In a post today David Lennon outlined his off-season plans for the Mets:
Attention Mets: Here is how to solve your problems
His plan focused on first getting a #1. Lennon also Twittered today “The Mets are testing the waters on John Lackey.”Â
Next he agreed with Beltran in the need to gamble slightly on bringing back Carlos Delgado on an incentive based contract. “He hit 38 homers with 115 RBIs in 2008 despite favoring that degenerative hip condition. Now that it’s fixed, Delgado could find his power stroke again – at a fraction of the price of some other sluggers.”Â
LF fill it with someone besides Bay or Holliday unless their price comes down.
C “it’s usually a position that’s difficult to fill through free agency. This year is no exception, with Bengie Molina at the top of a pretty unimpressive list”. Lennon added the following: “Molina should also add some pop – he hit 20 homers in 132 games last season.”
Finally, get rid of Castillo “Maybe unloading Castillo is a good first step toward placating a restless fan base, and if the Mets can save even a couple bucks on the $12 million they owe him over the next two years, it would be worth it.”
What do you guys think? There are some issues I have in it but overall it’s not a bad plan and very similar to many of the ones we have discussed on TRDM. Maybe Lennon has been reading?
65 comments
fongy2
11/13/2009-12:07pm at 12:07 pm (UTC -4)
Again, in the entire history of this great game,how many two-way Catchers have con’t to produce even close
to their prime offensive numbers
after the age of 35???
Almost always,they fall off the cliff
and real fast!
Next….
trs86
11/13/2009-12:10pm at 12:10 pm (UTC -4)
Agreed, but if it’s for 1+1 what is the harm? Thole is not going to be up no matter how much you wish and Molina is a better option than Santos or Barajas. No he’s not great but I don’t have an issue with anyone wanting him for 1 year.
CaseStreet
11/13/2009-12:21pm at 12:21 pm (UTC -4)
I agree about getting a top pitcher, someone else than Holliday or Bay, and trying to move Castillo.
Otherwise, hell no. As much as I like Lennon, this article doesn’t do it for me.
Delgado on a $2M base salary plus incentives, maybe. Hip injury = no power and no range.
Lennon gives no alternatives for LF, though the idea that the price on Holliday may drop like K-Rod last year is interesting.
Molina, like fongy mentioned b4, just wait till b4 ST and get someone for cheap. Molina will be expensive.
Lennon doesn’t give other options besides Hudson to replace Castillo. Might as well keep Castillo.
trs86
11/13/2009-12:28pm at 12:28 pm (UTC -4)
The article did not impress me as much as the idea seemed very similar. I would not like it compeltely but would not complain if Omar did something similar.
As for Delgado, did his hip cost no power in 2008 before the surgery? It’s a low risk move. Say he cost 4-5 million it’s not like we will be getting Lackey AND Holliday anyway and that kind of money is spent on bench players on good teams a lot of times.
Molina I don’t want but I said in June he would be here so I have accepted.
CaseStreet
11/13/2009-12:41pm at 12:41 pm (UTC -4)
I think a sore hip is different than coming back from hip surgery.
In early 2008, Delgado was facing both a sore hip and wrist injuries. They were both healed in the 2nd half and we saw the good Carlos.
Now, coming back from a minor hip surgery that was supposed to bring him back during the All Star Break when he didn’t come back at all, is quite different.
So aside from the likely chance that Delgado will still show the effects of his surgery, his range hasn’t been good for years. I’m sorry, but Delgado is a DH.
And it will cost because when you bring in Delgado, and then he gets hurt again, you have Murph as the every day 1B. If you don’t bring in Delgado, you can get someone that is an improvement over Murph and isn’t as much of an injury risk. So, IMO, ur sacrificing improving over Murph.
