Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Friday, December 06, 2013

Mets to sign Curtis Granderson

New York Mets and outfielder Curtis Granderson have agreed on a four-year, $60 million deal, pending the outcome of a physical, ESPN sources say.

Mark S. is bored Posted: December 06, 2013 at 01:29 PM | 97 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: mets

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. zonk Posted: December 06, 2013 at 01:57 PM (#4612241)
I know he was hurt and crappy last year and I also know that NYS had a lot to do with his back-to-back 40 HR seasons.... I don't think this is a terrible deal, especially for a team like the Mets that so desperately needs a credible OFer.

I guess he a few years past the wrong side of 30, but I still think this beats most of the other deals I've seen handed out.

I really think I'd rather have Granderson at 4/60 than Ellsbury at 7/150.
   2. tfbg9 Posted: December 06, 2013 at 02:07 PM (#4612262)
Steamer: .233/.326/.442 26 HR's (as a NYY)
   3. SG Posted: December 06, 2013 at 02:07 PM (#4612264)
I really think I'd rather have Granderson at 4/60 than Ellsbury at 7/150.


As would I.
   4. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: December 06, 2013 at 02:08 PM (#4612268)
Even when the Mets win, the Yankees overshadow them by losing...
   5. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: December 06, 2013 at 02:11 PM (#4612273)
I think its a terrific deal. The Mets are probably not that far away from being decent, and Grandy can still be a 4-5 WAR player.
   6. Mark S. is bored Posted: December 06, 2013 at 02:11 PM (#4612274)
ZIPS on Granderson

Granderson 2014 in NYN: 273/322/444, 113 OPS+, 2.4 WAR. Then 2.2, 2.0, 1.3
   7. Mark S. is bored Posted: December 06, 2013 at 02:12 PM (#4612275)
Mets 2014:

2014 Mets lineup

CF - Lagares
RF - Young
LF - Granderson
1B - Davis/Duda
2B - Murphy/Young Jr.
SS - Tejada
3B - Wright
C - d’Arnaud

P - Gee, Niese, Wheeler, Mejia, (Arroyo???)
   8. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: December 06, 2013 at 02:19 PM (#4612289)
and Grandy can still be a 4-5 WAR player.

4-5 might be too optimistic. A little over 5 is what Cano projects to be. He definitely makes the Mets better and they SHOULD be able to afford a contract like this easily.
   9. SG Posted: December 06, 2013 at 02:23 PM (#4612294)
That .273 average doesn't pass the sniff test. Granderson's hit .249 since 2009.
   10. Mark S. is bored Posted: December 06, 2013 at 02:24 PM (#4612295)
Last year, the Mets top OF (by WAR)

Byrd - 4.0
Lagares - 3.7
Eric Young - 0.9 (91 games. -0.6 overall)
Andrew Brown - 0.4

Everyone else is 0.0 or lower
   11. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: December 06, 2013 at 02:24 PM (#4612296)
Granderson 2014 in NYN: 273/322/444, 113 OPS+, 2.4 WAR. Then 2.2, 2.0, 1.3


Oh, well never mind.
   12. jmurph Posted: December 06, 2013 at 02:26 PM (#4612298)
That .273 average doesn't pass the sniff test. Granderson's hit .249 since 2009.


Yeah he's quietly turned into an exceptionally boring player. All strikeouts and home runs.
   13. Jesse Barfield's Right Arm Posted: December 06, 2013 at 02:27 PM (#4612301)
Granderson 2014 in NYN: 273/322/444, 113 OPS+, 2.4 WAR. Then 2.2, 2.0, 1.3

And Zips has Byrd in PHI: 276/325/441 (albeit in a much better hitting park) and 2.0 WAR

Winner: Ruben?
   14. Juilin Sandar to Conkling Speedwell (Arjun) Posted: December 06, 2013 at 02:29 PM (#4612307)
Hmm, the Mets seem like they should have a pretty good defensive outfield, with Granderson, Young, and Lagares, no?
   15. Mark S. is bored Posted: December 06, 2013 at 02:31 PM (#4612310)
Granderson 2014 in NYN: 273/322/444, 113 OPS+, 2.4 WAR. Then 2.2, 2.0, 1.3

And Zips has Byrd in PHI: 276/325/441 (albeit in a much better hitting park) and 2.0 WAR

Winner: Ruben?
ZIPS is probably estimating Granderson for less playing time since he was injured last season. Szym sez:
So I would slightly take the over on the ZiPS for Granderson, given that he had finger/forearm, not an elbow or shoulder.
   16. SG Posted: December 06, 2013 at 02:32 PM (#4612313)
Someone ask Szym about that .273 average.
   17. Mark S. is bored Posted: December 06, 2013 at 02:35 PM (#4612318)
Someone ask Szym about that .273 average.
Done. Waiting to hear a response.
   18. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: December 06, 2013 at 02:39 PM (#4612327)
I really think I'd rather have Granderson at 4/60 than Ellsbury at 7/150.


