lackey and a bat (not necessarily Holliday) they have hope.

This I agree with. But they better get a good bat, preferably 2.

The Mets need a 1B, C, OF and 2 SPs.

Solid analysis, solid conclusion.

The Mets should be trying to build a winning team for the next several seasons.

Minaya may not have that luxury.

-- MWE

With the right approach, of course, and with the Mets' budget there's no conflict between winning now and winning over the next several years. Holliday and Lackey go a long way towards accomplishing both aims, and signing FA's average for the position to short deals to fill holes helps to win now without jeopardizing winning later. The screwing will come if "winning now" means doing something stupid like overpaying in years and dollars for slightly above average players, or getting a "name" like Figgins then hoping he remembers how to play 2b, and so on.

Your #3-5 SPs would be some combination of Pelfrey, Maine, Parnell, Perez and Niese. What's the likely projection for them, 500 IP of 90 ERA+? Even with Santana and Lackey that won't cut it on a pennant contender.

The Mets need a 1B, C, OF and 2 SPs.

Well, I'm fairly confident that you can take Parnell out of the running for the rotation -- I think they saw enough of him during the experiment to realize he's a reliever, period. If he starts, it will be at Buffalo to learn a second pitch, not in the Mets' rotation. They would have to hope to somehow get decent work out of Pelfrey, Maine, Perez, and Niese combining to fill three spots behind Lackey and Santana. And the chance of that aren't great, given Maine's health issues, Pelfrey's fits-and-starts career as he shows glimpses then regresses, Perez's God-only-knows career, and Niese's grand total of 39.2 major league innings. But the chances are a hell of a lot better that combined they might give you 500 innings of useful work, than that they might give you 700+ innings, which is what you'd need if the Mets don't sign any starter.

So the question is . . . which starter? What level of quality should they be aiming for? I think if you are trying to build a winner, which is (after all) the point, you need high-level starting pitching. So acquire it. This need not be that complicated, really. Signing a John Lackey has a hell of a lot more to do with winning/contending than signing a Jason Marquis. Moreover, pitchers of the latter's quality, or a Piniero, are a lot easier to get later when you are trying to put the finishing touches on a rotation. Like, next off-season. Beyond that, the Mets can't be certain how Johan Santana will come back from his surgery. They may not have even ONE top-line pitcher. Adding one is not only justified to build a rotation's second piece, it may be the step we need to take to have a first piece.

Even if it's true that what the Mets have behind Santana and Lackey won't cut it on a pennant contender, I've got news for you. Adding two innings-eaters behind Johan won't cut it, either, even if it is buttressed by a bunch of other "feh" acquisitions masquerading as guys who can fill holes at 1B and C. It will just make the Mets mediocre around the diamond, and thus worse than the Phillies at almost every position for the foreseeable future. Building with quality acquisitions, gradually, would give the hope of actually overtaking them. What a concept.

Sam,

I'm not saying you don't sign Lackey if you like the price; he's a very, very good pitcher.
What I'm saying is that if getting Lackey prevents them from getting a C, 1B and OF, then it's a problem.

The $16-18M p.a. your paying Lackey would probably get you Mike Cameron, Russell Branyan or Nick Johnson and Bengie Molina, all on 1-2 year deals. Then add a couple of lesser SPs on short deals, and you've got a team that can compete, within last year's payroll, but doesn't lock you into any big money long-term deals or deplete the farm system.

That gives you a chance to see how Wright/Reyes/Beltran/Santana/Rodriguez bounce back, and how Martinez/Thole/Davis et al. develop in the minors. Then after 2010 you'll have a better idea whether you're augmenting your core or trading Beltran, etc. and rebuilding, and what positions can be filled internally.

The $16-18M p.a. your paying Lackey would probably get you Mike Cameron, Russell Branyan or Nick Johnson and Bengie Molina, all on 1-2 year deals. Then add a couple of lesser SPs on short deals, and you've got a team that can compete, within last year's payroll, but doesn't lock you into any big money long-term deals or deplete the farm system.

