As the off-season rumor mill has started to churn, we have already heard many rumors about who the Mets like, don’t like, will bid on and will not bid on. Of course all the talking heads see it differently. We here at TRDMB know that our fans voice is much more intelligent and informed than any of the talking heads. Thus, we put this question to the test.
Assuming money and years are similar should the Mets go after Holliday, Lackey or neither and pursue a different path. We know these two will be the two most coveted players in the off-season and will demand the most in money and years. As we vote, you may change your vote and in the comment section you can try and persuade your fellow readers to make the “correct” choice. Have fun. The winner will be announced tomorrow.
VOTE HERE: (You must be registered and logged in to vote!)
182 comments
trs86
10/12/2009-10:17am at 10:17 am (UTC -4)
Tough decision for me as you guys know my mind changes daily.
Would I rather have Holliday as our permanent LF finally and then try and trade for a pitcher or sign guys like Piniero or Wolf or would I rather sign Lackey and trade for a LF or sign guys like Byrd or Ankiel?
jaded1983
10/12/2009-10:28am at 10:28 am (UTC -4)
To be honest, if the Mets want to compete than the answer is both. If Madoff didnt affect the Mets like the Wilpon’s said, than both should be Mets in the offseason. I understand that next year’s SP FA class is much better than this year, however that just means that we can add yet another great arm to Santana/Lackey next year.
Look at it this way, we have a great young core, that if we add Holliday to only really leaves us weak at 1B and C, however we have CHEAP alternatives there which should allow us to add strength to other positions…namely SP.
The past two years (08 and 09), Philly has made some great pitching aquisitions and look where it has landed them, Blanton last year (a great #3 and complimentary piece) and not Lee to add to hamels. Plus the emergence of Happ has helped push them over the top.
We need Lackey and a Marquis this year, and then with the money (i dont know how much, im just assuming) coming off the books at the end of 2010 we should get someone else.
We slightly retool in 2010 with a rotation of Santana, Lackey, Pelf, Perez/Maine, Marquis. Then is 2011 we have the ability to add another stud to the rotation. If the Wilpons are really serious about winning than there is no other way.
Take the lineup of
Reyes
Castillo
Beltran
Holliday
Wright
Franceour
Murphy
Santos/Thole
Speed up top, pop in the middle, productive and order moving at the bottom. Seems well balanced to me. Thoughts?
trs86
10/12/2009-10:31am at 10:31 am (UTC -4)
The problem is the Wilpons, and I even understand this, are not going to go over luxury tax. Adding 38-40M this year and then pay raises again next year would mean there would be no additions the following year.
Obviously the Yankee way would be the best for the short term but I am not sure if that is best for the future of the Mets.
Would I rather have
Holliday and Lackey
or
Holliday, Piniero and Derosa example.
jaded1983
10/12/2009-11:01am at 11:01 am (UTC -4)
Totally understood, which is one of the reasons why I said I’m not sure how much money is coming off the books. I just took that between money coming off, and the luxury tax threshold for 2011, we would have enough room. Obviously we would need to see the actual $$ amounts to make a correct call, but if we could stay under that cap it would be great. Imagine the Mets take the initiative and while everyone else has a great 1/2, we had a great 1/2/3??
Wishful thinking on a quiet (so far!) monday morning. But to answer your original question, if we could only get 1 of Holliday or Lackey, Id prefer Holliday and then try to get both Marquis and Wolf. If we cant have that stud at #2, id rather have two guys who you can rely on to give you consistent outings.
Pelf isnt there yet, Ollie….well eh, and Maine is a health ?
Santana, Marquis, Wolf, Pelf, Ollie. At least you have SOME consistency there. And then for 2011 see what we can get via trade and FA.
jaded1983
10/12/2009-11:04am at 11:04 am (UTC -4)
Plus, I’d like us to pick up Putz option and trade him, and use Maine as a set up man. He has enough pitches and a great fastball to do it in the 8th. Parnell/Feliciano in the 7th, Maine in the 8th, Krod for the save.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-11:11am at 11:11 am (UTC -4)
Maine as a short reliever is an interesting idea. The question is whether he will be able to get ready quickly enough and to pitch multiple days or after warming up and not being used, etc.
jaded1983
10/12/2009-11:28am at 11:28 am (UTC -4)
Yep, that is the concern. However on the other hand, I wonder if he limited innings will help keep him healthy?
It would be an interesting option. Plus if he actually succeeds in the role, I wonder if he could be the next closer for us? Since he would be cheaper than resigning krod?
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-11:37am at 11:37 am (UTC -4)
He’s definitely got the stuff to pull it off. His low 90s stuff would probably be mid 90s if only throwing an inning or two and he wouldn’t have to worry so much about commanding his breaking stuff.
trs86
10/12/2009-11:30am at 11:30 am (UTC -4)
Do you realize how much Putz’s option is? He will be lucky to get a 1 year deal much less anyone wanting him for 8M.
jaded1983
10/12/2009-11:35am at 11:35 am (UTC -4)
You dont know that. The Rays need a closer, what if we traded him to them for someone with a similar contract (money per year) but longer deal?
You’re very quick to shoot down ideas my friend, but the Mets need to be creative and he is an interesting piece that would be stupid to just let walk. At the very least pick him up and trade him at the deadline.
trs86
10/12/2009-1:07pm at 1:07 pm (UTC -4)
Seriously?
You are willing to pick up an 8M dollar option on a guy who has missed 2 seasons? 8M for a middle reliever is already unheard of, much less a guy who has not been healthy since 2007.
jaded1983
10/12/2009-2:03pm at 2:03 pm (UTC -4)
Yes.
And your willing to trade all those players that we did for just Jeremy Reed?
He will be a tradeable commodity, even if we have to wait till the deadline. Letting him just go without getting SOME sort of compensation would be foolish.
trs86
10/12/2009-2:55pm at 2:55 pm (UTC -4)
You are not thinking logically. We took a gamble on Putz and lost. No reason to make it worse. This would be like going to Vegas losing all of your money and then saying well I can’t go home empty handed, I should put up my car too.
There is no way the prospects we got back in return would be worth the 8M invested. Think about it. Why would a team trade top prospects for a guy that over priced? OK so we chip in the money. Why would a team trade top prospects for a guy who has not been healthy in two years?
If Putz were not on our team and was a FA how much would you pay him? Maybe 2 million TOPS? If Putz were not on our team and you were to trade for him after 2 years of injuries what would you trade for him? A Low B prospect at best?
We gambled and lost, now cut your losses and move on. Besides what did we give up for him besides organizational filler?
Kingman 26
10/12/2009-3:02pm at 3:02 pm (UTC -4)
Completely and totally correct TRS. If Omar gave JJ 8 million, he would not only be fired, but put in a very well-padded cell.
I would love to have JJ back on a tiny incentive-laden one year deal, or invite him to ST as he very well may not be signed by anyone.
Picking up the 8 mil option is not a serious suggestion.
trs86
10/12/2009-3:09pm at 3:09 pm (UTC -4)
Kingman, I would have picked up Wagner’s 10M option or offer Delgado arbitration before I would offer anything to guaranteed to Putz.
Kingman 26
10/12/2009-3:22pm at 3:22 pm (UTC -4)
Agreed completely, and you know how much of a JJ fan I am!
Sure, try and get him back in for the spring at minimal cost if possible.
Maybe he really wants to play a lot longer, and maybe he could be a workable pen piece if/when he is healthy.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-3:27pm at 3:27 pm (UTC -4)
I think that if the Mets do not offer him arbitration that they will not be able to sign him until May.
But I agree with the decision not to pick up his option. $8m is too much for a middle reliever and is too risky for the hope that he might prove himself closer worthy for a trade.
trs86
10/12/2009-10:35am at 10:35 am (UTC -4)
Of course there is the trade route.