Yup. That Ellsbury contract both sucks and blows.
   19. Mark S. is bored Posted: December 06, 2013 at 02:43 PM (#4612330)
Szym answers:

I didn't notice it until recent projection, but Granderson high BA/low ISO is because I transposed digits. 237 BA, not 273
   20. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 06, 2013 at 02:47 PM (#4612333)
I'm not optimistic about Granderson because he's 33 and moving off of CF and seemed to benefit from YSIII, but 4/60 seems reasonable. I guess. Not a huge fan of the deal, but it's ok.

He's a high strikeout low BA high walk good power hitter who is moving parks. I don't think he's the kind of player I expect to age well, although he does have the speed factor going for him.

EDIT: His .944 OPS against lefties from 2011 never was going to hold, but he did appear to hold enough improvement against lefties that he is now competent against them and not just a sinkhole.

   21. JRVJ Posted: December 06, 2013 at 02:49 PM (#4612334)
13, it's actually Granderson and a foregone 2nd round pick vs. Byrd (if I understand compensation rules correctly, the Mets 1st rounder is protected).
   22. ColonelTom Posted: December 06, 2013 at 02:52 PM (#4612337)
Winner: Ruben?

I'd much rather have Byrd for 2/$16M than Granderson for 4/$60M. Of course, I'd really rather have neither of those contracts.

Odds that Kelly Johnson, if he starts at 2B for the Yankees, out-homers Granderson next year?
   23. SG Posted: December 06, 2013 at 02:57 PM (#4612344)
Thanks Mark, that makes more sense.
   24. Mark S. is bored Posted: December 06, 2013 at 02:58 PM (#4612346)
I'd much rather have Byrd for 2/$16M than Granderson for 4/$60M. Of course, I'd really rather have neither of those contracts.
Byrd is 3.5 years older than Granderson and coming off his best year ever, while Granderson is coming off an injury filled year. I'd guess that Granderson is more likely to exceed his ZIPS, while Byrd is more likely to be below.
   25. Lassus Posted: December 06, 2013 at 02:58 PM (#4612347)
I want to be optimistic about Grandy, who is an awesome personality, but I admit I fear we are paying for an ugly and apparent decline show.
   26. Dock Ellis on Acid Posted: December 06, 2013 at 03:31 PM (#4612404)
That salmon must've been really good.
   27. PreservedFish Posted: December 06, 2013 at 03:31 PM (#4612405)
25 - me too.
   28. tfbg9 Posted: December 06, 2013 at 04:08 PM (#4612442)
So, the ZiPS and Steamer end up just about the same.
   29. zonk Posted: December 06, 2013 at 04:38 PM (#4612463)
I'd much rather have Byrd for 2/$16M than Granderson for 4/$60M. Of course, I'd really rather have neither of those contracts.


Not me.

I can easily Byrd being REAL toast as soon as next year.

I MIGHT prefer Byrd over Ellsbury simply because I can east 2/16 easily enough... but something like 7/150 just scares the bejeesus out of me. 4/60 could be disastrous, too -- but this is for a guy that was really good pretty recently and has a track record of being really good (as opposed to Ellsbury... who basically has one career season, one good season, and then a bunch of partial seasons).

If I needed an OF, I suppose I'd flip a coin as to whether I'd land on 4/60 for Grandy or not.... but I'd still take him over 7/150 for Ellsbury and absolutely over 2/16 for Byrd.

Of course... my Byrd view is probably slanted by my experience in his final Cub days, when the dude literally looked like he ought to retire and get himself a coaching gig.
   30. Robert in Manhattan Beach Posted: December 06, 2013 at 04:39 PM (#4612468)
Good sign for the Mets. I didn't know they were spending.
   31. Tom Cervo, backup catcher Posted: December 06, 2013 at 04:51 PM (#4612489)
Granderson had some bad luck with HBP this year, so I think there's a decent chance he outperforms his projections. Even if he doesn't, there probably isn't a player more fun to root for.
   32. thetailor Posted: December 06, 2013 at 08:31 PM (#4612681)
Not a single post about this signing since 3:51 p.m. Are we already that bored of the Mets and of the Granderson thing?

Well, here's my take on it. I don't want to link it on the main newsblog but always love hearing what you guys think.

   33. AJMcCringleberry Posted: December 06, 2013 at 08:42 PM (#4612686)
I like this deal.
   34. depletion Posted: December 06, 2013 at 10:31 PM (#4612732)
I would have liked this signing more if Curtis had decent splits against LHP. They still are going to lose almost every game against decent lefties. I do like that the Mets have 3 potential CF's in the outfield. Even if Curtis does deteriorate a bit in the field he should be at least acceptable for the duration of the contract. I wonder who they have in mind for outfielders 4 and 5? On the balance it is a good signing, because one has to consider the alternatives which, in general, aren't as good as picking up Granderson for 60/4.
   35. Elvis Posted: December 07, 2013 at 12:23 AM (#4612804)
Granderson may not end up being worth it on a dollars-to-WAR basis but I would suggest we kick in a little extra for fan psyche. Also, for taking us out of any running for Nelson Cruz.