First of all, I reject your math. I don't think that amount of money gets you anything close to all those players. Nor do I think you'll get them on 1-2 year deals, at least not all of them. Nor, finally, do I want most of those guys. My philosophy on free agency is to avoid the mediocre players except for the occasional guy who might be useful on the bench. Do not build your line-up around fringe veterans who are not that good, who usually get overbid (but who aren't really that helpful in building a winner and are inconsistent and unpredictable even if the price is reasonable, because they are usually into their 30s and apt to decline in performance and/or be injury-prone). Go for the elite players.

Not one of the guys you are recommending would be better than his Philly counterpart at his position. I have no desire to have the Mets pay $$$ they could use on genuine quality for guys who don't actually make the team better. That, to me, is the folly of trying to do this all at once. You end up trying to do too much, and you do none of it well. If the budget, and the available supply of players at the positions where the Mets have needs, won't allow the Mets to fill all the holes this off-season, then fill some of them now and save the rest. Omar isn't smart enough to do it all now, and even if he were the conditions wouldn't allow him to.

So in a nutshell, my objections to your approach are both philosophical -- it is antithetical to the entire way I think a team should handle free agency -- and practical. I don't think it can work for this team, playing this particular off-season's market, with the budget they appear to have. Other than that . . . great plan. ;-)

WRT Ollie, we are all used to the good/bad Ollie bit, but 2009 viewed objectively it appears that his performance was injury related virtually from day one- but NO ONE gives him the benefit of the doubt on that- it's just assumed he's an unreliable headcase

Anyone thinks Perez can put it all back together? I know he goes extreme up and downs, and I thought the Mets giving him that contract was a dumb mistake, but his track record suggests he should offer enough to be around average overall.

With Lackey, if the Mets like him, and he's a quality starter, it's kinda crazy to pass on him unless there is a better option going forward (trade or 2010 FA). Not going strong on Lackey might mean eventually making a panic move, ie good money to lesser quality, like Perez.

Not one of the guys you are recommending would be better than his Philly counterpart at his position. I have no desire to have the Mets pay $$$ they could use on genuine quality for guys who don't actually make the team better.

I don't see why being better than the Phillies counterpart matters, that's up to Wright, Beltran and Reyes to provide your "comparative advantage". The point is the guys I suggested would be much better than what the Mets are currently planning to trot out there.

Cameron has been a 4 WAR player recently and would be replacing Francoeur who has been a zero WAR player. That's a huge upgrade. Plus, Francoeur will make ~$4M in arb, and could be non-tendered. Cameron made $10M last year, and will be unlikely to get more. Even regressing Cameron for age, that +2-3 wins for $5-6M net, tops. A Cameron/Beltran/Pagan OF would be very good defensively, and help the pitching a lot.

Branyan put up 2.8 WAR in only 500 PAs, vs. 0.6 WAR for Murphy. Another big upgrade, and Branyan has huge power, unlikely to be affected by Citi Field. I don't see him getting more than $5M.

Molina (or a similar veteran catcher - Olivo, Zaun, Buck, etc.) would probably give you a little bit worse than average production (~1.5 WAR) but would take most of their PT from Santos' backup, who's likely to be replacement level. I'm sure you can get one of those C's for $2-3M.

I agree with you on your general philosophy, but when you have as many holes as the Mets, you can't go with premium FAs at every position. And, I don't think waiting for 2011 is a good plan. That's the last year of Reyes contract, the other core guys (except for Wright) are starting to age.

I think the Mets could actually enact my plan for 1B,C, OF, and get Lackey, if Wilpon allows a $150M payroll again.

"Both teams had 4 average or above SPs and 3-4 good RPs. This team doesn't seem a good bet to have either."


We get it, snapper, you hate the Mets. This isn't analysis, it's trolling. Get lost.

Molina (or a similar veteran catcher - Olivo, Zaun, Buck, etc.) would probably give you a little bit worse than average production (~1.5 WAR) but would take most of their PT from Santos' backup, who's likely to be replacement level. I'm sure you can get one of those C's for $2-3M.

Even if the rest of your plan doesn't entirely fill me with excitement, I have no real problem with any of it except for this. I do not want to acquire a crappy-ass backup veteran catcher. No, no, no, no, no, no. There is no need to spend $2-3 million there when we can work with Thole. I'll swallow my five-iron if Thole turns out worse than the pathetic more expensive options you mention. (Note, it is not YOUR opinions that I'm judging as pathetic, but the players themselves.)