Of course, that all depends on what else happens, but if we’re talking about improving 1B, I’d want something more sure than Delgado. Otherwise, ur just throwing money and the chance of improving away.
trs86
11/13/2009-1:01pm at 1:01 pm (UTC -4)
Who are you bringing in at 1B that is an upgrade over Murphy, more healthy than Delgado and only signed for 1 year cheap?
CaseStreet
11/13/2009-1:17pm at 1:17 pm (UTC -4)
Why does it have to be for 1 year or cheap? Maybe LF is cheap.
Even if you do want cheap at 1B, there’s Gload, Johnson, LaRoche, Branyan, Blalock, Huff, and trade candidates, like A. Gonz., Overbay, Cantu, Kotchman, Jacobs or Garko.
Can you tell me that any of these guys don’t have a chance of being better than Murphy and less risky than Delgado?
trs86
11/13/2009-1:42pm at 1:42 pm (UTC -4)
Risk does not always have to do with health.
No I don’t think Gload, or Jacobs can be better than Murphy. No I do not think that Johnson is any more of a sure thing health wise and will most likely cost more. LaRoche will in my opinion get 2-3 years. Branyan was terrible the 2nd half and is looking for multiple years. Blalock I am ok with if he signs for one year but his OBP is terrible. Huff was also terrible last year. AGonz I want but will cost the farm, Overbay I like but maybe traded to someone else. Cantu will cost a decent amount in prospects, Kotchman is terrible, and Garko I like as a platoon player.
So all in all, yes Delgado is risky but if it’s low risk because it’s cheap and 1 year I am still listening.
CaseStreet
11/13/2009-3:08pm at 3:08 pm (UTC -4)
wow, ur funny.
metsfan4decades
11/13/2009-1:33pm at 1:33 pm (UTC -4)
No, that’s not right.
First, they knew Delgado had a bad hip going into 2009 so that was never ‘healed’ from 2008. They knew it was never going to be better w/o surgery but had hoped it wouldn’t need surgery until later, rather than sooner.
Second, Delgado was never projected to be back around the ASB from that hip surgery. It was always mid/late August. And he was right on track until he started swinging the bat and torn a labrium.
Taking a chance on Delgado, IMO, depends on who is playing LF and who they tried to get for 1st base.
To me, unless we’re getting AGonz, everyone else should be short term unless we’re not looking at Ike Davis to take over.
trs86
11/13/2009-1:44pm at 1:44 pm (UTC -4)
Agreed. I would shoot for Agonz, then Overbay/Cantu and then Delgado.
CaseStreet
11/13/2009-2:26pm at 2:26 pm (UTC -4)
Davis is a prospect. I’m not looking at Davis for anything other than to play in Binghamton.
You are correct about Delgado and mid-August and the torn labrium.
I still think there are better options then Delgado, even for a short and cheap deal.
DNDJohan aka kistics
11/13/2009-12:46pm at 12:46 pm (UTC -4)
I agree with you. As for Molina, if he’s 1+1, I’d sign him up. So what if his production drops. He’s not going to be the #4-5 hitter like he was in SF. Pitchers will pitch to him if he’s down in #6-7 spot. Plus whatever he can give us is much better than Schneider/Santos combo of last year. If he hits 13-15 HRs in 7th spot, I have no beef with that. Only problem I see with Molina is IF he’s willing to do 1+1, Giants will surely grab him.
As for Delgado, I wouldn’t mind taking a risk on him ONLY IF Omar has a back up plan. Murphy is not a good backup plan. Murphy platooning with a RHB, maybe. I don’t know what would be a good backup plan, but Delgado is risky. If healthy, I think he could still contribute offensively.