I’m cautiously optimistic about this move.
   36. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 07, 2013 at 12:34 AM (#4612809)
Remember when people here argued that Kevin Long had turned Granderson into a .940 OPS guy against lefties? That was fun.
   37. tfbg9 Posted: December 07, 2013 at 01:47 AM (#4612838)
36-IIRC, it was Cowboy Popup.
   38. PreservedFish Posted: December 07, 2013 at 02:50 AM (#4612846)
Remember when people here argued that Kevin Long had turned Granderson into a .940 OPS guy against lefties? That was fun.


I just found a thread on this in the archives and was pleased to find myself mocking the "Kevin Long can do anything" theory.
   39. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: December 07, 2013 at 03:12 AM (#4612851)
I know there are some reasons to be optimistic about Young and Granderson but I can't say I am in love with the fact that the Mets are spending roughly 22 million next year on two guys on the wrong side of thirty who combined to post a .211/.294/.390 batting line in 2013.

To be fair, the market is crazy right now and you are going to have spend big money to get solid players. I would have preferred Beltran for the contract that he got but even there we are talking about paying a guy into his 40s.

It's not like the Mets have a ton of outfielders who are likely to be better. Puello is going to get significant playing time anyway when he's ready. Grandy will need to be platooned or Young and/or Lagares will suck or someone will get hurt. I'm OK with this offseason so far. Just trade Duda or Davis for quality return and I'll be happy.
   40. Swedish Chef Posted: December 07, 2013 at 08:18 AM (#4612868)
Remember when people here argued that Kevin Long had turned Granderson into a .940 OPS guy against lefties? That was fun.

Seems to me they were entirely right, Granderson doesn't have a leftie problem anymore.
   41. dejarouehg Posted: December 07, 2013 at 09:27 AM (#4612873)
I love that Granderson seems to "get it." A very decent guy that I even rooted for on the Yankees. I fear that Lassus nailed it!!!
   42. Shoebo Posted: December 07, 2013 at 12:05 PM (#4612971)
I predict Granderson has a great first year with the Mets, but then sucks for the next 3.
   43. Banta Posted: December 07, 2013 at 12:11 PM (#4612978)
Not to put a black cloud over this conversation, but these are the deals that never seem to work out for the Mets and lead to them being unable or unwilling to resign, for instance, the best SS the franchise ever developed.
   44. Arbitol Dijaler Posted: December 07, 2013 at 12:22 PM (#4612986)
I guess there is your silver lining for not having anyone that good worth worrying about retaining right now.
   45. The Clarence Thomas of BBTF (scott) Posted: December 07, 2013 at 12:40 PM (#4612993)
Yeah, I have no problem with this. The Mets needed capable outfielders, and Granderson is that. Chris Young is two injury plagued seasons away from back to back 5 WAR seasons, and signed short and cheap. If Lagares really is that good in center their OF should go from being a serious weakness at the start of last season to one that might work on a playoff contender.

With Murphy at 2nd, Wright at 3rd, and D'Arnaud at C that leaves 1B and SS open. Tejada had a lost season, but he was an average to above average player at age 22 and 23. Ike Davis, who knows what happens with him. But they should have the makings of a decent offensive team, and they sure do have enough pitching prospects that hoping for a .500+ season is realistic.
   46. billyshears Posted: December 07, 2013 at 12:40 PM (#4612994)
I understand that every calculated risk the Mets take on an aging player or every mild overpay the Mets make to chase a dream of a championship or mere relevance ends catastrophically beyond all reasonable expectations, but that doesn't mean it's a bad idea. This is more than I would have preferred to give Granderson, but you can't keep running the likes of Kirk Nieuwenhuis, Lucas Duda, Eric Young, Mike Baxter, Scott Hariston, Juan Lagares, Marlon Byrd, Angel Pagan and Nick Evans out there and hoping for a miracle. Sometimes you get a decent result (Byrd), and sometimes you find a useful player (Lagares), but you waste an awful lot of ABs trying to find production and mostly you don't get it. The Mets were a terrible offensive team last year and the only OFs in their system above A ball that can reasonably called prospects are Puello and Nimmo. Needless to say, they both have their flaws. Nothing guarantees that Granderson doesn't go poof, but the contract shouldn't be all that crippling, there is no other good option for LF and at least there is a not insignificant chance that we get some close facsimile of the 2011-2012 Granderson for a couple of years.
   47. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: December 07, 2013 at 02:19 PM (#4613056)
I think we are pretty much in agreement about this deal. It's not a great deal but it's not a horrible overpay and it fills a need. The free agent market isn't a place you usually get bargains.