Branyan put up 2.8 WAR in only 500 PAs, vs. 0.6 WAR for Murphy. Another big upgrade, and Branyan has huge power, unlikely to be affected by Citi Field. I don't see him getting more than $5M.

This came up before. Am I the only one who finds this price very unlikely after the year he just had? Or am I just not seeing some kind of Abreu thing happening this off-season?

We get it, snapper, you hate the Mets. This isn't analysis, it's trolling. Get lost.

I neither like nor hate the Mets, and if you want to see trolling, I can give you some. I haven't made fun of the Mets, their players or their fans. I think their situation this off-season is intriguing, and I enjoy discussion the alternatives. In fact I've also suggested Cameron and Branyan for the Yankees on RLYW, so it's not like I'm proposing players that I think stink. Why don't you get lost?

This came up before. Am I the only one who finds this price very unlikely after the year he just had? Or am I just not seeing some kind of Abreu thing happening this off-season?

Branyan missed the last month of the season with back issues, and has always been viewed as a part timer. I don't see teams getting into a bidding frenzy for him. Seattle (who is a desparate for offense as anyone) has apparently declined to give him a 2nd year. If Abreu, with a near-HoF track record gets 2/18, I really don't see Branyan getting more than 1/5-6, or 2/10.

I get you point on the veteran Cs, they are pathetic, but pathetic is only a little below average for C's. I don't think Thole is ready, and rushing him won't help his development

I think Lackey + Perez aren't that likely to outperform two lower-tier free agent pitchers like, say, Joel Piniero and Jarrod Washburn. And it'd cost the same, if not less.

Agreed. The Mets can probably pick up two very durable, slightly above average pitchers such as Bronson Arroyo + Jason Marquis

Last 4 seasons ERA+
Pineiro: 70-104-83-118
Washburn: 95-101-90-116
Arroyo: 142-109-93-112
Marquis: 74-100-102-113

These guys were above average last year but they suffer from the same inconsistency that Perez does. I don't see much point in paying for their best (2nd best for Arroyo) season in the last four. Then you have the fact that Pineiro depends on infield defense, not likely to be a strength for the Mets. And Washburn cratered after the trade to Detroit when he left their fantastic outfield defense. Arroyo is not a free agent and carries an $11M price tag plus whatever else you have to trade to acquire him. Marquis made $9.875 million last year.

Lackey is the choice. And if they can't afford him, I would rather they go after Jon Garland, who has posted an ERA+ of 105 or better in four of the past five seasons and has a lifetime 104 mark. Plus, even though he's been around forever, he'll only be 30 next year.

Branyan missed the last month of the season with back issues, and has always been viewed as a part timer. I don't see teams getting into a bidding frenzy for him. Seattle (who is a desparate for offense as anyone) has apparently declined to give him a 2nd year. If Abreu, with a near-HoF track record gets 2/18, I really don't see Branyan getting more than 1/5-6, or 2/10.

Makes sense, I suppose. Honestly, I really like Branyan as an option, so my thoughts on his likely price may simply be pessimistic.

As far as Thole, it's been gone over plenty before. Based on his minor-league and (admittedly limited) major league numbers, I see no reason why he isn't ready and is a better option than the options you mentioned. Which, as we each seem to agree, are stinky like seven-month-old eggs.

As far as Thole, it's been gone over plenty before. Based on his minor-league and (admittedly limited) major league numbers, I see no reason why he isn't ready and is a better option than the options you mentioned. Which, as we each seem to agree, are stinky like seven-month-old eggs.

Yeah, it's been done to death. I'd just rather make Thole wow you in spring training to get the job, and not be relying on him. Even if you do sign Zaun for $2M, for example, he's only going to give you 300-350 PAs. There's plenty of room for Thole if he's up to it. Omir Santos is no prospect, his mLB numbers scream backup catcher, he can hang out in AAA as insurance.

Based on his minor-league and (admittedly limited) major league numbers, I see no reason why he isn't ready

I do. His isolated power, not a positive to start, dropped at Binghamton, which is a "better" hitting environment than St. Lucie. He's going to have to hit a lot of singles to have any offensive value at all, and while he's done that the last two years that's probably the hardest thing for a catcher to do consistently because he gets nicked up so much. Jason Kendall, the guy Thole is most like among current catchers, lost his offensive value rather quickly once he got hurt - and he showed more power in the minors than Thole has to date.