As for LF, what do you think of Dye? I know he’s a RF, but I think he can be signed relatively cheap (8-10M?) for a short term.
trs86
11/13/2009-1:04pm at 1:04 pm (UTC -4)
Dye is too much of a risk to mee because of cost. If he was 4-5 million maybe but even then at least with 1B we have a backup option. I guess Pagan would be the backup option with LF. In my opinion if you go with Dye then there is no Delgado and you have to bring in a reliable 1B. If you go with Delgado then you have to bring in a real LF or load up on SP.
whataputz
11/13/2009-2:34pm at 2:34 pm (UTC -4)
I agree with both of you. It makes no sense to let Delgado go to another team for a 1 year incentive laced deal. I mean, his name is still Carlos Delgado, he got his hip worked on, and it enables you to sign a pitcher and fill some other holes with good players like a Benngie Molina and sign an outfielder, depending on the money left over or another ok pitcher.
In short, if you commit 90 mil to Holliday, you’re kind of leaving little money for alot of spots. I’m just saying that I’d much rather take a risk on Delgado and Murphy and fill other needs than sign holliday and leave the holes empty.
fongy2
11/13/2009-12:34pm at 12:34 pm (UTC -4)
I agree w/you Case on Delgado and I can’t believe I’m saying that b/c I’ve been a big fan
of his for maybe 15yrs now.
I also appreciate what hes done as a Met BUT its time to
move on.Not just b/c of what Case noted,which hes right
about BUT also to change the
dynamic of that clubhouse.
Sorry,Beltran and Reyes but its time to set up and out
and take some of the responsibilty for leading this team wherever they’re gonna go.
Delgado has been the defacto
leader in the room and especially among the latin players. Bringing him in is not like bring in a Sheffield
who initially had to blend.
Gado walks to the front of the line in there. Either Murphy is gonna be the 1Bman or not
but he,Beltran,Reyes and a few
others on this team need to move foward and find their comfort zone as leaders or
followers w/o a presence as
large as Delgado’s looming.
Its time to move on.
trs86
11/13/2009-12:37pm at 12:37 pm (UTC -4)
I am not getting into your clubhouse theories. I see the fact we have no power in the lineup and are looking for a #2 starting pitcher that will cost a lot of money. That means we will have to gamble in LF or 1B for power and considering what is on the market after Bay and Holliday, Delgado is actually a good gamble assuming he is cheap.
wannybackstra
11/13/2009-2:27pm at 2:27 pm (UTC -4)
Case’s point about Delgado’s range went unnoticed here apparently but is a very good.
Alex Rodriguez range runs above average was at an all time low of -9.8 this year. Delgado had no range to begin with. Hey be like a statue now.
re: Molina, it might be difficult to tell the difference between he and the backstop, the only thing wider and slower than him in the ballpark.
CaseStreet
11/13/2009-3:00pm at 3:00 pm (UTC -4)
LMAO
are you saying Molina is fat and lazy like Castro? or just fat and slow?
wannybackstra
11/13/2009-3:14pm at 3:14 pm (UTC -4)
I can’t judge his effort. At the same time, I can’t miss his girth.
trs86
11/13/2009-12:47pm at 12:47 pm (UTC -4)
Plan for the ages.
Sign Lackey for 4/64 with a team/player option for 18 million with a 4 million buy out. Cost 16 million.
Trade farm for Agonz, cost 5 million
Trade Castillo and bring in Harang and Phillips. Net 12 million.
Total cost 33 million. Total change of the atmosphere of the team.
Reyes, Phillips, Beltran, Agonz, Wright, Frenchy, Pagan, Catcher
Johan, Lackey, Harang, Pelfrey, Ollie/Maine
stickguy
11/13/2009-2:22pm at 2:22 pm (UTC -4)
like the team. It really comes down to what the trade pieces were for A Gon.
I would actually support your plan, but skip the A Gon part (assuming the cost was totally out of control), and sign the best 1B/OF RH bat available, and let murphy/platoon have a shot.
At least you have all the farm pieces for future use.
and of course, you could also go with the 1 year shot on Delgado!
FAs you can reasonablly predict approx. contract (usually within a couple million and maybe 1 year). But trades? Way too hard to figure out packages that make sense, and the other team wants.