I just want them to trade either Ike or Duda for a reasonable return. You can't have both on the roster next year. I have no preference.
   48. Lassus Posted: December 07, 2013 at 07:09 PM (#4613183)
What do people here consider a reasonable return on either Duda or Davis?
   49. JJ1986 Posted: December 07, 2013 at 07:33 PM (#4613192)
I doubt you'll get much of a prospect for either, so it's probably better to take another major league ready player who's a bad fit on his team. Caleb Gindl's a guy I thought would be a fair return for Duda. Who else needs a 1B? I think Tabata might be an interesting target and he's going to have nowhere to play in Pittsburgh. I wonder if you could get Jake McGee from Tampa.
   50. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 07, 2013 at 07:34 PM (#4613194)
Remember when people here argued that Kevin Long had turned Granderson into a .940 OPS guy against lefties? That was fun.

Seems to me they were entirely right, Granderson doesn't have a leftie problem anymore.


It seems to you wrong, since he's not a .940 OPS guy against lefties.

He's ok against lefties now, yes. As I said at the time, it was reasonable to expect that Granderson had improved against lefties -- but improved up to adequate, not improved to a .940 OPS.
   51. bobm Posted: December 07, 2013 at 07:37 PM (#4613195)
What do people here consider a reasonable return on either Duda or Davis?

Great trade! Who'd we get?
:-)
   52. bobm Posted: December 07, 2013 at 08:07 PM (#4613211)
From a Mike Vaccaro column in the NY Post:

So you are cruising the Internet, feeling damned good about things (and, come on, be honest, feeling extra delighted since on the same day Granderson said “hello” to Flushing, Robinson Cano said “good-bye” to The Bronx), and you stop by the Grandy Man’s bio page on baseball-reference.com. Nothing — nothing — can darken your day, even as the skies darken and the clouds open on a perfectly miserable December day…

Until …

Until …

Until …

You take a glance at the “Similarity Scores” section, an algorithm which takes every player who has ever played Major League Baseball and crunches numbers and ages and every conceivable thing.

Your eye probably isn’t drawn to the listing of similar-age players, where No. 1 is Ron Gant, who was a fine player for the Braves, Reds and Cardinals, among others (even if he never hit higher than .262 starting with his age-33 season, which Granderson will arrive at this year).

No, your eyes fix on the other list, the one that compares whole careers. And it doesn’t much matter to you that among those top-10 comps are some terrific players: Jose Bautista, Jayson Werth, Wally Post, Jesse Barfield. No. There is only one name on the list that captures you and, well, it so happens it’s the No. 1 name on the list. The No. 1 comp to Curtis Granderson.

And the name is Jason Bay.

We will allow you sufficient time here to hyperventilate, to take several deep breaths, to maybe pour yourself a refreshing glass of ice water (or something stronger, if necessary). OK? We good?

Now the good news:
[Emphasis added]


http://nypost.com/2013/12/07/mets-deal-for-granderson-must-be-first-of-several-steps/
   53. formerly dp Posted: December 07, 2013 at 09:48 PM (#4613242)
I know Beltran being able to DH with them makes the Yankees a better destination, but I think I'd rather have his contract than Granderson's. To Banta's point: it does suck that Granderson's getting close to the same salary as Reyes. I'd rather have Jose at this point.

The OF should be better this year, especially if Puello can come up and contribute midway through the season. At least they have upside with Young and Granderson, though I wouldn't bank on either to be great.
What do people here consider a reasonable return on either Duda or Davis?
From what I've read this offseason, there's at least some demand for Davis. I can't see him bringing much, though. Maybe a #6 starter or backup infielder?

Wondering what all of these OF moves mean for Eric Young. He's blocked at 2B, and the Mets don't seem like the type of team to carry a pinch running LF. The roster's in a strange spot right now after all of the non-tenders earlier in the week.
   54. Conor Posted: December 07, 2013 at 10:01 PM (#4613248)
I know Beltran being able to DH with them makes the Yankees a better destination, but I think I'd rather have his contract than Granderson's.


I don't think I would go that far. Beltran is a much better fit for the Yankees than the Mets; he can DH and play in a much smaller RF than he would here. Beltran's USR cratered last year; I'm sure some of that was small sample, but it isn't surprising to me that a 36 year old, even one who was as good a fielder as Beltran was, would be a poor outfielder. I do agree on Reyes, as a 28 year old he signed for 6 years at 16 million per, the Mets signed Granderson at 33 for 4 years at 15. The Reyes deal looks like a bargain now.

Wondering what all of these OF moves mean for Eric Young. He's blocked at 2B, and the Mets don't seem like the type of team to carry a pinch running LF. The roster's in a strange spot right now after all of the non-tenders earlier in the week.


A Murphy trade wouldn't surprise me. Not sure how tight the budget is, but they may like Flores/Young enough to trade Murphy, save some money, and get a player back.
   55. Lassus Posted: December 07, 2013 at 10:47 PM (#4613267)
I can't believe I'm going to say this, but I'm actually fine giving Davis one more year to be decent. I would have no problem with Duda going, though.
   56. formerly dp Posted: December 07, 2013 at 10:56 PM (#4613271)
I can't believe I'm going to say this, but I'm actually fine giving Davis one more year to be decent.
I think '14 will be another year with some growing pains-- I'm fine with that too, as Davis has a chance at being an above-average guy at 1B, where Duda's ceiling seems to be not as high.
A Murphy trade wouldn't surprise me. Not sure how tight the budget is, but they may like Flores/Young enough to trade Murphy, save some money, and get a player back.