What I think you're looking at with Thole right now is a low-700 OPS catcher. He has got to start driving the ball more if he is going to be an offensive plus.

-- MWE

He's going to have to hit a lot of singles to have any offensive value at all, and while he's done that the last two years...

Mike - I understand your points, but this is the stance all the arguments against Thole take. While he's done it for two years, he won't keep doing it, because... he's young and improving? I don't see why if he's done exactly what you said he needs to do it somehow makes him a bad bet. And to continue the point, you compare him to an old catcher who got hurt, neither of which is currently true for Thole.

We're all going to have to wait and see, but I just don't think the one measure regarding the drop in isolated power and a minor-league ballpark factor is a reason to spend money on a decomposing zombie catcher instead. (Also, I'm aware that my hatred for this move is emotional, I HATE the idea of old backup catchers as a better plan giving a kid who has done quite well a chance.)

EDIT: Over 1504 plate appearances, Kendall was .398 SLG and .778 OPS. Over 1542 PA, Thole was .375 SLG and .754 OPS. There's a difference, but the way everyone talks, I expected it to be much more.

Both teams had 4 average or above SPs and 3-4 good RPs. This team doesn't seem a good bet to have either.

I know you are a fan of an AL team but I can't believe you said the Mets had a good bullpen in 2008. The Mets had the best run differential in the first six innings of games in 2008 (it may have been an MLB record) and didn't make the playoffs almost entirely due to the fact that they had an atrocious pen. As someone who watched much of that carnage live, it offends my sensibility for anyone to insinuate the Mets had a good bullpen in 2008.

We're all going to have to wait and see, but I just don't think the one measure regarding the drop in isolated power and a minor-league ballpark factor is a reason to spend money on a decomposing zombie catcher instead.

How about the fact that he's caught a grand total of about 15 professional games so far, desperately needs to get more experience on the defensive side of his game, and should gain that experience in the minors where the pressure to succeed right now is not immense, and the glare and the criticism on everything he does won't be so intense? You want him to be able to handle a major league rotation, deal with hitters and umpires, understand the nuances of catching -- and meanwhile maintain his offensive game too.

Cheerleading for a Thole promotion to the majors at this stage of his development is exactly the kind of move that gives Mets' fans a bad name. If he's going to be a major league quality catcher, I am pretty damn sure it won't be in 2010, and the one thing that will make it less likely than any other to EVER happen would be promoting him too soon.

What I think you're looking at with Thole right now is a low-700 OPS catcher. He has got to start driving the ball more if he is going to be an offensive plus.

-- MWE

You say that like it's a bad thing :-)
2009 Mets C: .254/.305/.380
2009 All Cs: .254/.320/.395

2008 Mets C: .249/324/.378
2008 All Cs: .255/.324/.389

2007 Mets C: .267/.309/.410
2007 All Cs: .254/.317/.393

Or did you mean to say low 600s?

My basic assumption WRT batters with high averages, good k/bb ratios and no power, is that as they move up the chain facing better pitchers, they are forced to deal with harder to hit pitches which are nonetheless strikes, the result is both walks and average (and any offensive value) tends to erode.

However, there has been in the past, and likely will be in the future, a small minority of hitters who can buck that trend.

Thole shows no erosion as he's been promoted:
2007 A ball: 267/.372/.311 (League .263/.336/.399)
2008 A+ Ball:.300/.382/.427 (league .256/.329/.376)
2009 AA Ball:.328/.395/.422 (league .258/.332/.385)
and I'm not even counting his MLB cup of coffee
Even though he's shown no signs of power, I'm higher on him than I was 12 months ago.

I know you are a fan of an AL team but I can't believe you said the Mets had a good bullpen in 2008. The Mets had the best run differential in the first six innings of games in 2008 (it may have been an MLB record) and didn't make the playoffs almost entirely due to the fact that they had an atrocious pen. As someone who watched much of that carnage live, it offends my sensibility for anyone to insinuate the Mets had a good bullpen in 2008.