Mets trade for Halladay and Overbay from the Jays at 22M and still have enough for an OF like Byrd.
trs86
10/12/2009-10:37am at 10:37 am (UTC -4)
The interesting thing with the trade is of course it cost prospects. However, we do not have to lock into a long term deal at the time unless Halladay demands it. Thus we could see how 2010 goes and then if we still don’t win and need to rebuild you can offer him arbitration or trade him during the year.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-11:01am at 11:01 am (UTC -4)
With Omar as a lame duck this is an increasing possibility. Prospects mean nothing to him if he doesn’t survive 2010. And again, we saw what happened in Montreal when he thought the team might be contracted (as unreasonable as a belief as that was, it was justification for him to trade 3 bluc chip future all-stars for one fat pitcher).
stickguy
10/12/2009-11:14am at 11:14 am (UTC -4)
at the time, they were either pretty low in the minors, or were far from being considered “blue chip can’t miss all star prospects”. THat trade gets a ton of revisionist thinking, and it damned near got the expos to the promised land.
And hey, isn’t that what every met fan believes? Trade the entire farm and future for a shot at the playoffs this year?
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-11:29am at 11:29 am (UTC -4)
It didn’t almost get them anywhere. They finished 19 games out.
And Phillips and Sizemore were considered blue chip prospects. Phillips was a 2nd round pick who at the time of the trade was hitting 327 .380 .506 as a 21 year old in AA and was immediately promoted to AAA by the Indians.
Sizemore was a 3rd round pick who received a $2m bonus to sign so that he would not play football in college (in other words, more money than the Mets paid Stephen Matz 10 years later in the second round). At the time of the trade he was a 19 year old in High A who finished the year hitting .292 .392 .402.
Cliff Lee was probably not considered as highly as the other two but was a 4th round pick who at the time of the trade was 7-2 with a 3.23 ERA in AA.
All of these guys were considered future major leaguers and the first two were projected as stars (Phillips was one of the top prospects in the minor leagues).
dirtysanchez
10/12/2009-10:40am at 10:40 am (UTC -4)
If we could only get one of these two, I think ya gotta go for Lackey. The mets CANNOT afford to go into next year with pelf as their #2. He still has a long way to go. The mets can get power from other sources but they need a #2 with the way the division is set up
Phillies-Hamels/Lee
Braves-Lowe/Vazquez
Marlins-JJ/Nolasco
We need a 1/2 punch to keep up with everyoen else. A healthy wright/beltran/reyes goes along way to helping some of the offenseive woes. I think reyes will play with a chip on his shoulder to prove people wrong and i think that will help generate runs. The Rays are looking to dump players with bloated contracts and im sure other teams are too(chicago)
prismo
10/12/2009-11:04am at 11:04 am (UTC -4)
LACKEY ISN’T THAT GREAT
Why does everyone think this guy is an ace?
His lifetime ERA is 3.81
He’s had more than 14 wins in a season only once and he’s over 30
He’s a good #3, or a bad/mediocre #2 pitcher, nothing more.
Stop making this guy out to be the savior for any team that signs him. He’s going to be WAY overpaid. WAY OVERPAID.
trs86
10/12/2009-11:12am at 11:12 am (UTC -4)
Agreed. That being said the Mets don’t have a solid #3 either and sometimes those guys get paid a lot.
prismo
10/12/2009-11:14am at 11:14 am (UTC -4)
Pineiro’s a solid #3 and he should come at a much more reasonable price than Lackey. The Mets have a lot of holes to fill, I’d rather fill them all with solid players, then fill a couple with good players and rest with crap.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-11:17am at 11:17 am (UTC -4)
Wait. You have a beef with Lackey and not Pineiro, whose career ERA is .5 runs higher than Lackeys and whose last good season before this one was 6 years ago?
trs86
10/12/2009-11:19am at 11:19 am (UTC -4)
I think his point is the price. Rumors are that Piniero could still be had for 2/16-18. I think it will be more but those are the opening rumors.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-11:35am at 11:35 am (UTC -4)
What good is paying less for Pineiro if he gives you what he did between 2004 and 2008?
trs86
10/12/2009-3:07pm at 3:07 pm (UTC -4)
And what good is it that you tie up all of this year and next year’s money on Lackey and he gets injured or you still have numerous holes the team won’t have the money to fix this year OR next.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-3:31pm at 3:31 pm (UTC -4)
Next year’s money? All of this year’s money too? He “wants” all $28m that the Mets have to spend?
If you’ve been reading my posts you already know that my feeling is that Lackey is the most likely to pitch well from among the available free agents.
His risk might be injury, but Randy Wolf also carries that risk, as does Joel Pineiro who has the additional risk of having a career year in his walk year after 6 poor seasons.
While Lackey might miss some time, he’ll at least pitch well when he’s there. Can you say the same for Pineiro?
By the way, how many times are you going to change your mind on this issue and fight to the death on your new position?
trs86
10/12/2009-11:20am at 11:20 am (UTC -4)
Example last year. Clearly to me Lowe is better than Wolf. However, I would have much rather had Wolf one year on the cheap than 4 years of an overpriced Lowe.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-11:15am at 11:15 am (UTC -4)
Since 2005, Lackey is 69-38 (a .645%) with a 3.49 ERA (in the AL). He has struck out 7.6 per 9 and walked just 2.6 per 9 for a 3:1 K:BB ration. His WHIP is 1.26 during that time period.
He pitched more than 200 IP in three of those five years.
The only question with him is if he’s going to be healthy enought to pitch 200 IP per year. There’s is no questioning his talent.
And really, when a guy pitches in the AL to an approximate 3.5 ERA and only wins 13-14 games you can bet his offense didn’t help much. And the Angels offense before this year has not been great. (Hence, K-Rod’s record number of saves in close games).
trs86
10/12/2009-11:17am at 11:17 am (UTC -4)
Wanny:
Question would you rather have Lackey or Solid #3 and Solid LF for same price?
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-11:32am at 11:32 am (UTC -4)
The problem with your question is that I am no where near convinced of two things:
1) that you can’t get a solid LF AND Lackey:
2) that Pineiro is a solid #3. Last year he had an ERA over 5.
trs86
10/12/2009-1:12pm at 1:12 pm (UTC -4)
I did not say Piniero necessarily. Just the idea of a #3. That could be Marquis, or even a trade for a guy taking up that 10M salary.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-3:32pm at 3:32 pm (UTC -4)
Marquis is a 3?
stickguy
10/12/2009-11:29am at 11:29 am (UTC -4)
not wanny, but I take the #3 + solid OF bat.
ALso, his #s in that period are really helped by his outlier (career) year in 2007.
since then, his innings are way down, k/bb down, k/9 down, and whip and h/9 up.
THe innings are the biggest red flag though.
And while he was in the AL, the AL west has some really, really bad offensive teams in it.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-11:33am at 11:33 am (UTC -4)
2007 is not really an outlier since he put very similar numbers in 2006 and 2005.
I agree his health is the question mark right now.
stickguy
10/12/2009-11:38am at 11:38 am (UTC -4)
05 and 06 were good, but not that good. OPS+ went from 123/128 to 151 (then dropped to 119), ERA was .5 lower, and he had themost IPs of his career.
not a huge anomoly, but certainly the year that sticks out as his peak or career year, that he didn’t do before and hasn’t done since.
honestly? As a GM, I don’t care what he did before. I only care about what I expect him to do for me when I am paying him. And I don’t think at age 31, coming of 2 yers with some injuries, that he is going to rediscover 2007 at age 31-36.
at best, look at 2008-2009 and decide if yo uthink he can reproduce those years, what wil you pay for it?
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-11:46am at 11:46 am (UTC -4)
The nature of free agency is that you’re rarely going to have the opportunity for a star pitcher under the age of 30.
I’m not sure what makes you any more confident that Joel Pineiro or Randy Wolf or Jason Marquis have any more of a chance of replicating their best seasons, which after long careers of mediocrity or injury have conveniently occurred in their free agent years.
The bottom line to me is that Lackey is easily the best pitcher of the group and the most likely to at least be good. All of these others are “traps” who have much lower downsides or more significant injury histories.