I'm not sure who would make a good fit, at this point, or what the Mets would want in return. I'm on board with giving Flores a shot (but I think I'm higher on him than most), and it seems like their biggest need positionally is at SS. They don't really need more pitching, at least in the long-term. This has been an odd winter for trades, so not really sure what any of these guys can bring in return. Murphy's value is as high as it's ever been.
   57. Lassus Posted: December 07, 2013 at 11:51 PM (#4613290)
I really wish I understood WTF was going on with the Mets and Tejada. He just doesn't seem like a pain-in-the-ass Valdespin type so it just seems like the Mets are complete dicks to him for some reason. I know he's know star but his flashes seem worth more work and investment, time- and training-wise. But.... I guess not? Whatever.
   58. Greg K Posted: December 07, 2013 at 11:55 PM (#4613291)
I'm not sure who would make a good fit, at this point, or what the Mets would want in return.

How is Murphy at 2B? The Jays are desperate for one, and I'm curious who's available. Dustin Ackley or Gordon Beckham seem like guys you could buy low on. But I've always liked Murphy from afar...kind of like a Frank Catalanatto who can actually play the field. And the Cat was one of my all-time favourite Jays.
   59. bobm Posted: December 08, 2013 at 12:03 AM (#4613297)
[57] See http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/sports/2013/11/8536712/mets-tejada-era-continues-after-all
   60. Lassus Posted: December 08, 2013 at 12:09 AM (#4613298)
See http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/sports/2013/11/8536712/mets-tejada-era-continues-after-all
"You know, one of the problems with Ruben is, it’s like pulling teeth. Extra batting practice, extra this, extra that, doesn’t happen unless someone else is insisting on it. And that’s what we need to see.
It still sounds he annoyed some veteran coach or player or flirted with somebody's wife to me. This and other quotes have all had a strong scent of pettiness to them. Maybe I'm wrong.
   61. formerly dp Posted: December 08, 2013 at 12:38 AM (#4613307)
How is Murphy at 2B? The Jays are desperate for one, and I'm curious who's available. Dustin Ackley or Gordon Beckham seem like guys you could buy low on. But I've always liked Murphy from afar
I've thought of Murphy as a good fit for the Jays for a while now, for different reasons at different times. But I don't know who Toronto would send to the Mets to make it worth their while.
   62. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: December 08, 2013 at 02:37 AM (#4613371)
Murphy plays a decent second base. Good hands, solid arm, with poor but not awful range.

I think '14 will be another year with some growing pains-- I'm fine with that too, as Davis has a chance at being an above-average guy at 1B, where Duda's ceiling seems to be not as high

Why exactly do we think Davis has the higher upside?

   63. Lassus Posted: December 08, 2013 at 08:44 AM (#4613411)
Why exactly do we think Davis has the higher upside?

Better overall career numbers, not-abyssmal defense, and unproven hope. Yes, I know that the career OPS+ is two points worse.
   64. Arbitol Dijaler Posted: December 08, 2013 at 10:02 AM (#4613428)
What do you think about a cross-town trade centered around Murphy and Brett Gardner? Yankees have a vacancy at second; Gardner is likely to outperform Lagares in a starting role. Yanks probably have to kick in a reliever or low-level prospect to account for Gardner being a year away from FA.
   65. AJMcCringleberry Posted: December 08, 2013 at 10:06 AM (#4613432)
What do people here consider a reasonable return on either Duda or Davis?

Probably not much, but the Astros traded nothing and got Dexter Fowler.

I like Murphy, but I would like him to be traded and Flores to be given the job. See if he can be the guy when the Mets (hopefully) contend in 2015/2016.
   66. formerly dp Posted: December 08, 2013 at 10:21 AM (#4613436)
Better overall career numbers, not-abyssmal defense, and unproven hope
On the last two points: Davis looks good at 1B to me, but the numbers don't bear it out. Duda looks...like he's trying hard. My suspicion is that other teams still have higher hopes for Davis as well.
   67. Arbitol Dijaler Posted: December 08, 2013 at 10:26 AM (#4613438)
Davis in the second half last year:

.286/.449/.505

Just 4 home runs meant the turnaround wasn't nearly as heralded as it was in 2012, but there are persistent signs of life with him.
   68. AJMcCringleberry Posted: December 08, 2013 at 10:28 AM (#4613440)
What's the rotation going to be? Wheeler, Niese, Gee, Mejia, FA?
   69. yo la tengo Posted: December 08, 2013 at 10:40 AM (#4613447)
Interesting take on Grandy at http://thereadzone.com/2013/12/06/granderson-signing-isnt-jason-bay-part-2-but-it-aint-good-either/

Is there reason to think anyone would bite on a Murphy/Duda or Murphy/Davis package?