Well, they had some good RPs, Wagner in particular had an excellent year, they were just hurt/ineffective/mis-managed when they needed them. Sorry to offend.

Omir Santos is no prospect, his mLB numbers scream backup catcher, he can hang out in AAA as insurance.

You are being too kind to him, his mLB numbers scream AAA 3rd catcher :-)
That 82 OPS+ he hit in 2009 is as far above his true talent level as that 147 Garrett Jones put up- but whereas ZiPS thinks Jones can post a 114 my guess is it will see 55 or so in Santos' future...

Cheerleading for a Thole promotion to the majors at this stage of his development is exactly the kind of move that gives Mets' fans a bad name. If he's going to be a major league quality catcher, I am pretty damn sure it won't be in 2009, and the one thing that will make it less likely than any other to EVER happen would be promoting him too soon.

Mike used the Kendall comparison as if it was a bad thing, but I'll turn it around. He's had almost EXACTLY the same ML career that Kendall had and Kendall's career turned out pretty good. I am not even saying he's going to be as good as Kendall was at his prime, but I can't see how anything that you bring up other than what I consider an entirely subjective EARLY PROMOTION DESTROYS LIVES is an argument against bringing him up, because none of the numbers currently support that position. He's been good in the minors, and he's been good in the majors. He didn't look lost, he didn't look scared, and he didn't play badly at all - he played well, in fact. I'd start the season with him, yes, and as far as it giving Mets fans a bad name, your pessimism seems equally that to me. He sucks out for two months, send him back. If two months is going to destroy a player's career, he wasn't going to be good in the first place.

Also, I'm not saying it's a given he's going to succeed, much like you're saying it seems to be a given he's going to fail. But what I am saying is based on all the numbers and what I saw as a non-scout basement blogger baseball fan, I'd be fine with starting him over Greg ####### Zaun and Benjie ####### Molina.

Mike used the Kendall comparison as if it was a bad thing, but I'll turn it around. He's had almost EXACTLY the same ML career that Kendall had and Kendall's career turned out pretty good.

wasn't kendall's value mostly derived from his excellent defense/playcalling/gamemanagement? isn't that the reason he's still around to this day?


good defensive catchers can be pushed to the moon, because even if they hit for a .650 OPS, they still provide positive value. thole doesn't do that.

I can't see how anything that you bring up other than what I consider an entirely subjective EARLY PROMOTION DESTROYS LIVES is an argument against bringing him up, because none of the numbers currently support that position.

I am pretty grumpy these days, I'll give you that. But I am not always against swift promotion. I am for it when a player has dominated -- I don't think you are arguing Thole has done that. I am for it when the player is being asked to fill a low-stress defensive position, or where the indications are that he may be especially awesome at a particularly important defensive position. Thole, as a catcher with little experience and less-than-glowing reports on his defense, fits neither of those. Thole is, in short, a paradigm case of a prospect for whom patience is called for. And I'm not saying the Mets should hold him back until 2012 or something. I'm saying 190 games caught -- which is the entirety of his pro experience -- just isn't enough to turn over the catching job to him. I'm agnostic on his hitting, and it's not the reason I oppose his being the Mets' catcher. I just think he does not have enough minor league experience, nor has he developed enough defensive ability (yet), to handle that job.

EDIT: Over 1504 plate appearances, Kendall was .398 SLG and .778 OPS. Over 1542 PA, Thole was .375 SLG and .754 OPS. There's a difference, but the way everyone talks, I expected it to be much more.

Kendall SLG/League SLG
A- .352/.358
A+ .437/.405
AA .448/.384

So he went from -6 to +32 to +64, slugging relative to league
Relative to league, Thiole has gone -88 to +53 to +37
Kendall played in a much better advanced A hitting environment than Thole, otherwise they've played in similar run environments.
Kendall was a little younger too I believe.

If Thole is 90% of the player Kendal was, pre-injury, as Met fan I'd be jumping for joy.
If Thole is the same player (on the field not off), that LoDuca was for the Mets, I'd be satisfied.

I'm not looking for Thole to be a star, just someone who is no worse than what they've been getting the past 2-4 years

Santos scares the crap out of me, his 82 OPS+ was like Tony Pena's 68 in 2007, I can easily see Santos hitting .238/.279/.308 with significant PT (in case you were wondering that was his minor league averages less .20/.25/.40)

wasn't kendall's value mostly derived from his excellent defense/playcalling/gamemanagement? isn't that the reason he's still around to this day?