Of course, I’d prefer to be able to trade for Felix or Matt Cain but that’s not happening.
stickguy
10/12/2009-12:03pm at 12:03 pm (UTC -4)
the debate always comes down to money (and contract length). Since we are all working on the assumption that the mets have alimited budget to spend, how much more do you want to spend o nLackey, if it means having less to spend elsewhere?
that, and do you want a 31 YO for 5 guaranteed years, vs. some other guys for 1 or 2?
but, in most cases, unless you have an unlimited budget, building a roster with high-end FA pitching is a dangerous game.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-12:28pm at 12:28 pm (UTC -4)
The debate is whether to spend big money on a 31 year old pitcher or likely even bigger money on a 30 year old outfielder.
They’re both dangerous.
trs86
10/12/2009-3:06pm at 3:06 pm (UTC -4)
You know yourself that a healthy 30 year out fielder has a better chance of staying healthy than a 31 year old pitcher in the MLB. Especially over the long term. Hitters NORMALLY don’t go down for a season where it is much more likely for a pitcher to miss significant time. Not to mention that to my memory Holliday has been relatively healthy and Lackey has had a few injury concerns.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-3:35pm at 3:35 pm (UTC -4)
I know that? How do I know that? And even if I did, how does that prove Holliday still won’t get hurt?
And did we forget that Holliday was less than great in Oakland this year and was hurt in Colorado in 2008?
And do you really want to make this decision on the generalization that pitchers are more likely to get hurt than outfielders?
What happened to yesterday’s opinion that the Mets should beef up the pitching staff and try to fill LF in via trade or via mid-tier free agent? Now all of a sudden this is such an untenable position? You’re really losing all credibility with me.
trs86
10/12/2009-3:51pm at 3:51 pm (UTC -4)
I am going to cry, I am not credible with Wanny anymore. Say it’s not so… LOL.
And when did I say it was an untenable position?
There are a lot of options the Mets can chose. And I believe that they and I can change our minds as many times as we want. A lot will depend on the market itself of course. If bidding goes crazy for Lackey, they may decide that Holliday or Halladay is the best route. If Lackey gets a Lowe type deal and Holliday ends up with 18M a year then their plans may change. They are most likely as fluid as mine are.
Each day I read as much information as there is out there. Sometimes that information causes me to rethink my position. I consider that a strength of mine, not a weakness.
gategem
10/12/2009-12:44pm at 12:44 pm (UTC -4)
Neither the AL West nor the AL Central are known as powerhouse divisions, yet players such as Vicente Padilla, mediocre for the Rangers, has done well for the Dodgers and Rafael Betancourt, mediocre for the Indians, has done well for the Rockies. While I have just listed these two players the list over the years favors players moving from the AL to the NL.
When Rockies GM Dan O’Dowd was asked whether he considers a change of leagues in making deals, he answered “honestly, I do.” He added “the difference in leagues has been obvious for a decade.â€
darknova306
10/12/2009-11:18am at 11:18 am (UTC -4)
His career stats are similar to Lee, and Lee is listed as part of one of these solid tandems in our division. My only concern with Lackey is being healthy consistently, because when he’s healthy he’s got a nice K-rate, eats innings like crazy, and typically has pretty decent control. He’s not a saviour, but he’d go a long way toward making our rotation respectable again.
Pitching is at a premium, and teams are locking up their pitching as best they can. This leads to the market for FA pitchers going up and up in value. They get what a market will give them when demand is constant or increasing and supply is diminished… more money.
stickguy
10/12/2009-11:24am at 11:24 am (UTC -4)
well, he is 31 on opening day, and in 2008 and 2009 has averaged ~170 innings, with a K rate of 7.1/9. Not real young, and not eating innings. WHIP of ~1.21.
darknova306
10/12/2009-11:41am at 11:41 am (UTC -4)
Right, which is why I said ‘when consistently healthy’. He hasn’t been that lately, so that’s the worry. A couple shorter-term, cheaper guys that could be jettisoned when we rebuild next year after failing again would make me more comfortable, but Lackey could make us a lot better.
stickguy
10/12/2009-11:11am at 11:11 am (UTC -4)
I voted Holliday, but will probably change my mind to wht I really wnat (but don’t expect to happen) “other”.
Lackey IMO is certainly a good pitcher, but looking at the numbers, I think he is starting to get some of the derek lowe idolization. That is, his rep is getting ahead of what he brings to the table. I am also worried that the scattered injury issues the last 2 years will become a much bigger problem, especially since he will be 31 next year.
Now, I would love to have im on the team. It is the cost that worries me. An ollie contract? sure. A Burnett contract? Maybe not.
At least with Holliday, especially if it is not a ridiculous length deal, it should give you a solid, reliable, productive bat in the middle of the order for years to come. And the last few years have proven the mets can really use that.
reyes, beltran and DW back to something passing for normal will be a huge lift to the offense. Francouer and Murphy are actually decent looking bottom of the order coplimentary pieces. HOpefully whatever catchers they get are not a black hole.
So, that one more solid bat (think, the Met version of Jayson werth) can make a huge difference.
Do this, and try to trade fr some pitcher, or more likely, look to add acuoople of the ST options (wolf would be fine, Harden on a risk/reward deal, lots of choices).
trs86
10/12/2009-11:16am at 11:16 am (UTC -4)
Right now I am at 1)Other, 2) Holliday, 3) Lackey.
metsfan4decades
10/12/2009-12:30pm at 12:30 pm (UTC -4)
Same here.
stickguy
10/12/2009-11:21am at 11:21 am (UTC -4)
also, to answer the question above about next off season, unless I am missing someone, the Mets have NO contracts coming off the books (unless you count the normal arb eligible or pre-FA year guys that can be non tenedered). So lets say no guaranteed deals of any size.
Oh, I suppose they could not pick up up the Reyes option to free up 10mill, but that aint happening.
snatana, k Rod, DW, Beltran, ollie, castillo are all signed though at least 2011. Francouer is on the pre-FA arb prgram with Maine.
I suppose they could non-tender Frnechy if F Mart takes his job, but that’s what, 5 mill?
My point is, whover you sign for multiple years now, means you are likely passing on anyone big in the 2010 FA class. Assuming of course that payroll is kept about the same, and pretty close to the luxo tax.
Just gives another reason to take the “other” option. That, and hopefully it keeps the cream of the prospect pool intact.
trs86
10/12/2009-11:22am at 11:22 am (UTC -4)
Agreed, that is why Halladay MAY be the better option even IF he cost prospects.
stickguy
10/12/2009-11:31am at 11:31 am (UTC -4)
too many prospects most likely. I really fear that they will empty the farm, and have no one left to call up (and they will need help along the way!) or trade for the missing bat or other part.
ANd if halladay goes down, they will be totally screwed.
I really would like to see the Mets get away from the “all eggs in one basket” model (even if the basket is say 6 guys + a ton of crap)
whataputz
10/12/2009-12:00pm at 12:00 pm (UTC -4)
What farm! Who from our system do you realistically see contributing? Fernando is hurt every year, and has the body of a 13 year old. Neise has looked mediocre and when he was finally looking good he has to get hurt. And the a good bulk of our top guys are way too young to even think about the majors. Remember, this is New York. I’m not saying empty the farm, but I’m game to get rid of some of the animals.
darknova306
10/12/2009-11:30am at 11:30 am (UTC -4)
I think I’m kinda leaning toward the ‘other’ option. I’d prefer to see us bring in a bunch of decent complimentary pieces. We need, in my eyes: C, LF, competent backup SS for Reyes as insurance, #2SP, #3SP, setup man. I think I’d like to see Omar fill these holes with decent mid-level guys (the Byrds, Wolfs, etc. of the world) on short cheap-ish contracts. I don’t have a list of names and numbers right now, but I could try to throw something together if I get a solid chunk of time later today.
stickguy
10/12/2009-11:33am at 11:33 am (UTC -4)
So maybe wolf or pinero, marquis, one of the many vet catchers, lopez for MI, byrd and some arm for the pen. That’s if Omar does it all through FA.
could give them enough to get the job done, while preserving the farm for another year of development.
darknova306
10/12/2009-12:08pm at 12:08 pm (UTC -4)
That’s exactly the idea. Ideally, we would also leave some financial flexibility for mid-season acquisition(s), though that’s starting to really strain the economics of this scenario.