Also, what about trying for Prince? he is more expensive $$ wise, but what about the player cost?
Finally, how about a minor piece to TB for 1 year of Pena?
trs86
11/13/2009-2:26pm at 2:26 pm (UTC -4)
Fielder I think they try and win a very winnable NLC one more time.
Pena I think will be available in July with Crawford.
wannybackstra
11/13/2009-2:28pm at 2:28 pm (UTC -4)
Doesn’t anyone realize that Harang finished last season on the DL?
GravediggerHebner
11/13/2009-2:35pm at 2:35 pm (UTC -4)
My understanding is he had an emergency appendectomy.
I can’t claim any knowledge of how that might effect his pitching abilities, if at all.
I know that starting with 2004 inclusive he’s made 28, 32, 35, 34, 30 & 26 (before the emerg app) starts. Not exactly Harden-esque.
wannybackstra
11/13/2009-2:39pm at 2:39 pm (UTC -4)
Fair enough. I didn’t know what the injury was.
But I do recall there was some concern for his arm based on velocity issues in 2008.
GravediggerHebner
11/13/2009-2:42pm at 2:42 pm (UTC -4)
Yes, there was. I linked to an article the other day which outlined how in late May 2008 Toothpick Baker used Harang in relief on 2 days rest to throw 63 pitches after he threw either 103 or 113 (I forget) pitches in that previous start.
His velocity was back up again in 2009, actually higher than his career average.
wannybackstra
11/13/2009-2:47pm at 2:47 pm (UTC -4)
Put him back on the list!
GravediggerHebner
11/13/2009-2:55pm at 2:55 pm (UTC -4)
DNDJohan aka kistics
11/13/2009-12:50pm at 12:50 pm (UTC -4)
How about Nick Johnson or LaRoche? They would be good 2nd tier 1Bs. I think you can get 20-25 HRs out of them. Not sure how much they will cost, but I’m assuming something like 2/16 could get it done.
trs86
11/13/2009-12:55pm at 12:55 pm (UTC -4)
Johnson should not cost more than 1/6 or 8 considering how bad he was on defense last year and how he looked injured again at the end of the season. I am betting LaRoche gets 3 years and around 21 million.
GravediggerHebner
11/13/2009-1:16pm at 1:16 pm (UTC -4)
Typically I really enjoy Lennon’s work but as I read this article I was struck by how much was missing from it. Maybe he was in a hurry but it just seemed really empty, and I see you guys have touched on that above. I was disappointed.
So because of my disappointment and because IMO his “plan” won’t foster much debate at all, I give you the following excerpt from Amazin’ Avenue regarding grit. Enjoy:
“We would all prefer to root for a team full of players who all appear to be trying their hardest, who seem to enjoy every moment of the game, who get along with each other, who give great interviews and spend their spare time with underprivileged children. The problem is that, to the best of our understanding, none of those things propels a player’s value above and beyond what can be measured using the best analytical and scouting tools we have at our disposal.
There are really two main classes of intangibles: hustle and heart. A player who is constantly hustling but only gets on base 30% of the time isn’t really more valuable than an apparently lazy player who reaches base with the same frequency. Rather, it is his work ethic that allows the scrappy player to reach base as often as he does, whereas a loafer with the same exact skill set might only reach base 28% or 29% of the time. There’s no hidden value to hustle, I’m afraid, even if it is more pleasing to the eye.
Heart, or the fatuous idea that some players “want it more” or “will their teammates to victory”, is just a feel-good placeholder that people like to use to explain the role that randomness plays in baseball, particularly during short playoff series. Random variation isn’t a compelling narrative. When the light-hitting shortstop belts three homeruns in the LCS or the underdog beats the best team in the league in the World Series, it’s satisfying to say that they did so because they were gritty or because they stepped it up in a big spot or because some player on the other team always chokes when it matters the most. The reality is that the worst team in baseball will still beat the best team 20-30% of the time, and if over a stretch of three or five or seven games they happen to win 50% or 75% or 100% of the time, that’s easily explained (and proven) by cold, unfeeling randomness.