If you're playing Jason Kendall for defense, you're doing it wrong.

I guess also, if you're playing Jason Kendall for offense, you're doing it wrong.

It'll be interesting to see if he has a job in 2010. Are the Brewers planning to bring him back?

wasn't kendall's value mostly derived from his excellent defense/playcalling/gamemanagement? isn't that the reason he's still around to this day?

NO.



That was where most of Kendall's value was

BTW, Sam, did you see where I agreed with you in the, er, um, it's off the sidebar now. But I TOTALLY agreed with you on something just yesterday.

As far as #85 - well, that is eminently reasonable. As I've said before, this is partly emotional for me. The thought of trundling out a Molina or a Zaun will make me want to turn off my television, and I don't want to do that. So I can make good argument from there that Thole can start. I wrote in another thread, I would have been fine with Ramon Hernandez starting and Thole backing up then. Also, I'm sure there are other catchers I'm not thinking of for whom this would be the case. In fact, a scenario that we could probably both agree on would be Thole as the primary backup to someone decent. Molina, Zaun, Buck, Santos do not qualify for that. To be clear, I will freely admit that it's a risk, but I think it's a good risk.


wasn't kendall's value mostly derived from his excellent defense/playcalling/gamemanagement? isn't that the reason he's still around to this day?

I have no idea, but from '97 to '03 his OPS was .825, .884, .939, .882, .639, .706, and .815.


I guess also, if you're playing Jason Kendall for offense, you're doing it wrong.

Actually, based on people doing a better job calling up numbers than I did, this statement seems to be doing it wrong.


I agree more with JPFW13 on this matter than I think I do with myself.

BTW, Sam, did you see where I agreed with you in the, er, um, it's off the sidebar now. But I TOTALLY agreed with you on something just yesterday.

I did see that. It gave me goose bumps. ;-)

The one scenario in which I could see agreeing with having Thole on the major league roster would be in that caddy role. Convince me that it would be his best learning situation, from the right veteran on a day-to-day basis, and he gets enough playing time as well, and it could work. If he's not going to play more than once a week, then it's a waste. Some playing, a lot of learning . . . that could work.

Well, then in reality, who that's AVAILABLE would this be? (And to be clear, I'm in favor of the primary backup roll, everything fifth day, lefty/right, slump, something probably a little more than you envision.)

wasn't kendall's value mostly derived from his excellent defense/playcalling/gamemanagement? isn't that the reason he's still around to this day?

Let's not forget that before his gruesome ankle injury in 1999, he was also on his way to being the greatest base-stealing catcher of all time: 71 SBs versus only 16 CS in his first 3.5 seasons. After his return, he continued to run more than most catchers, but his success rate plummeted much more deeply than ordinary wear-and-tear would have accounted for.

He's had almost EXACTLY the same ML career that Kendall had and Kendall's career turned out pretty good.

No, he hasn't - because he's been a year older at each stop and because his power took a step backward at age 22, rather than a step forward.

Kendall slugged .437 in high A-ball with an ISO of .119 at age 20, .448 in AA ball with an ISO of .122 at age 21. Thole, a year older, slugged .427/.127 in high A-ball then .422/.094 at age 22 in AA. Kendall's OPS at high-A was 37 points higher, at AA was 18 points higher. Thole has, in his minor league career, a total of eight home runs. Kendall hit that many at AA.

Kendall's major league ISO, as a rookie, was .101. Thole's ISO, in limited PT with the Mets, was .075 - which I think is a reasonable estimate for what he'd likely do as a major leaguer - and he really doesn't walk a whole lot. I think his upside, at this stage, is something like .300/.360/.375, and I don't think that's sustainable over the long haul, especially for a catcher (yes, they DO get nicked up). That may be better than anything the Mets have at catcher, to be sure, but that's not a long-term solution.

-- MWE

Cheerleading for a Thole promotion to the majors at this stage of his development is exactly the kind of move that gives Mets' fans a bad name. If he's going to be a major league quality catcher, I am pretty damn sure it won't be in 2010, and the one thing that will make it less likely than any other to EVER happen would be promoting him too soon.