GravediggerHebner
10/12/2009-11:47am at 11:47 am (UTC -4)
While I think “other” may be the “best bet” I voted to sign Holliday and I did it for one reason only: The Mets at least have some potential (emphasis on potential) viable pitchers already under contract in their system from which they may be able to whittle down a pitching staff. They have NO ONE from which to whittle down an outfield. NO ONE.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-11:49am at 11:49 am (UTC -4)
You weren’t impressed with Emil Brown?
GravediggerHebner
10/12/2009-11:53am at 11:53 am (UTC -4)
Exactly!
whataputz
10/12/2009-11:52am at 11:52 am (UTC -4)
But what about Fernando the great?
GravediggerHebner
10/12/2009-11:54am at 11:54 am (UTC -4)
What you said!
DNDJohan aka kistics
10/12/2009-12:02pm at 12:02 pm (UTC -4)
But are those potential viable pitchers ready to step up next year? We saw that Pelf is clearly not the #2 that we all hoped for. So… who in their current system will be the #2 next season?
I think a power bat will be easier to get via trade than a #2 pitcher.
GravediggerHebner
10/12/2009-12:13pm at 12:13 pm (UTC -4)
I don’t know the answer to the question “are they ready to step up next year.” None of us do.
I just feel like flashes of potential to be viable ML starting pitchers have been shown at the major league level by enough pitchers already in house to at least have some, however small, hope. I haven’t seen any flashes of potential at the major league level from any already in the system OF that suggests a power hitting OF is on the horizon.
Between Pelfrey, Perez, Niese, Nieve, Maine, Figueroa, Misch and even Redding I think we’ve seen some flashes. Have we seen anything from any in house OF to make us think they are capable of starting 150 games and supplying us with some power?
stickguy
10/12/2009-12:16pm at 12:16 pm (UTC -4)
well said my man. That’s one of the reasons I voted for Holliday over lackey. That, and the inherent risks involved with signing FA SPs to huge, LT deals.
metsfan4decades
10/12/2009-12:32pm at 12:32 pm (UTC -4)
Agreed. You guys are way ahead of me today….
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-12:37pm at 12:37 pm (UTC -4)
The same risks apply to signing free agent hitters to huge, LT deals. Bobby Bonilla, Albert Belle or Mo Vaughn anyone?
trs86
10/12/2009-3:03pm at 3:03 pm (UTC -4)
Out of that group, who would YOU have signed long term? Bad decisions are bad decisions.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-3:12pm at 3:12 pm (UTC -4)
No one knew Albert Belle had a degenerative hip condition and no one knew that Bobby Bo would want to show reporters the Bronx.
The year Vaughn was signed he was 30 years old, hit .337 .402 .591 and played 154 games.
These guys were all in their primes.
Are you really going to dispute that free agent hitters are risky too?
trs86
10/12/2009-3:13pm at 3:13 pm (UTC -4)
Of course some of them are risky. But are YOU going to debate that they have the SAME risk as signing a pitcher long term?
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-3:17pm at 3:17 pm (UTC -4)
I’m willing to guess that about the same percentage of free agent hitters bust as do pitchers.
But to prefer to sign a hitter because of a generalized belief that pitchers are more likely to bust is silly. You sign the player that best meets your needs and passes through your due dilligence process.
trs86
10/12/2009-3:35pm at 3:35 pm (UTC -4)
True, about what fits the team the best. But in my opinion that part is not clear cut.
However, I still say there is greater risk signing a 31 year old pitcher to a long term contract than a 30 year old OF.
Kingman 26
10/12/2009-3:16pm at 3:16 pm (UTC -4)
How about George Foster?
His number’s werent nearly as good with the Met’s as they had been with the Red’s.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-3:20pm at 3:20 pm (UTC -4)
The li’st goe’s on and on. The idea that people ‘should have known that Albert Belle wa’s too ri’sky to sign is crazy. Maybe hi’s emotional condition was un’stable but hi’s hitting ‘sure wa’sn’t.
Kingman 26
10/12/2009-3:32pm at 3:32 pm (UTC -4)
Your fact’s are ‘so correct.
And Alberts hip’s had ‘some trouble’s too.
stickguy
10/12/2009-12:14pm at 12:14 pm (UTC -4)
one big problem with pitching, especially younger guys, is they are hard to predict. So no, I have no real idea if Pelf or Maine will finally put it all together for a full year next year (or if Ollie gets back to something passing for OK).
But, they have the talent/potential and have shown flashes in the past, so at least (even if it is IMHO) they have the potential to do it. Unlike a guy like Figgy, that doesn’t.
take cliff lee for example. in 2007, as a 28 YO veteran, he was horrible. absolutely dismal. an ERA+ of 73. Much worse the Pelfrey was this year, and approaching Ollieesque. There was even talk of trading (I think maybe releasing?) him before the 2008 season.
SO of course everyone predicted he would go 22-5 with an ERA+ of 175, and cruise to the cy young in 2008.
Maine is actually the guy that I am thinking will have the big break out year, now that it seems his shoulder spur is finally fixed, and he can spend a full off season getting his full strength back, and working o npitching instead of resting.
I don’t even consider him injury prone. He really had 1 injury (the shoulder spur) that it just took a while to resolve.
DNDJohan aka kistics
10/12/2009-11:52am at 11:52 am (UTC -4)
Do the Mets want to give up their 1st round pick? I’m assuming that Lackey and Holliday are both type-A FAs. From what I’ve heard, Mets are reluctant to give up their 1st round pick (I’m thinking between #5-8th pick). Or am I missing something here?
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-11:54am at 11:54 am (UTC -4)
The Mets’ first pick is protected.
DNDJohan aka kistics
10/12/2009-11:55am at 11:55 am (UTC -4)
Ah…. That’s great!
I’m all for Lackey then
whataputz
10/12/2009-11:57am at 11:57 am (UTC -4)
I hope so, but I just see Red Sox written all over this guy. Ofcourse if the Yanks lose a playoff game, they might be looking for a #5 starter so we’d probably be out of luck.
DNDJohan aka kistics
10/12/2009-11:59am at 11:59 am (UTC -4)
I see Angels strongly bidding on this guy. More reason to go after him if the current team is willing to retain him.
trs86
10/12/2009-3:01pm at 3:01 pm (UTC -4)
I think the Angels offer him arbitration and let him walk collecting the 2 picks and then spend the money on 2 lesser guys.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-12:31pm at 12:31 pm (UTC -4)
Doubt the Sox are spending big money on Lackey. For one thing, the Sox do not typically spend big money on free agent starters. For another thing, their rotation with Beckett, Lester, Dice-K, Bucholtz and Wakefield is pretty much set. Lastly, they’ll have to pony up big money to retain Jason Bay.
trs86
10/12/2009-3:02pm at 3:02 pm (UTC -4)
I think the Sox will actually make a big push for Holliday and settle back for Bay.
gonzowill
10/12/2009-11:53am at 11:53 am (UTC -4)
Spend the Money and get them both, we are not a small market team. Why do we need the cheap way out? Fill the holes!
whataputz
10/12/2009-11:55am at 11:55 am (UTC -4)
I say this all the time. I said this when Manny was out there. We play in NY and have a new stadium, lets splurge the money!