#64 - Isn't the outfield a bit crowded already?
   70. formerly dp Posted: December 08, 2013 at 10:46 AM (#4613449)
Wheeler, Niese, Gee, Mejia, FA?
That's my assumption. I'm sure there's someone they can scare up for the fifth slot. I don't think you can count on Wheeler and Mejia to chew up that many innings, especially f Wheeler keeps running up high pitch counts early in the game. Montero/Syndergaard should be ready by midseason, but you've got similar issues there.
==
What do you think about a cross-town trade centered around Murphy and Brett Gardner? Yankees have a vacancy at second; Gardner is likely to outperform Lagares in a starting role. Yanks probably have to kick in a reliever or low-level prospect to account for Gardner being a year away from FA.
Eh, no thanks. They already have a CF in Young if they decide to push Lagares to the bench-- if they want to upgrade, I'd rather see them add another potential impact bat in a corner. Murphy's worth more than a speedster entering his age-30 season.
   71. JE (Jason Epstein) Posted: December 08, 2013 at 10:53 AM (#4613455)
Davis in the second half last year:

.286/.449/.505

How may of those PAs were against LHPs?
   72. formerly dp Posted: December 08, 2013 at 11:13 AM (#4613469)
How may of those PAs were against LHPs?
Not sure, but they have a decent platoon partner for Davis in Satin. Duda has a similar problem: career .224.302/.341 hitter against LHP. Davis is worse at .204/.268/.334, but it's an issue for both.
   73. JE (Jason Epstein) Posted: December 08, 2013 at 12:43 PM (#4613520)
Not sure, but they have a decent platoon partner for Davis in Satin.

Right, but it's borderline fantasy to think Ike is still an everyday player.
   74. Arbitol Dijaler Posted: December 08, 2013 at 01:06 PM (#4613542)

#64 - Isn't the outfield a bit crowded already?


I think it depends on what you think of Juan Lagares. His defensive numbers were so off the charts this year, I have to think they'll come significantly back to earth. At that point, you'd want to see more hitting, and there's plenty of reason to doubt much more is likely.

Certainly a power hitter would be better than a Gardner type (though there is no real leadoff hitter on the roster right now), but we'll see what's out there. Ethier is cromulent at the right price; Kemp is unlikely to be had for anything I'd be comfortable with in light of health issues.
   75. formerly dp Posted: December 08, 2013 at 01:13 PM (#4613548)
Right, but it's borderline fantasy to think Ike is still an everyday player.
I don't think anyone here's expecting him to hit lefties. My expectation is that he'd be platooned if they keep him. And the same goes for Duda-- both are worthless against LHP.
   76. Lassus Posted: December 08, 2013 at 01:31 PM (#4613565)
I'm also confused about the lukewarmness of the FO on Lagares. He's quite obviously an excellent fielder, even with his numbers coming back to earth. No one expects - or should expect - a lot of crazy pop from the CF.

I guess I can understand the stuff about Ruben - sure, I'm not on the team, maybe I can't see he's some kind of enormous pain in the ass. But are we hearing the same about Lagares? Why don't they want to see him develop? Are my glasses too rose-colored?
   77. Mark S. is bored Posted: December 08, 2013 at 01:36 PM (#4613569)
Not sure, but they have a decent platoon partner for Davis in Satin.
Josh Satin? The 29 year old Josh Satin who batted .240/.317/.333 in the second half? I wouldn't think Satin is going to make the MLB roster at all, much less as a platoon partner.
   78. bobm Posted: December 08, 2013 at 01:53 PM (#4613589)
Ike Davis: 170 Plate Appearances in 2013, In July or In August

 vs. RHP 149
vs. LHP 21

.267/.429/.443/.872
   79. formerly dp Posted: December 08, 2013 at 02:26 PM (#4613602)
Josh Satin? The 29 year old Josh Satin who batted .240/.317/.333 in the second half?
I'm thinking of a different guy-- the one who hit .317/.404/.476 off lefties in 2013 :>

I don't think that's a long-term plan or anything, but finding a right-handed platoon partner for a lefty 1B seems like it shouldn't be too difficult. Those guys seem to float around pretty freely.
===
But are we hearing the same about Lagares? Why don't they want to see him develop? Are my glasses too rose-colored?
I think maybe. Lagares was pretty horrible down the stretch last year(.143/.189/.190), finished at .242/.281/.352, and without much by way of speed. It's worth seeing what he can do, but I think it's unrealistic to expect him to be average with the bat. So really, it depends on how good his defense is in CF, and how much the Mets can afford to punt a position for defense.