First of all, I couldn't care less what others think about us. Either it's an intelligent move or it isn't, and worrying about others' perception is a bad trait, whether in posting in a baseball website or in life.

Second, even if he isn't ready yet, there's value in letting him develop in the majors if we would get similar or inferior production from the veteran retread pile. We have 2 vacant catcher spots right now (Santos sucks), so Thole should get 1 of them. And if he's going to be up here, he needs to be in a timeshare at minimum.

even if he isn't ready yet, there's value in letting him develop in the majors if we would get similar or inferior production from the veteran retread pile.

Assuming he'd develop rather than stagnate. There's also value to be had in letting a player stay in the minors where he can develop skills that he might have trouble developing in the majors under pressure.

-- MWE

Assuming he'd develop rather than stagnate. There's also value to be had in letting a player stay in the minors where he can develop skills that he might have trouble developing in the majors under pressure.


Decisions aren't static. As the Mets are constituted right now, there's no reason why Thole shouldn't be the starting C. If he struggles or shows signs of pressing, then I agree they should demote him. But to say that he wouldn't outperform Santos or Schneider right now, I disagree.

BTW, I would be fine with starting Thole at AAA as well.

As the Mets are constituted right now, there's no reason why Thole shouldn't be the starting C. If he struggles or shows signs of pressing, then I agree they should demote him.

This whole debate is causing me to hallucinate. I swear I first read that as "...then I agree they should detonate him," which struck me as kind of unnecessarily violent. You don't get called up again after being detonated.

Mike's points in #93 are good ones, but Kendall was a very good offensive weapon. All most of us are arguing for is that Thole will be above average, and if so, should be given the opportunity to start. As Rask says, the short leash is not going to ruin him.

There's also value to be had in letting a player stay in the minors where he can develop skills that he might have trouble developi

From the POV of Thole's development, I think you can make a pretty good case that catching is a special case, where it is justifiable to have a kid -- once he has enough of the basic fundamentals down from experience in the minors -- come up and caddy for a starting catcher, even if he's not really ready. In fact, I think such an apprenticeship is probably part of getting ready. Working with a veteran catcher who knows the league's hitters, knows the umpires, in an ideal world knows most of the pitchers on the staff -- that can be invaluable for a young catcher in really becoming a strong defensive performer. Not necessarily the physical stuff (catching and throwing and blocking the plate), but the working with the pitcher part of his game. And goodness knows the Mets have pitchers who could use a strong catcher helping them along.

In Thole's case, I think he needs both parts of that plan: more time in the minors on the fundamentals, and then an apprenticeship as the back-up working with the right veteran. That's IF he has the core skills and potential to be a good defensive catcher, because I agree with Mike that his offensive ceiling just isn't that high. He has some potential, but if he's going to be part of the future, the Mets ought to be arranging a plan that gives him the best chance to become an above average catcher.

As far as who that veteran might be, I have no idea. It would be a guy who's willing to sit with Thole and talk about why he worked hitters the way he did, what worked and what didn't, about the umpires and their foibles, about which pitchers are total head cases and how to handle them. All I'm saying is that, at some point, bringing a young catcher to the majors doesn't have to leave him to stagnate.

Sadly, on the Mets, it probably would. It's what we do.

First of all, I couldn't care less what others think about us. Either it's an intelligent move or it isn't, and worrying about others' perception is a bad trait, whether in posting in a baseball website or in life.

Let me clarify then. It's the kind of thing that deservedly gives Mets' fans a bad name. Thole as the 2010 starter is a bad idea, for Thole as much as anything.

One answer to the 2010 Kendall question. Melvin has said that he is considering having Lucroy skip AAA and be the catcher for the Brewers in 2010. He even referenced that Kendall himself had skipped AAA.

The Brewers are happier with the current status of Lucroy's defense over Salome and as one point of reference, the CHONE projections have Lucroy and Salome one run difference offensively, and better than any FA C that is available (and almost 2 wins better than Kendall).

We get it, snapper, you hate the Mets. This isn't analysis, it's trolling. Get lost.

Really, it's not, Free.

Speaking as someone who has a highly trained and sensitive troll-o-meter, I can tell you that this actually is analysis.