Should the Mets..Get Wiggy Wit It?
A recent report out in Baltimore is that the Orioles could possibly look to move ex-Met Ty Wigginton. I am intrigued by this and I’ll tell you why.  When Wiggy was here he was a crowd favorite and for good reason. He was young at the time, energetic, aggressive, and hit for power. He seemed like a winner, and if not a go getter. A great 6th man on the NBA court. We didn’t think he would ever be an All-Star, but we respected his game because the guy had some talent.    In 2004 we moved him in what Met fans considered at the time an acceptable move as we netted a big young right hander who showed some promise by the name of Kris Benson. We know how that panned out.
Ty getting that jersey dirty as always
Wiggy went on to have a solid career. In fact, I was shocked when I looked at his numbers to see how solid they really were. Three seasons of 20+ homers, and consistent .270-.280 for really all 8 seasons. Not bad for a 6th man. Yet, Ty’s been shipped around the league in the last few years, and that’s mainly because of his defense. While you can respect his versatility being able to play all around the infield, without a true position Wiggy never could hold on to a steady job.
So why bring him back then? Listen, I am not saying the guy will be our savior, but a guy like that can win us a few ballgames for sure. Maybe that hard nosed attitude and that energy spreads in this clubhouse. With guys like him and Francoeur, Wright, Reyes…these are high energy guys that need to start having some fun again on the field. Maybe we platoon him at 2b with Castillo. We know Castillo won’t play 162 games this year this is a given.Â
In some ways his return to the Mets would resemble the way Sean Avery return6d to the Garden for the New York Rangers. Avery wasn’t the most talented of the bunch but definitely had some unique assets: his energy, his aggressiveness…similar to Wiggy. Avery became a fan favorite in New York has his personality suited the city well, yet the Rangers moved him a few years back. He is back with the organization this year, and the crowd and team feed off his energy. Â
Avery...being Avery
So, is Wigginton worth the $3 mill we’ll be taking on next year? Might be worth bringing him back just to hear a few more cheers in Citifield.Â
Who would we trade? Can Wiggy make any difference?
15 comments
CaseStreet
2/9/2010-9:18am at 9:18 am (UTC -4)
Whose spot would he take on the bench?
njstuckintx
2/9/2010-9:19am at 9:19 am (UTC -4)
I enjoy me some Wiggy, but I am not sure I see how he fits into the plans. I’d rather they saved the salary dumps for a pitcher (arroyo, harang). I would not get all upset if he was brought in for Evans and/or something comparable.
stickguy
2/9/2010-9:23am at 9:23 am (UTC -4)
He really would have had to fill Tatis’ spot (for 2+ million + a prospect traded to get him) more. And based on recent numbers and positions played (or at least stood at), is there really that much difference?
njstuckintx
2/9/2010-9:30am at 9:30 am (UTC -4)
Agreed, which is why I don’t quite see how he fits into the plans. I do like that people here are turning over every rock for possibilities. Can someone make sure that these articles are printed out and left in various bagel spots across the tri-state region.
And send me down an everything with scallion cream cheese while you’re at it.
GravediggerHebner
2/9/2010-10:18am at 10:18 am (UTC -4)
I agree with the sentiment above both in the post and the resulting comments. Wiggy is a useful piece on a roster, a player whose skills make him a helpful reserve on pretty much any team. But I don’t see how/where he fits on this Met roster unless we go back in time and don’t re-sign Tatis. And as Stick noted, given the cost of Wiggy’s salary and the player(s) traded to get him, Tatis fits better right now. The Mets still have the commodities on hand to aquire Wiggy later should that prove necessary.
mrose
2/9/2010-11:42am at 11:42 am (UTC -4)
I think using Avery is a terrible comparison. With Avery, the Rangers are literally a .500 team. Without his contract and penalties, they could be better.
I’m not saying I dislike the wiggy idea, but Avery is not Wiggy
halfmanhalfamazin
2/9/2010-11:53am at 11:53 am (UTC -4)
Completely disagree he doesnt get enough ice time to affect the team as negatively as you say. hes an energizer just like Wiggy was when he was here. not saying these guys are going to win us a championship, but they could be pieces to the puzzle…maybe the difference between winning and losing a few games.
GravediggerHebner
2/9/2010-11:56am at 11:56 am (UTC -4)
I’m with you HMHA in that the way you’re using the comparison seems valid to me, them both being energizing role players.
Where I shudder at the comparison is their personal lives. But that has little to nothing to do with their on field/ice performance helping their respective teams. Whether Avery respects women or not is not your point of comparison.
wannybackstra
2/9/2010-12:13pm at 12:13 pm (UTC -4)
I’m not sure a baseball player’s energy can make as much of a difference as a hockey player’s can.
GravediggerHebner
2/9/2010-12:19pm at 12:19 pm (UTC -4)
I can see that. For as little time as a hockey player is actually on the ice doing something, a baseball player is on the field doing something even less when considering all the down time spent on field.
Maybe if we factor in off-field/ice time it becomes more equitable?
mrose
2/9/2010-12:36pm at 12:36 pm (UTC -4)
Its not just personal lives but Wiggy has energy on the field (which may or may not help), but Avery may have energy, but he also takes cheapshots at other players and as much as thats part of hockey… he takes it to an extreme.
A better comparison would be a player who has been a leader on many stanley cup teams in hockey, Avery is not a leader, hes a goon and his personal life does nothing to help it either.
I’m having trouble thinking of that journeyman but heck even a Claud Lemiuex is a better comparison. Others respected him, hes not the best player in the league, but hes got some cups and played on some winnings teams that struggled without him.
GravediggerHebner
2/9/2010-12:47pm at 12:47 pm (UTC -4)
That’s fair. I should probably abstain from further digging myself into a hole since I don’t follow hockey. I was agreeing with the comparison based on a very cursory knowledge of the sport and a few headlines, and I’m out of my league.
I certainly don’t mean to offend or disappoint anyone but just to explain my ignorance, hockey is like 7th or 8th on my list of sports that I pay attention to, and then only if the Rangers make the playoffs. I have a greater knowledge of and interest in stock car racing, tennis and competitive bicycling, and soccer is slowly moving up the chart.
So my bad for trying to pretend I knew what I was talking about, you caught me so I’ll leave it to those that do.
Mr North Jersey
2/9/2010-11:59am at 11:59 am (UTC -4)
HMHA, sounds like an acronym for some Home Mortgage financing company.
GravediggerHebner
2/9/2010-12:06pm at 12:06 pm (UTC -4)
HMHA is what “The Man” brings into poor neighborhoods to keep the people docile.
CaseStreet
2/9/2010-1:42pm at 1:42 pm (UTC -4)
So then what are flat screens for?