I think people still accept intangible explanations for baseball events because they’ve been fed to us for as long as people have written about sports, and we’re at a point where these sentiments no longer have any content. Everyone will readily acknowledge that if a player goes 4-for-5 with two homeruns on Opening Day that he probably won’t hit .800 with 324 homeruns for the season. We’ve all seen Albert Pujols go hitless for a week and we’ve seen Omir Santos hit .500 over the same span. We all know that Pujols isn’t a .000 hitter and that Santos isn’t a .500 hitter, so the concept of random variation in baseball is easily recognizable by almost anyone. So why do we pick and choose when to apply that filter?”
fongy2
11/13/2009-1:40pm at 1:40 pm (UTC -4)
So…..you’re sayin’ Santos
isn’t as good as Pujols???:)
Seriously though,I’m amazed
at any serious fan over….
lets say 25 or so…who doesn’t
understand the nuances of sports, especially baseball.
And what slaves so many younger fans are to stats overall. I can understand
it for those under 25 or there
about,b/c everyone I ever knew
from about 10 to 25 who were
serious fans,including myself
couldn’t comprehend for instance how anyone except for
most yankee fans could argue,
How @25 Jeter was a better and
more important baseball player than ARod or Nomar at the same
age,around the same time.
GravediggerHebner
11/13/2009-1:55pm at 1:55 pm (UTC -4)
All I’m really saying is how disappointed I was in Lennon’s piece. I read it twice and then wondered, “is there more to this that I am missing due to Newsday’s new pay policy?” It just seemed so half-assed, and IMO so unlike him.
I think all of us amateurs have on some level or another put forward more thoughtful plans. So I just threw in this piece for the proverbial “change of pace” really.
Speaking of change of pace, I read last night that Mike Pelfrey threw a greater percentage (78.3%) of fastballs than any other starting pitcher in the major leagues who had thrown enough innings to qualify (out of 77 pitchers). Perhaps he needs to change it up a bit more often.
The guy who threw the second lowest percentage of fastballs (31.7%) was Roy Halladay. Only Doug Davis threw it less often (25.4%).
trs86
11/13/2009-2:07pm at 2:07 pm (UTC -4)
You are right the details were very fuzzy. However, the overall plan is not that bad.
#1 SP, resign Delgado, Bring in Molina and trade Castillo. That’s not that bad in my mind.
GravediggerHebner
11/13/2009-2:16pm at 2:16 pm (UTC -4)
You hit exactly on my complaint. He left a lot open.
He spends his LF segment talking about re-signing Delgado, but mentions no one as a potential LF.
Is he endorsing Molina or not? I can’t tell. He suggests that it’s “the easy play.” So does he want them to make the easy play or not?
And I’m not sure how suggesting that the Mets are “seemingly in a rush to stick Castillo in any number of trades…to overpay for Chone Figgins” is an endorsement.
The way I read it the only clear thing he endorsed, which you know I agree with, is to pair Halladay or Lackey with Santana, and I also agree with him that Lackey is the preferred option due to the fact that he’s just money, not money and prospects.
The rest of it had so many caveats it was difficult to impossible for me to detect a preference on his part.
fongy2
11/13/2009-2:09pm at 2:09 pm (UTC -4)
Taken that way,as a change of pace.My reaction wasn’t
really to your posting Heb,
just more of an
overall thought.
I both agree and disagree w/
you posting on Heart/grit etc.
its case by case.I don’t think any two
situations are the same……
like most things in life.
Idealy,I’d like
the player with both talent and grit BUT sometimes in team sport pairing a Charles Oakley
together with
your franchise,Patrick Ewing is better both for
the players and
team than trying a Karl Malone/Ewing
combo. Different fits.
