Assuming the Mets are completely done obtaining any more free agents or acquiring a player through a trade, would you gauge the Met’s off season player moves as a  failure or success?
Feb 07
The Sunday Question
Leave a Reply
MLBTradeRumors
- Mark Teahen Granted Release From D'Backs
- Trade Market For Lefty Relievers
- Latest On Nationals, Mike Rizzo
- Which Players Will Be Traded This Summer?
- MLBTR Originals
- NL West Notes: Mattingly, Goldschmidt, Gregorius
- East Notes: Braves, Brignac, Cabrera
- Week In Review: 5/12/13 - 5/18/13
- AL West Notes: Profar, Astros, Mariners
- Cubs To Designate Michael Bowden For Assignment
27 comments
rustyjr
2/7/2010-9:23am at 9:23 am (UTC -4)
I would have to say it is a mix bag at best – the only player we obtained that isn’t a question mark ( & the mysterions) is Bay – everyone else hinges onbouncing back from injury ( escobar) playing in a forign league ( the ryota) and if guys that were average player can play at or above their capabilities ( see everyone else)
rustyjr
2/7/2010-9:23am at 9:23 am (UTC -4)
this is to the aquisitions – not to the guys that were mets last season
trs86
2/7/2010-9:42am at 9:42 am (UTC -4)
He gets a B-
I still think the uproar over them not getting a garbage pitcher to supplement our own question marks is comical.
“Sherman also wonders how it was possible the Mets couldn’t land Bengie Molina, Joel Pineiro, Doug Davis, or Jon Garland when their current rotation has “Johan Santana and The Yipsâ€.”
I too wonder how it was possible that Omar did not overpay for mediocre players. YIPPPIEEEE. Go Omar.
ceetar
2/7/2010-9:58am at 9:58 am (UTC -4)
Some of these guys were slightly above garbage. (Garland, who wasn’t coming east for example)
I’d say the offseason was a success, in the sense that the team as constituted will and can compete, however they definitely needed to sign a 5th starter, because I don’t think you can write in Niese or Nieve in there as a guarantee, and that hurts the depth if Maine or someone else gets hurt.
It’s no big deal but they also needed a better/different catcher than Santos.
But I don’t think they’re done anyway, so it’s a moot point.
Mr North Jersey
2/7/2010-10:01am at 10:01 am (UTC -4)
I like how you give a B-. Just out of curiosity based on having met or failed to meet what objectives do you give Minaya a B-?
njstuckintx
2/7/2010-9:45am at 9:45 am (UTC -4)
Since it is a yes or no question, I’ll say yes. This is based on what was out there, the holes that were filled and such. I would have liked to seen more done, but Bay, Escobar and the bench moves were decent. If they can somehow finagle a trade for a SP, then this will be a firm yes. But for now, a semi-firm yes.
trs86
2/7/2010-9:49am at 9:49 am (UTC -4)
Yeah I agree, at times I go back to a C+ but then I remember that we did get Bay and it moves back to B.
njstuckintx
2/7/2010-10:18am at 10:18 am (UTC -4)
If you extrapolate this question out and sprinkle in Mack’s Mets article on rebuilding, I think that the combo of what was brought in and what wasn’t shipped out via trade as a positive offseason. I still believe that the farm should have be shipped out for Halladay, but oh well. The future does look better.
GravediggerHebner
2/7/2010-10:51am at 10:51 am (UTC -4)
I don’t think it’s as simple as “success” or “failure” but that’s the beauty of the question, I get to expound, something I love to do.
In early November I wanted 1 thing for this team – a viable # 2 SP, a “second ace” as we came to call it then. When for whatever valid or invalid reasons the team didn’t get the one I wanted most, Lackey, I shifted my gaze to possible trades and as a group here we dissected 29 teams’ rosters to find that second ace to be added through trade.
We came up with a very small group of options, none arrived. So I shifted my focus to the one desperate gamble remaining, Ben Sheets, and he went elsewhere.
So in that context, given the choices of “success” or “failure” I call failure.