I'm with you on not understanding why they're so vehemently opposed to Tejada as a human being.
   80. Mark S. is bored Posted: December 08, 2013 at 07:09 PM (#4613777)
I think maybe. Lagares was pretty horrible down the stretch last year(.143/.189/.190), finished at .242/.281/.352, and without much by way of speed. It's worth seeing what he can do, but I think it's unrealistic to expect him to be average with the bat. So really, it depends on how good his defense is in CF, and how much the Mets can afford to punt a position for defense.
The Mets are planning on using Lagares in CF even though they signed two other players who had both played CF before. That should tell you what they think of his defense. As well as his 3.5 dWAR last year in only 121 games.
   81. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: December 08, 2013 at 07:28 PM (#4613785)
Honestly, I'm not horribly against Lagares being the centerfielder with the same slash line if he's really a +10-15/150 UZR centerfielder. You don't have to hit a ton if you're that valuable defensively.
   82. formerly dp Posted: December 08, 2013 at 09:23 PM (#4613862)
But is his defensive performance from last year sustainable? I'm not saying it isn't just that it's an open question at this point.

There are different paths to winning, and I am cool with the Mets being a team that prioritizes defense over offense, especially in that spacious OF. But they need to get runs from somewhere, and with huge question marks at SS and 1B going forward, we'll see if they can get by with Lagares's bat in CF. A lot hinges on how well Flores, Puello, and d'Arnaud can hit, along with Tejada's ability to at least be passable with the bat.
   83. Arbitol Dijaler Posted: December 08, 2013 at 09:49 PM (#4613875)
I think 1B is a modest question mark at this point. They're going to get some, not overwhelming, amount of production, especially if it's a platoon situation. I don't see a scenario shaping up in which they have a star there, so there we are.
   84. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: December 09, 2013 at 12:16 AM (#4613935)
But is his defensive performance from last year sustainable? I'm not saying it isn't just that it's an open question at this point.

I doubt that his UZR is going to be as good as it was last year as he was +34.1/150 but let's do some math. According to fangraphs, he was replacement level offensively. Let's assume the exact same. He played about 900 innings and produced 25.5 runs. Prorate that to 1200 innings and that's 34 runs. Let's say he's half that good. That put's him at 17 runs above replacement.

That would be worth 1.8 to 2.0 WAR. For a guy who is making the minimum, that's a solid option.

There is a question as to whether or not he can keep his offense at the level he had last year. He might regress even more defensively than this example is assuming he will. But it's a reasonable gamble.
   85. formerly dp Posted: December 09, 2013 at 10:03 AM (#4614026)
Updating on some news: they're considering handing 2B to Young if Murphy's dealt. Prefer to deal Davis instead of Duda (not sure if it's b/c of Davis's trade value or b/c they think Duda will be a better player), and plan to have Montero and Syndergaard up in 2014, but not to start. The rotation by the end of the year could be so crowded that someone fairly talented gets crowded out. That leaves me doubtful they'll make another Marcum-style signing this offseason. Not trying to go all Generation K or anything, but 2015 could be Harvey, Wheeler, Mejia, Syndergaard, and Montero (or whoever doesn't get hurt out of that bunch).
   86. Mark S. is bored Posted: December 09, 2013 at 04:46 PM (#4614552)
2015 could be Harvey, Wheeler, Mejia, Syndergaard, and Montero (or whoever doesn't get hurt out of that bunch
Do they trade Niese? He's signed through 2016 with team options of 2017 and 2018 at very reasonable salary (5,7,9,*10,*11).

*team option
   87. JJ1986 Posted: December 09, 2013 at 04:56 PM (#4614558)
I think if they have Harvey, Wheeler and one of the other 3 as starters they'll be doing well. There will be room for Niese (and Gee).
   88. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: December 09, 2013 at 05:04 PM (#4614566)
Lagares hit .308/.347/.436 in 1200 PAs in hi A and above, given the parks/leagues he played in his MLB line of .242/.281/.352 looks reasonably sustainable (hell he should do better).

OTOH I hard time crediting the defensive numbers he got last year...
   89. formerly dp Posted: December 09, 2013 at 05:12 PM (#4614574)
Do they trade Niese? He's signed through 2016 with team options of 2017 and 2018 at very reasonable salary (5,7,9,*10,*11).
Depends on his 2014, and how everyone else develops or fails to. He's very keepable at that salary, but also very valuable in a deal. Though he's obviously not as well-regarded, they're in a similar boat with Gee. The floor of the current crop*, barring injury, seems lower than Gee's ceiling, but perhaps that's a tad optimistic.

The Mets are apparently in on Colon, but I can't see them wanting to meet the asking price. Are they keeping Torres around? I'd prefer they just stick with some AAAA/filler types until Montero's ready midseason.

*I know it was only 5 starts, but Mejia looked pretty amazing out there this year. I hope they do everything in their power to keep him as a starter.
   90. Mark S. is bored Posted: December 09, 2013 at 06:32 PM (#4614650)
*I know it was only 5 starts, but Mejia looked pretty amazing out there this year. I hope they do everything in their power to keep him as a starter.
The only thing they need to do to keep him as a starter is hope he stays healthy.
   91. formerly dp Posted: December 09, 2013 at 06:49 PM (#4614671)
The only thing they need to do to keep him as a starter is hope he stays healthy.
Well, that and not push him to the bullpen out of fears over his stamina/durability...
   92. Mark S. is bored Posted: December 09, 2013 at 06:51 PM (#4614673)
Well, that and not push him to the bullpen out of fears over his stamina/durability...
If he stays healthy, he's in the rotation (based off Alderson's statements and what Mejia showed last year). If (when?) he gets hurt again, they'll push him to the bullpen then.
   93. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: December 10, 2013 at 03:51 PM (#4615333)
The Mets have 45 million in 2014 money due to Wright, Granderson, Niese, and Young.