DNDJohan aka kistics
10/12/2009-11:58am at 11:58 am (UTC -4)
But we’re talking about incremental spending on top of what they spend already. We’re not talking about building from the scratch. The point is that the Mets do not want to pay Luxury tax and to meet their threshold, Mets can only sign one (I think).
darknova306
10/12/2009-12:01pm at 12:01 pm (UTC -4)
These two guys wouldn’t ‘fill the holes’, they’d fill 2 out of many holes. I’d love to have all our holes filled with all-stars, but that ain’t happening.
whataputz
10/12/2009-12:03pm at 12:03 pm (UTC -4)
Well seeing as Holliday dropped that ball and will now probably have problems getting it done in the clutch for the rest of his career and will cower in the fear of winning, I think he perfectly fits the Mets build.
darknova306
10/12/2009-12:05pm at 12:05 pm (UTC -4)
Huh? That’s just silly.
whataputz
10/12/2009-12:08pm at 12:08 pm (UTC -4)
Is it really though? Can you not just picture the Mets signing Holliday and in game 7 NLCS fly ball to win the game dropped, Mets lose, Phillies go on to win the world series.
darknova306
10/12/2009-12:12pm at 12:12 pm (UTC -4)
He dropped the ball once and now he’s ‘unclutch in the field’? That’s like saying DWright is unclutch because of one at-bat with a runner on 3rd…
GravediggerHebner
10/12/2009-12:15pm at 12:15 pm (UTC -4)
ohhhhh nooooo!
darknova306
10/12/2009-12:20pm at 12:20 pm (UTC -4)
Just trying to point out the ridiculousness of the statement. I hope I haven’t started something…
whataputz
10/12/2009-12:22pm at 12:22 pm (UTC -4)
I was half serious first off, but singlehandedly costing your team a huge playoff game is something that can have long term effects over a player.
darknova306
10/12/2009-12:25pm at 12:25 pm (UTC -4)
Alright, fair enough. It’s gotta really suck for him, there’s no question about that. We’ll see what it does to him down the line, I guess.
gategem
10/12/2009-1:06pm at 1:06 pm (UTC -4)
Donnie Moore, Bill Buckner??????
metsfan4decades
10/12/2009-1:21pm at 1:21 pm (UTC -4)
Actually, I thought Bill Buckner handled that error pretty well. That was a team loss anyway, he just made the error that caused the winning run to come across. Shiraldi and Stanley should have closed the door on that game long before that Buckner error.
I read a biography on Donnie Moore. He had problems that transcended that one blown save in ’86. He just never got the help he needed.
whataputz
10/12/2009-12:18pm at 12:18 pm (UTC -4)
No, but you’re telling me that’s not going to eat away his mind for the next week or so, and then if he ever gets in the playoffs and sees a ball coming his way.
And I’m not going to dive into the David Wright comment because there’s no need for WW3 on this lovely monday.
darknova306
10/12/2009-12:23pm at 12:23 pm (UTC -4)
Has he done anything in his career to make you think that he’s likely to think that way? I’m sure it’ll bother him, as failure should bother any professional athlete, but I don’t think one misplay should be an indictment of his future performance.
DNDJohan aka kistics
10/12/2009-12:12pm at 12:12 pm (UTC -4)
no… Phillies won’t even make the playoffs… hahahaha…
darknova306
10/12/2009-12:15pm at 12:15 pm (UTC -4)
Well, played.
darknova306
10/12/2009-12:16pm at 12:16 pm (UTC -4)
Why is there a comma there? Hurray for not paying attention to my typing. Wheeee!
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-12:33pm at 12:33 pm (UTC -4)
Because you’re preoccupied with one hand up a cadaver’s rear end, remember?
darknova306
10/12/2009-1:05pm at 1:05 pm (UTC -4)
But I just can’t help myself!!
ceetar
10/12/2009-12:55pm at 12:55 pm (UTC -4)
I think it’s unlikely the Mets get both, so you have to Holliday. There’s a ton to debate with Warthen/Pelfrey/improvement. But I think it’s more likely Pelfrey improves, Maine makes 27+ starts and Perez is more good than bad, than we can get what we need in the outfield via trade or Pagan and Francouer. There is less risk in Holliday than Lackey in a long term contract. Lackey is overrated in a class where there are always a lot of free agent pitchers. The Mets need to work together and evaluate these guys to find the guy that’s going to come out and pitch like Wolf did this year. The guy that’s going to step up, not ‘hopefully stay healthy’.
Most of those guys didn’t work this year. Garcia never figured out (or wouldn’t in the minors) his fastball, Redding had some success here and there, and that might’ve been okay if everyone didn’t get injured. He would’ve been replaced by Misch or Niese or Nieve and it would’ve worked. I wouldn’t mind giving a guy like Justin Duscherer (assuming he’ll actually be ready for spring) a cheap contract and giving him a chance in Spring. I think it’s likely Niese gives someone a run for their money as well in the 5th spot.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-1:08pm at 1:08 pm (UTC -4)
Maine has made 27 or more starts twice in his professional career (majors and minors) which began in 2002.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-1:10pm at 1:10 pm (UTC -4)
3x, actually. In 2005 he did it between his major league and minor league stints.
stickguy
10/12/2009-1:31pm at 1:31 pm (UTC -4)
Not many guys in the first couple years in teh minors make more starts tahn that anyway. You don’t see a lot of A+ ball players making 30 starts.
2006 was really a good audition, for a 25YO finally showing what he could do in 1/2 a season. Good numbers all around pretty much.
2007 was a solid year too. Not perfect, but showing excellent progression. 32 starts, and an ERA+ of 109. All for basically minimum wage.
And frankly, the Mets need ore of those guys, and fewer guys making 8 figures like ollie, so they can beef up elsewhere!
2008 he started off strong, until the shoulder problem caught up with him. Still had a nice K rate though. End up making 25 starts anyway.
2009 was pretty much a lost season, but the most important thing was he seemed to finally be healthy and pain free in his last starts.
)of course it is a risk that he doesn’t relapse, but hell, every pitcher is 1 pitch away from Dr. Andrews!
If he really has the root cause cured (the spur), and can stay on the field, I think he is primed to take the next step up and become a very good SP.
should you put all your eggs in that basket? No, but like Hebs said, they have guys, including him, that can easliy form a very solid rotation.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-1:35pm at 1:35 pm (UTC -4)
Do you really have any confidence that he can make 27 or more starts in 2010? On a scale of 1-10 I would say my confidence in that is somewhere around 3.
stickguy
10/12/2009-1:37pm at 1:37 pm (UTC -4)
I will take a 7.
And not as risky when he is a cheap salary guy just being considered in the mix for a back of the rotation slot.
trs86
10/12/2009-2:59pm at 2:59 pm (UTC -4)
As long as they are adding a mid-rotation starter, Maine is not a risk at all. He can compete for the backend with the rest of the #4/5′s.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-3:06pm at 3:06 pm (UTC -4)
How is he not a risk? Did he somehow become healthy? Is a 4th starter not needed to take a regular start in the rotation?
He will always be a risk until he proves himself healthy and capable of pitching innings.
The fact that he might have a lesser role (and I’m not sure 4th starter is insignficant) might mitigate the damages but it doesn’t make him any less of a risk.
trs86
10/12/2009-3:11pm at 3:11 pm (UTC -4)
Wanny you are not getting what I am saying.
If we have
Johan, Lackey or other mid-rotation guy, Pelfrey, Perez, Maine/Nieve/Niese to choose from for the 5 rotation spots what does it matter if Maine falls all to hell and we have to go with Nieve? What did we lose? The 2.5M due to him? Again, not a risk unless they are depending on him.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-3:14pm at 3:14 pm (UTC -4)
As I said, reducing his “role… might mitigate the damages but it doesn’t make him any less of a risk.”
Risk and loss/damages are two different things.
And it matters a lot since none of the other guys in your mix for the 4 and 5 spots have proven particularly healthy or capable.
stickguy
10/12/2009-1:18pm at 1:18 pm (UTC -4)
all good points.
CaseStreet
10/12/2009-1:10pm at 1:10 pm (UTC -4)
My quick and dirty opinion, sign Lackey for 3 yrs.
The rotation is questionable but the offense is decent.
Plus, our hitting prospects are closer to Citi than our pitching prospects.
stickguy
10/12/2009-1:34pm at 1:34 pm (UTC -4)
If they can get lackey for 3 years, then it makes a lot more sense. I seem to recall at some point that Omar had a rule about no contracts longer than 3 years for a pitcher (with Johan, obviously, being the exception).