But that’s not the only context. In the absence of this second ace, I believe the “second best” course of action was to “stay the course” (as opposed to “where’s the beef?”) and in that respect I consider the off season a success because the intended major league roster of 2009 has largely stayed together (essentially subtract Delgado, add Bay, subtract Putz coming off injury, add Escobar coming off injury) and now becomes the 2010 roster of second chance. Surely if this group has any of the “heart” or “grit” so many expect from a baseball team, it will show this year as they look to put the debacle of 2009 in the rearview.
Yes, I know essentially the same sentiment applied to 2007, 2008 & 2009. But each of those teams were partly augmented via big signing or trade, and partly dismantled via that big signing or trade and the loss of draft picks or minor leaguers.
This time, the draft pick lost for Bay was protected and so becomes a less vital second rounder. The minor leaguers all stayed, and the national media’s rankings show the system is better regarded now because of that. The intended 2009 team, with the Delgado/Bay & Putz/Escobar swaps, that so many picked to contend and some to win it all is now back for another try. Unless historic injuries take place a second consecutive year we will now get to see if that team lives up to it’s expectations. And we kept the minor leagues intact allowing them to grow and improve. Success.
ceetar
2/7/2010-10:59am at 10:59 am (UTC -4)
Can I start referring to it as the ’09-’10 season and pretend that first half was just practice?
They still could use another pitcher.
GravediggerHebner
2/7/2010-11:09am at 11:09 am (UTC -4)
Please do, it seems to work for the winter sports, we may as well give it a try.
I largely agree that they could use another pitcher but do they need that other pitcher more than they did at this time a year ago?
Aside from the “second ace” the only one I wanted was the one you mentioned above, Garland, and as you noted he likely wasn’t coming east so…
Marquis, Pineiro and their ilk IMHO were not worth the investment, however small, due to their inconsistency. I suppose if Cincinnati falls out of contention by July, if the Mets are still in such they can talk starting pitcher. Given the Reds plethora of young up and comers they could probably part with one of their vets in that scenario and as the Mets have kept their minors intact thus far they should have a chip worthy of such a deal if the opportunity arises.
Not to mention greater dreams of Brandon Webb.
ceetar
2/7/2010-11:22am at 11:22 am (UTC -4)
I wanted consistancy. I don’t know taht Marquis was it. Garland was the guy I would’ve chosen. I figure there has to be a trade out there right?
Last year I thought Livan or Freddy Garcia or Redding (who could’ve had a bounce back season) could provide some measure of average pitching between them. Garcia never quite got his fastball up to snuff (but his other stuff looked good) and after he didn’t accept the minor league assignment I believe he ended up elsewhere and did sorta okay.
The thing with ‘blocking’ the rotation for the 2011 free agent class..If Maine or to a lesser extent Pelfrey or Perez, completely bomb this year they’ll be replaceable. If they didn’t..well, onecan dream can’t they?
stickguy
2/7/2010-11:01am at 11:01 am (UTC -4)
I will say success if I have to pick one of the 2. And that is because they A) improved (Bay, etc.), and B) kept the higher end prospects intact in the farm, giving it another year to develop.
ANd B is something I think they absolutely had to do.
COuld they have beefed up a couple more areas? Sure, esepcially the bench and 2B (which would only have taken some ST $ investment). But overall, the team is pretty good, and they are getting 1 more year to take a run at it (probably deservedly so).
If the year is a bomb, then lots of changes get made, which again make B from above vitally import to have done.
Mr North Jersey
2/7/2010-11:19am at 11:19 am (UTC -4)
Minaya Day 12/7/2009 of Winter Meetings
When asked what are their priorities said they needed to look at pitching and offense and that for him pitching wins championships. That they were going to look at trades.
When asked is he was looking at other opyions besides Daniel Murphy at 1st base he said yes that right now they are looking at other options that Murphy finished strong but they wanted to look at what options were out there regarding power.
______________________________________________
Minaya Day 12/8/2009 of Winter Meetings
When asked about Molina he said he is someone they are considering that they got Blanco but don’t feel he can play everyday.
When asked again has pitching been the primary focus so far he said for him you have to win championships with pitching.