I’m sure the mid/late 80s Mets could have
found a better
2Bman than Wally but even
adding a Ryne Sandberg may not
have garnered
the same results.I think Sandberg could qualify as both very talented and a real grinder.
I hope you get what I mean.
I don’t want a team full of David Ecksteins
but I also don’t
want a team full of Milton Bradleys either.
GravediggerHebner
11/13/2009-2:20pm at 2:20 pm (UTC -4)
Understood, and I agree with you that there’s a balance. You cannot go “all Eckstein” or “all Bradley” cuz either way you are doomed.
But I also agree with the sentiment in the article I copied and pasted that a .300 OBP guy who is perceived as a lazy selfish good for nothing is the same as a .300 OBP guy who is perceived as breathing fire and spitting blood. They’re both .300 OBP guys.
fongy2
11/13/2009-2:24pm at 2:24 pm (UTC -4)
Understood! No argument there.My further point is though that the lazy
,good for nothing type is more likely to wreck the team.Especially if things aren’t going well to begin with.
Thats all.
GravediggerHebner
11/13/2009-2:30pm at 2:30 pm (UTC -4)
I can’t argue with that.
I don’t have a ready baseball example, but see Randy Moss on the Oakland Raiders as compared to Randy Moss on the New England Patriots.
GravediggerHebner
11/13/2009-2:27pm at 2:27 pm (UTC -4)
By the above second paragraph what I mean to get at is this: if your team is in need of improvement, switching out a .300 OBP guy who is perceived as lazy for a .300 OBP guy who is perceived as gritty isn’t going to help, or at least it isn’t going to help as much as switching him out for a .350 OBP guy.
fongy2
11/13/2009-2:33pm at 2:33 pm (UTC -4)
Again,it depends upon the player,team and situation.
metsfan4decades
11/13/2009-1:47pm at 1:47 pm (UTC -4)
Finally….
Someone with a bit realism on this ‘heart and grit’ debate.
trs86
11/13/2009-1:51pm at 1:51 pm (UTC -4)
Agreed, so I guess the Yankees won because they had more gritttttttt? Or was it because they had more talent? Or maybe the Phillies got there because they had more gritttttt or was it because they were good and the rest of the NL was terrible?
trs86
11/13/2009-1:50pm at 1:50 pm (UTC -4)
Great article. So basically heart and grit mean nothing without talent.
“There’s no hidden value to hustle, I’m afraid, even if it is more pleasing to the eye.”
There you go buddy.
metsfan4decades
11/13/2009-1:59pm at 1:59 pm (UTC -4)
Exactly.
And IMO, the Yankees beat the Phils b/c their pitching was just better. After Lee, it was a crap shoot and their BP mirrored the Mets 2008 BP.
But oh, the Phils – they had that heart and grit in spades. Didn’t quite translate….
I’m willing to concede though, sometimes you just get a group of guys in that clubhouse that just about all click together. And that does make it easier to do your job.
I’m sure most of us have been in the workforce long enough to know it’s much harder when half the office/team/whatever hate each other or there is one really big A-hole that no one likes.
GravediggerHebner
11/13/2009-2:02pm at 2:02 pm (UTC -4)
Sometimes though the big A-hole who no one likes serves the valuable purpose of bringing everybody else together. Pat Burrell comes to mind. Without him around, the Phils couldn’t quite rally together enough to win it all.
I kid about Burrell, but I’m serious about the general idea.
metsfan4decades
11/13/2009-5:46pm at 5:46 pm (UTC -4)
Oh, agreed. Especially when the A-hole is the big boss.
Been there, done that, worn the tee shirt.