They have Davis, Parnell, and Murphy in their Arb-2 years.

They have Gee, Duda, Young, and Tejada in their Arb-1 years.

The Mets still have a significant amount of money to spend if even all they are going to do is get back to their 2013 payroll.

I'd like them to get an innings eater starting pitcher even if they have to give someone a multi-year deal. The Mets have pitching prospects and that is their strength of their team right now. But with the health concerns, I'd feel a lot more comfortable about the team if they had someone they could rely on for 30-35 starts.
   94. formerly dp Posted: December 10, 2013 at 04:14 PM (#4615350)
But with the health concerns, I'd feel a lot more comfortable about the team if they had someone they could rely on for 30-35 starts.
I said it upthread, but the Mets need another Marcum-type guy this year (hopefully, with better results). Anyone they sign for to a multiyear deal will soon be surpassed by what's coming through the pipe, or by what's already on board. They could deal someone like Gee or Niese, but then that's just getting out from a logjam they created. It would be a similar situation to the one they ended up in during 2013-- either go with a 6-man, bump a deserving candidate, or keep guys in the minors longer than they should be. I think the money would be better spent on Drew, though he'll be overpriced.

Sandy could do me a huge solid right now and not listen when Cesar Izturis calls.
   95. Arbitol Dijaler Posted: December 10, 2013 at 04:51 PM (#4615391)
An innings eater who is overtaken by prospects could always be moved. There's always a need for that.
   96. The District Attorney Posted: December 10, 2013 at 05:18 PM (#4615420)
The main starting pitcher name I'm hearing with respect to the Mets is Bronson Arroyo, so I bet you get your "inning-eater" wish.
   97. Conor Posted: December 10, 2013 at 05:41 PM (#4615442)
The number I've seen floated around for the Mets current payroll is roughly around $70-72 million, give or take.

The Mets still have a significant amount of money to spend if even all they are going to do is get back to their 2013 payroll.


Depending on what that number really was, I'm not sure how likely that is. Based on what Sandy has said, they're gonna be around $87 million or so, so maybe $15 million to spend. They could open up some more room by trading Ike and/or Murph. The real holes they have right now would be at SS and SP. They probably couldn't sign both Drew and Arroyo, unless they traded Murphy and Ike both (for what? I don't know).

The one thing they have with Young is the ability to move him to CF if Lagares really can't hit.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
The Piehole of David Wells
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogBryce Harper benched for 'lack of hustle' despite quad injury
(17 - 8:47pm, Apr 19)
Last: Chris Needham

NewsblogA’s Jed Lowrie “flabbergasted” by Astros’ response to bunt
(2 - 8:47pm, Apr 19)
Last: Random Transaction Generator

NewsblogOTP April 2014: BurstNET Sued for Not Making Equipment Lease Payments
(1731 - 8:41pm, Apr 19)
Last: tshipman

NewsblogOT: NBA Monthly Thread - April 2014
(349 - 8:37pm, Apr 19)
Last: robinred

NewsblogMitchell: Now Playing First Base for the Yankees
(57 - 8:35pm, Apr 19)
Last: Bug Selig

NewsblogOT: The NHL is finally back thread, part 2
(151 - 8:34pm, Apr 19)
Last: PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth)

NewsblogOMNICHATTER FOR APRIL 19, 2014
(59 - 8:26pm, Apr 19)
Last: CFBF Is A Golden Spider Duck

NewsblogRB: Carlos Beltran: more of a center fielder than Mickey Mantle, Ty Cobb or Duke Snider. So what?
(36 - 8:12pm, Apr 19)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread March, 2014
(914 - 8:03pm, Apr 19)
Last: Jose Can Still Seabiscuit

NewsblogChase Utley is the hottest hitter in baseball and has a shot at .400
(50 - 7:58pm, Apr 19)
Last: bobm

NewsblogDoug Glanville: I Was Racially Profiled in My Own Driveway
(353 - 7:45pm, Apr 19)
Last: Morty Causa

NewsblogCesar Cabral tossed from game, from team
(22 - 7:39pm, Apr 19)
Last: Nasty Nate

NewsblogDaniel Bryan's 'YES!' chant has spread to the Pirates' dugout
(95 - 7:38pm, Apr 19)
Last: NJ in DC

NewsblogPirates Acquire Ike Davis From Mets
(35 - 7:34pm, Apr 19)
Last: bobm

NewsblogA's, Doolittle agree to 4-year extension
(4 - 7:33pm, Apr 19)
Last: Walt Davis

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

 

Page rendered in 0.9345 seconds
52 querie(s) executed