______________________________________________
Now Minaya wanted to address the pitching offense and defense.
He addressed the pitching with:
Kelvim Escobar
Ryoto Igarishi
He addressed the offense with:
Jason Bay
He addressed the defense with:
Jason Bay
Henry Blanco
Gary Matthews Jr
How do you grade this A+,C,F? I have no clue. Does a A+ mean he achieved all his goals? Does an F mean he failed at all his goals?
If you subtract Bay from all the moves he has done so far what grade would Minaya get?
Is he graded on the quality of player he got or potential?
Is he graded on a dollar value/performance ratio?
Is Bay a good signing at 4yrs/66m but a bad signing at 4yrs/74m?
So many variables to consider.
Was Minaya’s off season a failure or a success? Hard to say when you take into account so many variables but if you are forced to choose between just those 2 I have to say it was a failure.
Did he upgrade the pitching? Well he didn’t upgrade the rotation and while he added a Escobar and Igarishi, Escobar has to 1st pitch b4 we can say Minaya got the Escobar of old so who is to say what Escobar will do in 2010 and Igarishi has never pitched in MLB so one can’t say how good he will be in MLB.
Right now the only thing we know he upgraded pitching wise come Opening Day is unknown.
Did he upgrade the defense? The places where he could upgrade the defense was LF,1ST,2ND and Catcher. LF is better with Bay. I don’t know if you want to give credit at Catcher with Blanco since we don’t know if Blanco will even go north with the team come April. It was reported Castillo was trying to be moved I assume in hopes to upgrade at 2nd but he is still here. Finally with Murphy even Omar admitted to looking at what other options they had at 1st.
Right now the only thing we know he upgraded defensively come Opening Day is Bay.
Did he upgrade the offense? Again the only spots that he could really improve the offense was in LF,1ST,2ND, and catcher. He got Bay
Right now the only thing we know he upgraded offensively come Opening Day is Bay.
Now rip away.
GravediggerHebner
2/7/2010-1:08pm at 1:08 pm (UTC -4)
I don’t feel compelled to rip away but I do feel compelled to reiterate and expand on what I said in Rusty’s thread which is the best thing the Mets could’ve done this off season, better than signing a Lackey or a Bay or both, was to have issued polite “no comments” when asked about their “plan.”
The very idea of having a rigid, structured plan as they outlined it was flawed. As Stickguy has said many times and I agree, the only real plan should ever be “to improve the club,” which by it’s vague nature is very fluid and tough to grade because it’s so subjective. When the FO and ownership foolishly get any more specific than that with the media or in any public way all they do is put themselves in a corner and make describing what they have or haven’t done as failure more easy for those interested in doing so.
If they had responded “no comment” or “improve the club” we would then be left to simply ask did they do so or not. I would say the Delgado/Bay & Putz/Escobar swaps didn’t in themselves improve the club but by virtue of the side effects of getting Murphy out of LF and into 1B, and by not pillaging the farm system the team has been improved in a very small way but improved nonetheless.
Mr North Jersey
2/7/2010-1:24pm at 1:24 pm (UTC -4)
Fair points indeed, as usual there is no one way to look at it. One can look at it in many ways and while different all have valid points.
Murphy was out of LF with or without Bay in my opinion so I don’t feel Murphy to 1st is a side effect of signing Bay.
I will agree and say again that looking back at this off season the best trade Minaya may have made was no trade at all. We will have to wait and see if it was the right choice.
GravediggerHebner
2/7/2010-1:36pm at 1:36 pm (UTC -4)
Absolutely. I am not sitting here saying you are wrong and I am right. You may very well be right. All your points above are certainly well founded, nothing you laid out is a stretch IMO.
In my opinion at this point you summed it up best with your last sentence about “wait and see.” No matter what any of us think, or how any of us categorize the last 3 months, now we are all at the mercy of allowing it to unfold. That process can’t start soon enough for me.
We are all rather firmly on record with our stances on it all and if nothing else it will be fun (or perhaps horrifying) to look back at these posts and comments and see if any of us were even close. Surely “Mr. Reach Back In Time And Quote Us All” DirtySanchez will be copying and pasting away to remind us.