3/45? 3/48? Steep, but worth the risk.
Not sure how you see the hitting prospects being that much closer. Thole and Davis? You counting F Mart?
Vs. Neise, and (uhm, lets see) Mejia?
maybe you are right, but there is a better chance that a few live arms show up sooner to at least help in the pen.
trs86
10/12/2009-2:56pm at 2:56 pm (UTC -4)
Lackey wants 5 and most likely won’t settle for anything less than 4 and considering the market and his age? He will get it.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-3:04pm at 3:04 pm (UTC -4)
Did you and John also discuss his movie picks?
trs86
10/12/2009-3:12pm at 3:12 pm (UTC -4)
Wanny as always I am just reporting the rumors I read. Until other rumors come out then that is what I am going to assume they want.
And again if possible think rationally. WHY would he settle for ANYTHING less than Derrek Lowe?
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-3:24pm at 3:24 pm (UTC -4)
I have a hard time believing there are any credible rumors about what John Lackey “wants” since he is still pitching, has no idea what the market will be, etc.
And what he wants and what he gets might not be the same thing. For example, why did accomplished players like Bobby Abreu and Adam Dunn settle for less than Raul Ibanez got?
The issue I always take with your “reports of the rumors you’ve read” is that you present them as facts in disputing the ideas of others.
trs86
10/12/2009-3:37pm at 3:37 pm (UTC -4)
You did not answer the question. WHY would he settle for less than Lowe as the TOP FA pitcher? Be rational.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-3:41pm at 3:41 pm (UTC -4)
I think I already answered your question.
WHY did Abreu or Dunn take less than Abreu? Because that’s what the market is willing to give. Did you know that Abreu was only going to get one year? Or did he tell you that’s what he wanted all along.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-3:42pm at 3:42 pm (UTC -4)
Should be why did they take less than Ibanez…
trs86
10/12/2009-3:45pm at 3:45 pm (UTC -4)
That is NOT answering the question. You are talking about hitters who were NOT the top hitting FA. A lot of teams are polarized on Dunn and Abreu.
Answer the question, what scenario can you even THINK of that Lackey would settle for less than Lowe as THE top FA pitcher?
Only 1 I can think of is he gets injured in the playoffs.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-3:54pm at 3:54 pm (UTC -4)
I’m sorry you’re not satisfied with my answer. You obviously know better.
Thanks for the scolding, though. The tone of your ALL CAPS reads like someone’s mother putting her foot down.
Have you ever heard the Stones song, “You can’t always get what you want?”
There are lots of scenarios in which Lackey might not get the 5 years he told you he wanted during your pillow talk with him. For example, with the Yankees and Sox likely out of the bidding there won’t be many superpowers throwing money at him.
Other teams might fill their needs in other ways rather than give him 5 years – especially if he’s as risky as you have diagnosed his medical condition to be.
Do you recall K-Rod last year? Remember what you said he wanted — 5 years and $75m? How did that work out? Was he not the top closer on the market last year?
Maybe Lackey wants to go somewhere specific. Did you ask him that?
trs86
10/12/2009-4:10pm at 4:10 pm (UTC -4)
I NEVER said that Krod would get anywhere NEAR that amount. Sorry for the caps, maybe you can have a pillow talk with your mom sometime and solve some of your issues.
I use all caps to emphasize MY points, not yours. It’s not about internet protocol and I am NOT yelling at you. LOL.
And to your scenario, do you think that if all of a sudden Lackey was going to go for 3 years 36M that they Yankees and Redsox would NOT get involved?
Again, am I 100% certain that he will actually want or get that amount? No but I think there is enough to make a rational prediction. Of course you could just pretend that I am not being rational and throw insults in there about my pillow talks with the players. LOL. Nice.
By the way, why do you care? I have already lost all credibility with you anyway. I am at home right now crying on to my pillow while I discuss with Bay what he is looking for.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-4:21pm at 4:21 pm (UTC -4)
Rumor:
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2008/12/olneys-latest-w.html
K-Rod “wanted” 5 years and $75 million.
Actual: K-Rod signed for 3 years and $37 million.
Meaning: Mick Jagger was right.
trs86
10/12/2009-5:18pm at 5:18 pm (UTC -4)
“I NEVER said that Krod would get anywhere NEAR that amount.”
His report was not rational at the time and I said so. There was no teams on the market and as I said at the time it was a perfect storm.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-5:27pm at 5:27 pm (UTC -4)
Not the point. The rumors of what K-Rod wanted were that he wanted 5yrs and $75 but he didn’t get it.
So whatever rumors you hear of what Lackey wants might not come to fruition either.
Why was there no market for K-Rod? Because his demands were too high. Lots of teams needed closers. Indeed Fuentes, Wood and others all signed lucrative deals too.
That same kind of “perfect storm” could hit Lackey too. Why can’t you acknowledge that? If everything you say is true: that he’s a bad injury risk; that he’ll be overpaid; he’s too old, don’t you think he might price himself out too?
If the Yanks and the Sox don’t drive the price up, who will?
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-5:29pm at 5:29 pm (UTC -4)
“Wanny as always I am just reporting the rumors I read. Until other rumors come out then that is what I am going to assume they want.”
So now you pick and choose which rumors to believe?
Anyway, Lackey may sign for three years or ten years. The moral of the story is that the rumors are meaningless.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-5:34pm at 5:34 pm (UTC -4)
No teams on the market? You really are a hoot, playing fast and loose with the facts.
Milwaukee, Cleveland, the Mets, Angels and Tampa Bay all signed new closers (or guys to compete for the job in TB’s case).
How many teams do you think will be in on Lackey at his projected price?
trs86
10/12/2009-5:36pm at 5:36 pm (UTC -4)
Uhm, yes I do choose what rumors I believe based on rational thought and a combination of other spurces.
If I did not then how the hell could I even watch the news?
trs86
10/12/2009-5:39pm at 5:39 pm (UTC -4)
Clearly the Angels were not interested in giving him a multi-year deal. No way would the Brewers or the Rays give him 3 at 10+ and I don’t think he had any intention of going to the Indians nor did they ever express interest. Thus, as I said at the time, the Mets were the only clear suitor for Krod. He did end up signing a little cheaper than I expected though. If I remember correctly I predicted 3/42.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-5:40pm at 5:40 pm (UTC -4)
By the way, I notice you have not addressed any of the points I made in these points concerning the series of events that could lead Lackey to sign for last than what Tim Dierkes says Lackey wants.
Rather, you skipped ahead to make a low-brow joke about my mother and have objected to which rumors matter and which ones don’t.
trs86
10/12/2009-5:41pm at 5:41 pm (UTC -4)
And to your perfect storm idea? Sure it could happen or he could pitch next week and actually throw his arm literally to home plate. Should we start discussing that too? Or should we actually look at what is rationally likely to happen?
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-5:43pm at 5:43 pm (UTC -4)
Clearly the Angels weren’t interested in a multi-year deal? Then why did they sign Fuentes to a multi-year deal?
Can’t you see the same scenario playing out for other free agents (afterall, it happens every year), which is the point of this whole discussion?
Who is lining up to pay Lackey 85 million over 5 years?
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-5:47pm at 5:47 pm (UTC -4)
Forget it, TRS. There’s no point. You simply know too much and no one else has observed anything different.
To whomever suggested we try to sign Lackey for less than 5 years you just forget it too. TRS said there’s no way that’ll happen. That’s not what Lackey wants (he should set his aim lower like K-Rod, Abreu and I-Rod — when he took a one year deal years ago).
trs86
10/12/2009-5:53pm at 5:53 pm (UTC -4)
“Lackey wants 5 and most likely won’t settle for anything less than 4 and considering the market and his age”
Yup, that’s what I said. Lackey will not sign for less than 5 LOL. You are losing credibility Wanny. LOL.