Actually, those were some good times – LOL.
trs86
11/13/2009-2:06pm at 2:06 pm (UTC -4)
That’s a great point. As a basketball coach I am always looking for that football player who is not in the daily life of my basketball players. I look for the guy to be a cocky confident asshole. That more than any kid who hustles changes the dynamic of a team for the good.
fongy2
11/13/2009-2:17pm at 2:17 pm (UTC -4)
See thats
I’m taking about.
trs86
11/13/2009-2:24pm at 2:24 pm (UTC -4)
Fongy that means I am looking for a kid who is a cocky, confident asshole over someone who just hustles.
fongy2
11/13/2009-2:30pm at 2:30 pm (UTC -4)
Doing 3 things at once,misread your post.
As an B-Ball player though,I’ll tell ya,its always good to have a football player type who may only be your 8thor9th most talented player but b/c of his football players mentality pushes everyone else better than him.
gipperpdx
11/13/2009-1:29pm at 1:29 pm (UTC -4)
Delagdo? Hell no. If we’re going to change the clubhouse, we have to start with him.
johan4cy
11/13/2009-5:03pm at 5:03 pm (UTC -4)
no
stickguy
11/13/2009-2:29pm at 2:29 pm (UTC -4)
I will go with the change talent level plan, and not worry about changing the clubhouse.
I will agree though that heart/grit whatnot is less improtant than talent, but it is still better to have guys that hustle and play hard, WITHIN A GIVEN TALENT LEVEL. That is, I want guys with talent and skill, that also bust their hump to take the extra base, take out the 2B to break up a DP, etc.
Guys like Utley and Teixera are extremely talented, top players, that also (IMO of course) play the game hard and do the little things that likely lead to more wins (although that is very hard to quantify).
Does Eckstein have more heart/grit/hustle than Miggy C.? Probably. Do I want ecky on the field instead? Nope.
fongy2
11/13/2009-2:32pm at 2:32 pm (UTC -4)
Agreed BUT atleast he shows up
for the most important series of the season.
stickguy
11/13/2009-2:47pm at 2:47 pm (UTC -4)
one ting about baseball that seperates it from football is how long the damned season is.
So, in some ways, you almost need 2 sets of players. The talented guys to get you to the PS, and the grit/hustle guys to get you through the big games!
stickguy
11/13/2009-2:43pm at 2:43 pm (UTC -4)
So hard to put out a detailed plan (anything more than the framework Lennon put together). Hell, anything beyond “get a #2/LF/BU catcher and some power” is just guesswork!
So, my latest compliation of the 75 plans I have proposed or supported when others did the grunt work:
Oh, and this does not represent steps that I think have to be done in order, or are neccessarily in importance rank.
- Trade Castillo for the best return you can get, looking to fill any hole (inclduing adding prospect depth).
- Work on the Reds trade to get Arroyo (harang 2nd choice, and should come a tad cheaper) and philips.
- Sign the best combo of talent/deal (shorter is better) for a 2nd catcher. Avoid a type A FA though (molina?) barajas is fine. Even better, get one back for Castillo
- Sign 1 more SP for depth. Lacky if he falls to 4/60 range, otherwise best of the rest (wolf or garland) depending on terms
- preserve the better prospects as much as possible. Davis in particular. Look to build a compettive team for 2010 as much as possible on ST fillers while guys like murphy and davis and F Mart prove if they can be part of the core moving forward
- For 1B, look for a salary dump (Pena if available) for a FT guy. Delgado only if very cheap (doubt it). If that doesnt owrk, just get the best RH support and run with Murphy + a friend.
- LF will be the wildcard. I am willing to roll with a blend of carter/pagan/whoever else they pick up to be the RH 1B/OF guy. Just keep it cheap, if you can’t wing a deal for Holliday that is reasonable (6/110 is not reasonable!) Just please, make a reasonable attempt to get good D from whoever you bring in.
The plan for power is 2 fold. 1st, the incumbents will put up a lot more HRs next year most likely. Philips also adds juice. The rest will come from the mix of LF/1B guys, depending on how that plys out.
This plan is of course fungible, and will adjust to where you get lucky with a better talent (LF or 1B or 2B).