Mr North Jersey
2/7/2010-2:43pm at 2:43 pm (UTC -4)
lol
stickguy
2/7/2010-12:18pm at 12:18 pm (UTC -4)
It is actually a pretty simple answer.
You can’t give a grade until after the season is over.
If, as I expect, the rotation is a relative strength, and the team makes the playoffs, then it was a success.
Mr North Jersey
2/7/2010-12:32pm at 12:32 pm (UTC -4)
I might be wrong but the idea is to look at it where he is now like one grades a team based on the half way point of the season. I don’t think anyone is trying to suggest that one’s opinion of how Minaya has done so far is a reflection of what the team will be come the end of the season.
If Bay for example is a bust and hits .260 with 15 homers and 65 rbi’s I don’t think or rather I’d hope many will not say Minaya was wrong in signing Bay.
As far as grading goes the you can’t give one approach is but one opinion.
CaseStreet
2/7/2010-1:06pm at 1:06 pm (UTC -4)
Counting on M.O.P. + Nie(s/v)e = major fail
Last year we had Santana plus a healthy Maine, Ollie and Pelfrey plus Redding, Livan and Garcia. That was exciting because of the depth and upside.
This year we have Santana, Maine and Ollie all coming back from some surgery, and hoping Pelfrey will bounce back. Then you throw in our depth of Nieve, Niese and Figgy and it doesn’t look as good as Redding, Livan and Garcia.
Redding was a 10 win guy on a scrubby team, Livan was the innings eater 5th starter we wanted in 08, and Garcia was that upside guy that if healthy could be lights out. Niese and Nieve are both coming off of pretty serious injuries, neither pitched many innings last year, and neither has had major league success. Maybe the team is actually counting on Figgy.
Anyway you look at it, the rotation took a major step back. After Lackey, I at least wanted a Pineiro or Garland. Hell, Marquis would’ve looked good right about now. You can pretty much guarantee someone will get injured, that’s baseball. That’ll mean we’re expecting major innings from both Nie(v/s)e. I don’t want to even think what’ll happen if that guy is Santana.
I’ll hope for our top 4 to get 15+ wins and an average of 30 starts, but it’ll take some major innings from our bullpen and our lineup to score tons of runs.
Last year the Mets only had an above .500 win-loss average when scoring 5 runs or more and when allowing 4 runs or less. Let’s hope at the end of the year the team has scored more than 800 runs and allowed less than 650.
GravediggerHebner
2/7/2010-1:38pm at 1:38 pm (UTC -4)
Counting on M.O.P. may or may not be a massive fail, but coining the acronym M.O.P. has to be one of the highlights of the off season. So we’ve got that anyway.
rustyjr
2/7/2010-1:43pm at 1:43 pm (UTC -4)
btw guy the new takahasi turned down both the mets & orioles offers for minor league contracts
rustyjr
2/7/2010-1:51pm at 1:51 pm (UTC -4)
I posted this in my comments section also so bare with me here
although i cant stand Joel Sherman i read this on his blog
When I asked Minaya exactly this, he initially hesitated and said, “I could see how someone could see it that way.†But then he quickly shifted into good-soldier mode and said, “We checked in on some of those guys, but we just did not get them.â€
But why? How could the Mets have encountered bargains for players they wanted and not ended up with a single one; outbid instead by, among others, the Brewers and Padres? San Diego officials actually were stunned the Mets did not jump on Garland at these prices.
Now we could argue if it is smart to crave players such as Molina with his low on-base percentage or Garland with his hardly overwhelming stuff. But that is a different discussion. This is about a GM wanting players, the prices for those players dropping to reasonable rates, and the Mets signing none of those players.
Jeff Wilpon declined a request to discuss the current state of the team, but he has insisted in the past that the Madoff debacle is not impacting the day-to-day operations and that Minaya
is making the baseball decisions. But officials from other teams and agents paint a different picture.