And calling me out for a your momma joke when I was joking about you? I was not making fun of your mom at all, she has enough to deal with having you. But do we need to remember who started the insults saying that I am having pillow talks with the players because I like to PREDICT what they will get based on rumors and rational thought?
trs86
10/12/2009-5:55pm at 5:55 pm (UTC -4)
And to your perfect storm idea? Sure it could happen or he could pitch next week and actually throw his arm literally to home plate.
So I did not say it would never happen. Why should we discuss what is not likely though?
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-5:58pm at 5:58 pm (UTC -4)
I’ll ask once more: what is the market for lackey at 5 years and 85 mil?
trs86
10/12/2009-6:05pm at 6:05 pm (UTC -4)
There is a difference in what they WANT and the market. They never get what they want but you can use that as the high point. And if you notice I never said a player would get what they want or what is rumored. I just use that to develop what I think they will get. But enough of my defending myself.
I would GUESS his market is somewhere between lowest case 3/45 with a player option for a 4th year to the highest 5/75. If I had to guess where it will end up, right in between with around 4/60 (same as Lowe).
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-6:12pm at 6:12 pm (UTC -4)
I would conclude the same thing.
But I wouldn’t rule out Stick’s 3/45 or 3/48 idea because I could see the market collpasing around him with the Yanks presumably not getting involved.
But I put no weight on what his agents say he wants. He’s not going to stay home next year and wait until someone bends.
trs86
10/12/2009-6:18pm at 6:18 pm (UTC -4)
I look at what they want as the high mark and try and think what the lowest possible would be before all kinds of teams would enter. I think 3/45 and a crap load of teams are in, thus pushing it back up to that middle ground we expect.
I do not think it is fair to compare a #2 starter that is the best sp on the market to Krod or those hitters you mentioned, however.
I think the Dodgers, Giants, Brewers, Cardinals, Cubs, Mets, Redsox, Yankees, O’s, Rangers, Angels and M’s could all be interested in Lackey to varying degrees.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-6:28pm at 6:28 pm (UTC -4)
Your list is interesting. I don’t expect Texas to have the money to spend (there have been stories about the team being in bad shape) and I would think SF will spend its money on offense (I definitely see them as a darkhorse for Holliday). Baltimore would have to blow him away.
The Cards would be a good place to go but will they spend that money when new contracts for Pujols, Wainwright and Carpenter are on the horizon?
The others might all investigate depending upon what else they’re doing. Milwaukee is a good one I hadn’t thought of.
If I had to pick the teams that I thought would be serious bidders they would be the Mets, Angels, Dodgers and Brewers. I guess I shouldn’t rule out the Cubs either.
Can’t see the Sox doing it with what they have already and would want to puke if the Yanks got involved again.
Could the Jays look at him if they trade Halladay? Would he want to go there?
trs86
10/12/2009-6:45pm at 6:45 pm (UTC -4)
The desire is key to a lot of them. I think Texas might because they will be off the hook for Blalock and Padilla which would pay for Lackey, a much more needed contribution than either of those guys could provide.
SF I think is a front runner even for Holliday, if nothing else because of Boras. But if they get shut out they may decide to use Johnson and Molina’s money to dominate even more with pitching OR maybe sign Lackey and trade Cain for hitting.
Cardinals, I reasoned because of Holliday leaving and Piniero leaving they could most likely afford it.
stickguy
10/12/2009-1:35pm at 1:35 pm (UTC -4)
Don’t forget the most important deal that Omar is going to pull off tis off season.
Trading Wilson Valdez for Jose reyes, and not adding a dime to the payroll!
trs86
10/12/2009-2:56pm at 2:56 pm (UTC -4)
Well he kind of is. Reyes is due a big pay raise. LOL.
stickguy
10/12/2009-5:02pm at 5:02 pm (UTC -4)
but they are already on the hook for that salary. So the only incremental cost savings is the 400K Valdez won’t be getting paid.
jaydh
10/12/2009-2:51pm at 2:51 pm (UTC -4)
This is a difficult question to answer, no doubt. What is expected of FMart? or Niese? Can nieve start? Can Misch be a starter? I think we will have peices to trade and that is most likely the route we will go. What happens with our #2SP and LFer is a complete mystery but I doubt we get Holliday, Bay, or even Lackey.
Kingman 26
10/12/2009-3:14pm at 3:14 pm (UTC -4)
The more I think about this, the more I think Omar should try his hardest to get Halladay.
Lackey is just over a year younger, not nearly as good, and while I think we virtually HAVE to try and sign him barring trading for Roy, I think more and more that Lackey will be grossly overpaid.
Halladay’s last two years have been among his best, and this is the guy we could use the most. Roy has never seen the postseason and this would surely be a huge added incentive for him.
Holliday is really good, as his lessened splits each year at Coors as well as this year’s performance away from Coors showed.
I guess my answer is that if we cannot get Halladay, we must try to sign Lackey first and foremost, as starting pitching is as clearly our top need this year as bullpen help was last year.
But the very best answer for this team would be trading pretty much anyone other than Wright/Reyes/Beltran/Johan/KRod for Roy, and then signing Holliday. Spend all the money there, and hope for 1–2 great years before Johan and Roy start breaking down. And after that, you would still have Holliday, Jose, and Wright under control for another year or two. Assuming Jose can still dance; err, I mean play.
trs86
10/12/2009-3:20pm at 3:20 pm (UTC -4)
Not sure still if they have the money or commitment for Halladay and Holliday. However, I could see the trade expanded to include Downs/Tallet and Overbay. Then signing a FA solid LF. I could live with that.
Kingman 26
10/12/2009-3:28pm at 3:28 pm (UTC -4)
Would go for that.
I just feel more and more that a really good starter is absolutely essential, and while Holliday would be wonderful he would be much more of a luxury.
I could even see trading for Halladay AND signing Lackey if he could be had for like 4/60.
trs86
10/12/2009-3:40pm at 3:40 pm (UTC -4)
While I would love it, Mets would never go for it.
I do wonder though, IF they Jays would be interested in Maine as part of the deal?
Kingman 26
10/12/2009-3:50pm at 3:50 pm (UTC -4)
They might….talent and potential if healthy, inexpensive, and would be controllable for another couple of years.
trs86
10/12/2009-3:52pm at 3:52 pm (UTC -4)
Agreed, low risk if we are taking Overbay. They get Maine for 2.5 million and he can slot into the rotation, head to the pen or be released.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-3:47pm at 3:47 pm (UTC -4)
It’ll be interesting to see what the trade price is for Halladay. They won’t be able to get as much for him in the offseason as they would have this past July.
But if they’re facing a Santana like return for him, they might be better off holding on and taking the draft picks…
trs86
10/12/2009-3:53pm at 3:53 pm (UTC -4)
Question is was the Santana return that bad when it occurred or did it just develop that way. Also we have to remember that they are not guaranteed a 1st round pick if they offer him arbitration. It could be a 4th round pick, who knows?
I agree they should not get as much for him. It will also depend if he is going to force a contract extension which could even lower the return.
Kingman 26
10/12/2009-4:15pm at 4:15 pm (UTC -4)
I think it was that bad…I mean, who knows what any of the names being bandied about at the time meant, but it sure seemed as though the Twins could have asked for Reyes, or demanded Pelf or FMart, but what they got did not include anything close to our top prospects at any level, except for maybe Guerra at the time. And he has been pretty horrific in the low minors.
That was a basket of mediocrity at best.
trs86
10/12/2009-4:17pm at 4:17 pm (UTC -4)
True, I think a lot were high on Gomez for some reason. I think Johan dictated that trade so they could not demand much of anything.
dirtysanchez
10/12/2009-4:05pm at 4:05 pm (UTC -4)
lol…wanny is on offense today
bottom line…mets can either take the expensive, easy way out or get creative.
The mets will have returning for sure
Johan
Ollie
Now first off the mets NEED to make ollie #5.
To fill in the middle(2/3/4) you got
pelfrey
maine
niese
nieve
none of the guys above imo are #2 quality so the mets need to make some decisions here.