CaseStreet
11/13/2009-2:47pm at 2:47 pm (UTC -4)
Too bad Newsday doesn’t have you on their salary. Nice job.
stickguy
11/13/2009-2:48pm at 2:48 pm (UTC -4)
thank you. I think I just had a movement…
CaseStreet
11/13/2009-3:41pm at 3:41 pm (UTC -4)
That’s great. I’ve been having movements all day.
GravediggerHebner
11/13/2009-2:54pm at 2:54 pm (UTC -4)
The more I read and think, the more I come over to the feeling that these plans are great for us and I encourage us to continue formulating and sharing them with each other.
However, I also believe that having any plan more specific than “improve my ballclub in whatever way(s) and/or opportunities manifest themselves” is bad for a GM to do.
Omar’s plan of improve the bullpen worked out terribly. He apparently didn’t view any of the free agents who languished unemployed into the New Year as improvements to the ballclub because they didn’t conform to his plan to improve the bullpen.
Because guys like Randy Wolf and Bobby Abreu were not late inning relief pitchers, and because Omar had already acquired late inning relief pitchers anyway because that was his plan, he brushed aside the opportunity to improve his club’s starting pitching by signing Randy Wolf (feel free to insert a different name, the name is not the point so much) or to improve his OF by signing Bobby Abreu.
He had a plan and stuck to it. He improved his bullpen. He didn’t improve his ballclub despite many opportunities to do so at reasonable cost that presented themselves.
I want us to enjoy exchanging our plans with each other like the wonderful conversation pieces that they are. And I want Omar to improve his ballclub whenever the opportunity to do so in a way that doesn’t hamstring the organization presents itself, not ignore the opportunity because it doesn’t fit his plan.
stickguy
11/13/2009-3:12pm at 3:12 pm (UTC -4)
good point. It does seem like Omar can get tunnel vision at times (fixated?)
I certainly agree also that a GM needs to be able to zig and zag as the market changes. IOW, take what the market gives you, and take improvement wherever you can (even if it is a place you thought you were set at) if the cost makes sense.
One thing I think GMs do (should they? I bet Omar does) is decide eraly on if they are going vertical or horizontal. ANd of course, keep an eye on the budget!
Vertical is get that 1-2 big (expensive) names, and fill in the rest from the bargain bin, minors or trash heap. This seems to scream “omar”
Horizontal is the idea of not getting a “star”, but add more players that are better than average, so in essence, make the talent level more even but overall deeper.
I think the Phils have done so well the last couple of years since they hit it big on the 2nd approach. Werth, vicky, Ibanez aren’t the huge “name” guys, they are just very good players that make the line up deeper.
gotta do the cost/benefit analysis. Is 1 Holliday at 18 mill worth more than Ibanez + werth at the same 18mill? Not to me!
johan4cy
11/13/2009-4:53pm at 4:53 pm (UTC -4)
obviously this plan will help us but there is a very small chance of it actually happening. Thats what I do during the offseason in my video game, I’m not sure its the Mets’ gamepan although Omar is going to want to make a bang in order to keep his job which I feel is in jeopardy.
stickguy
11/13/2009-5:12pm at 5:12 pm (UTC -4)
THe idea that Omar is more concerned about his job than building the best team (for 2010 and beyond) scares me. For some reason I don’t think he will though. Maybe since he has the 3 year deal already?
Realistically, getting a big name or 2 (say Holliday and Lackey) can generate buzz, but come back and bit him in the arse.
The only thing that will save him is a winning team (with a future, so clear cutting the farm probably won’t fly!). Doesn’t matter if he signs all big names like the yanks, or gets a bunch of under the radar value guys. he gets 2010, then the results determine past that.
And, the fastest way out of town? BLow the budget on a couple of back page big names, and roll out a team with notable flaws that can’t get the job done. That will cement his reputation as a 1 trick pony.
Hell, going the other way (all “value” guys, no big names) and keeping the farm gives him a better chance of staying around!