One AL official said the Mets do have money worries tied to Madoff. It is not that they lost in the Ponzi scheme, but that the government is seeking to recover funds from those who took out profits over the years as the Wilpons likely did.
“Is that $20 million, $100 million, $200 million?†the AL official asked. “If it is in the hundreds of millions and they actually have to pay that back, what does that mean for them even owning the team long-term?â€
Nevertheless, Mets officials insist Madoff is never a factor in internal discussions, that the Wilpon family was well diversified and that the family will own the team for a long time. They point to the signing of Jason Bay (four years, $66 million) as a symbol of business as normal, with the team still expecting one of the majors’ top payrolls.
But even under that scenario, one veteran agent asked, “How can you have that payroll and still not have a starting catcher or first baseman, a second baseman you hate and no legitimate starters after Johan?â€
Which leads back to the Mets essentially staying in neutral after the Bay signing. They refused to adjust offers upward to land Molina or Pineiro.
Is it because the Mets wanted to pretend to their fans that they were going after players while knowing they were offering too little to get them?
Is it that ownership emphasized not overpaying even slightly after the Bay signing rather than actually getting deals done?
Is it that the Mets are too comfortable finishing second in negotiations, taking more gratification from making an offer that, say, Bud Selig will appreciate for its conservative nature rather than actually winning for the player?
Or has the Mets’ disarray on matters such as health care for players become such a turnoff that they no longer are a destination place, so that a Pineiro may simply be getting the Mets to bid so he could shop it elsewhere; kind of an anywhere-but-Flushing philosophy?
Whatever the correct answers, the problems at Citi Field are bigger than Omar Minaya’s job title
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/mets/mets_failure_to_sign_bargain_MPzk1Yr9I4OdLmW7j6FcOL#ixzz0esSq54rn
mind you i am happy the mets didn’t get either molina or pinero but the fact that it seems like they would stick their toe in the water and then immediately pull it out when the water was luke warm I find disturbing – but they †have a plan †and i hope that their plan works for all of our sakes
stickguy
2/7/2010-3:55pm at 3:55 pm (UTC -4)
well, they may not have a 1B or catcher that are up to Sherman’s standards, but they have a high payroll because they are paying for one of the top CF, SS, 3B and Closer in baseball. And of course they have a 2B they don’t like because he has a hefty contract!
Every team, even the yankees, has lower end or cheaper players at some positions. You relaly can’t have all stars at every position.
And if the core of the rotation was a positive going into last year, if anything, it should be better this year, since Maine really wasn’t fully healthy until September, and OLlie had his jnee fixed (and looks good after his boot camp adventure). And Plef? At least he is healthy, and has another year of experience to build off of.
Hey, you can find positiviality anywehre if you look at things from the rigth angle!
Oh, I do agree that they missed the boat not getting a better 5th starter.
steveo
2/7/2010-2:13pm at 2:13 pm (UTC -4)
Here’s the point, while signing another pitcher would have been a upgrade, the downside is this. We don’t know what a piniero or marquis would have done for the team if they were to have a bad year, it would be another bad castillio type contract that handcuffs a team for at least 2 years.I am no Omar fan but I think this is where he actually did good, knowing that Maine,Pelfrey or Perez could perform to Piniero,Marquis or even Garlands level if they just have a decent year, and not to pay big money and years for that level of pitching, in my opinion is a sound financial decision. Those guys mentioned are not going to take this team over the edge,The other part of my defence to Omar is that finally if we need a player at the deadline, we will have money and prospects to deal. Look this year we will have to sit back and not expect too much and maybe we will be pleasantly surprised by what happens, and if the team fails we won’t be so let down.I think that if we signed one of the above mentioned we would have had our hopes raised too high once again and if they failed, the bubble would once again be popped.So in the end barring my choice for trading to make the team better, I would say that Omar showing restraint from more bad contracts and keeping the farm to the point that we might actually have a farm this off season was a sucess.
stickguy
2/7/2010-3:56pm at 3:56 pm (UTC -4)
THe long-term contract problem was why I was oping they could get someone respectable on a 1 year deal. If they suck, just waive goodbye at year end.