Pelf is not #2 quality but i think can give you #3 numbers if he improves
Maine is an INJURY RISK…he is serviceable when healthy but i dont think the mets should count on that so i think #4 has to be a tryout with
Niese
Nieve
Maine
The mets can get creative with a trade for halladay by involving one of those pitchers(nieve or niese would be the ones to throw in imo) to make it more even. That way you will have
Johan-#1
Halladay-#2
Pelf-#3
Niese/nieve or maine-#4
Ollie-#5
If the Mets sign lackey, you got
Johan-#1
Lackey-#2
Pelf-#3
Niese/nieve/maine-#4
Ollie-#5
You can use one of those pitchers(niese/nieve) to net you a big bat in a trade.
That would be my gameplan.
trs86
10/12/2009-4:12pm at 4:12 pm (UTC -4)
Not a bad plan, as I said I am torn. Not sure which way and I think a lot will depend on how things play out.
I can see rational reasons for all 3 options.
stickguy
10/12/2009-5:15pm at 5:15 pm (UTC -4)
unless there was a huge difference in expected output, I would go with the FA over the trade guy that is going to cost a painful return of prospects. The Mets do have some attractive trade chips, but I really think this is the year to try and hang onto them if at all possible.
And I have said before, a 5 year, 100mill+ extension to a 33YO SP (or will he be 34 when 2011 season starts?) is certainly a big, big risk.
I did think it made more sense for teams to trade for him last mid-season, since they got 2 post season runs out of the deal, and NOT try to extend him right away. Get the service, then offer arb and get the picks, or try to reup at that time. Not like he was going to give a discount at the time of the trade!
Also, once this mythical #2 comes on board (from whatever source), that pitching pool looks a lot better than what they went into last season with, especially at #2 and 5-7.
what about signing the offense (Holliday and someone else), then rolling the dice on Harden?
trs86
10/12/2009-4:16pm at 4:16 pm (UTC -4)
Hey Wanny I gotta go, maybe change my pillow cases. Would you like for me to chat with you guy Byrd while I am there? See what his demands are? I can get back with you. Would you like to get your kids an autographed bighead? You know to fit in with your big head? LOL.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-4:24pm at 4:24 pm (UTC -4)
I’m afraid my answer won’t be satisfactory to you and you’ll yell at me again.
Anyway, you should already know what I want… regardless of the facts.
stickguy
10/12/2009-5:08pm at 5:08 pm (UTC -4)
I know I will regret asking this, but what exactly, specifically, do you want them to do?
I know that you never like anyone elses ideas, but at this point, I really don’t remember what the wanny plan is.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-5:22pm at 5:22 pm (UTC -4)
In the various similar topics I have suggested lots of things…and believe or not I have even agreed with the plans of others…
I think pitching should be the priority. With Beltran, Reyes, a full season of Francoeur and Wright hopefully back to normal, the offense should improve organically. On the other hand, after Santana the Mets have nothing reliable in the rotation and only two pitchers in the pen.
Things I have suggested:
1. Start with Lackey;
2. Seek a hitter through creative trade such as for another team’s blocked player, i.e. F-Mart for Kyle Blanks?;
3. Otherwise leave Murphy at 1B (along with Carter) and try to improve LF either by trade, i.e. Conor Jackson, or through mid-level free agents like Marlon Byrd (focusing on hitters who could maximize the dimensions of Citifield);
4. Experienced middle infielder to back up Reyes and perhaps play frequently at 2B against lefthanded pitchers, i.e. Lopez, Scutaro, Loretta;
5. Low-risk/high reward back end of the rotation starter via free agency, i.e. Erik Bedard if willing to take a make-good contract, Vincente Padilla, or via trade;
6. Mike Gonzalez or other legitimate relief pitcher to pitch late innings;
7. Veteran defensive catcher like Jose Molina or Josh Bard… or give Thole a shot with Santos.
My lineup would look something like:
Reyes SS
Castillo 2B
Wright 3B
Beltran CF
Francoeur RF
Jackson LF or Marlon Byrd or both
Murphy 1B (with Jackson and Carter as fallbacks)
Santos/Thole C
Santana
Lackey
Pelfrey
Perez
Bedard/Sheets/Padilla/Maine
Rod
Gonzalez
Parnell
Feliciano
Maine?
With a good backup middle infielder, someone better than Angel Pagan in the OF and Chris Carter among those on the bench.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-5:23pm at 5:23 pm (UTC -4)
the 2B should play v. righties, not lefties…
trs86
10/12/2009-5:48pm at 5:48 pm (UTC -4)
Nothing wrong with your plan at all. I still, even though according to you I am not supposed to, go back and forth about which plan I would take. My concern with your plan is that there is not a hitter in the lineup that does not have a question mark about what kind of season they will have next year. Of course all teams have guys like that but not the entire lineup. I would like to see one hitter in there that here is what you WILL most likely get.
I like the Padilla idea, I don’t THINK Sheets will leave Texas and Bedard someone will most likely be dumb enough to give him two years. Gonzalez I love, but we have already discussed how I really THINK he will be able to find a team to close for if that is what he wants.
And I think Pagan is fine for a backup OF but if some team will give value in a trade I would ship him off. Carter, we don’t know what we have. He may be great for the bench.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-5:52pm at 5:52 pm (UTC -4)
I’m not married to the names. The point is really that I think another hitter can be acquired via trade. I don’t know who other teams will want to move. It wouldn’t surprise me if a more reliable hitter like a Brad Hawpe (might be a nightmare in the Citi outfield) or a Michael Cuddyer became available for $ reasons or to make room for a younger player.
trs86
10/12/2009-6:00pm at 6:00 pm (UTC -4)
I don’t think Cuddyer will be available, they seem to love him. I think Young may be. Hawpe will be available but that would not be a guy I consider a reliable hitter next year. Not saying I would not want him, just would not think he gives that guaranteed production (of course here is where you say no one is guaranteed, but I think you know what I mean).
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-5:38pm at 5:38 pm (UTC -4)
By the way, I don’t dislike the idea of signing Holliday but the purpose of this thread was to debate Holliday or Lackey.
I’ve never once said that signing Holliday is a bad plan.
stickguy
10/12/2009-6:20pm at 6:20 pm (UTC -4)
a reasonable concept plan. I don’t agree with all the names, but as “types of” guys, they make sense.
Actually, I think this is about the same as the grand plan I proposed a week or so back (I know TRS liked it!)
-lackey as teh big piece (to beef up the SP)
- fill in with better quality bats where you can, but not a huge $$ splash gu- add a risk/reward upside P (like Harden? or Bedard)
- improve the bench and pen, but mostly through the losers in the race for starting or rotation jobs.
Nice thing is, not too expensive, and does not really lock them into a ton of LT guarantees that they won’t be able to get out of.
One wrinkle, and I know you don’t eithe rlike or have fiath in him, but if they get lackey, Maine can actually serve as the risk/reward SP guy.
wannybackstra
10/12/2009-6:31pm at 6:31 pm (UTC -4)
I think you, TRS and I are were all involved in that plan from last week and in agreement.
I don’t dislike Maine at all. I actually like him a lot. I just don’t have faith in his health or his ability to be a front line starter because he just doesn’t throw enough innings even when he’s healthy.
Someone suggested today that Maine would be a good candidate for the 8th inning. If the Mets were able to acquire two legitimate starters this offseason, I would try that out in a heartbeat.
trs86
10/12/2009-6:47pm at 6:47 pm (UTC -4)
I think we may be able to trade Maine for a bullpen guy or in a package if we upgrade 2 spots but I would not be opposed to a late inning guy at all.
And yes I still like that plan as 1 of the directions they could go. Still not sure if I would give 4/60+ however.
rustyjr
10/12/2009-5:07pm at 5:07 pm (UTC -4)
I forgot when do players start to file for free agency or decline their options?
stickguy
10/12/2009-6:21pm at 6:21 pm (UTC -4)
shortly after the WS ends, but I don’t know the exact timing.
gipperpdx
10/12/2009-7:10pm at 7:10 pm (UTC -4)
The only answer after the debacle of the last few seasons is: BOTH.
But, if I have to choose, I’ll always choose pitching.