According to Brian Costa with the Star-Ledger:
“Minaya told me first base will be “an open competition” between Daniel Murphy and Mike Jacobs. “Murphy is still the pre-camp favorite to win the job, but if he struggles over the next seven weeks and Jacobs impresses, the Mets could alter their thinking.” “He’ll compete for the job,” Minaya said of Jacobs. “I think it’s fair to say that Murphy has proven himself worthy of being considered, but he’s going to have to continue. It’s an open competition.”
So as others have ask, including our: The Sunday Question , is this open competition at 1B a good thing? Do Omar and the Mets not trust Murphy, are they playing it safe, or is Jacobs here just to push Murphy? For someone, or for that matter a team, whose confidence has been pushed to the point of breaking is it a good idea to have them looking over their shoulder? Time will tell. For now, lets hope for a great competition.
92 comments
njstuckintx
2/15/2010-9:54am at 9:54 am (UTC -4)
Murphy can’t get any love.
I’ve never been a favorite of the “open competition” concept. Obviously you go with the hot hand, but if you don’t trust Murphy, just say it.
And, if you don’t trust Murphy, how in name of things good and pleasing is LaRoche playing for another team on the cheap? Please don’t tell me that you don’t trust Murphy, but feel covered if/when he fails by bringing in Jacobs. I know my intelligence doesn’t hit the Einstein level, but I am not mental midget (no offense to our midget reader population).
stickguy
2/15/2010-10:01am at 10:01 am (UTC -4)
competition is fine for guys that are not established stars (heck, for them too). Theoretically, it should push guys to work harder, and get to the next level. Makes you worry if a guy can’t handle the pressure of having someone else in camp fighting for the same job.
besides, I am not that worried about 1 guys psyche. I want to see the best combination of talent on the field, leading to the most wins.
The problem I have with this scenerio though (and IMO it goes back to talent evaluation flaws in the FO) is who is in competition. While Murphy might still be the front runner/incumbant, Jacobs is just not a good player, especially for a team with a no range 2B.
Bring me to my second point, why is there no competition in camp (*cough, Lopez, cough*) for 2B?
Anyway, if the guy trying to take a weak incumbant’s job is a hot prospect/young stud type, that is good. When it is a lousy player (with basically 1 psuedo skill), not good.
I worry too about Jacobs looking good in ST hitting against 2nd tier (MiL) pitchers, and guys just throwing meaty FBs while getting in shape. Then after winning the job, striking out 5 times opening day against a real pitcher!
Kingman 26
2/15/2010-10:12am at 10:12 am (UTC -4)
I think Murph is full of confidence.
Jacobs stinks. He cannot hit for average, his OBP is among the very worst in all of baseball, he is a bad fielder, and he runs like he is dragging multiple anchors. He has topped 20 HR ONCE, so this idea of him being some Balboni/Kingman is also a joke. He hits a mistake for a HR. Any good pitcher (except Pedro) toys with him.
This is a bogus competition, and I am not sure why Omar is playing moronic games with Murphy. I am disappointed in Omar for saying this.
The more Costa the better. The best, most honest, and most reliable of the Met beat writers.
GravediggerHebner
2/15/2010-10:30am at 10:30 am (UTC -4)
Jacobs is by most measures not a good defensive player. So the Mets alleged emphasis on ‘pitching speed & defense’ is belied by the fact that they’re giving him a realistic shot to win the job. Of course Murphy is an unproven commodity overall, defense included.
But offensively, Jacobs has what I think are fair to describe as 4 full seasons in the major leagues, only 1 of which was ‘below average.’ Except for 2009 when he was in the AL used primarily as a DH, his average season is 30 2B, 23 HR, 75 RBI, .258/.314/.483 so one can at least theorize that he just didn’t take well to the AL and to being DH and he might be expected to return to something like the average season noted above.
Right or wrong the Mets might be thinking they want ‘slugging’ from 1B and they might not be sure Murphy will give it to them. 39 doubles or no 39 doubles for Murphy, Jacobs has outslugged Murphy over their careers thus far and Jacobs career OBP is exactly the same as Murphy’s was in his only full season of 2009.
So I think if both guys play decently in ST the Mets decision on 1B will be made based on how much they think Murphy has improved versus how much they think Jacobs has regressed, and whether they want SLG which Jacobs seems more likely to provide or OBP which if Murphy does improve he seems more likely to provide.
Given that Murphy still has an option left and given that the team might think after not breaking 100 HR as a team last year (yes guys were injured but still they were lame power-wise) I’m starting to come around to the idea that unless Murphy far outperforms Jacobs in ST that Murphy is going to be optioned out and Jacobs is going to start at 1B for the 2010 Mets.
I’m not endorsing this plan, simply noting reasons why I could see it unfold a certain way.
njstuckintx
2/15/2010-10:41am at 10:41 am (UTC -4)
Your reasoning makes sense. Back to my point from the other day about specific production from 1 position vs. another. I don’t think you specifically need a lumbering HR jacker at 1B. If you get good D, decent average with alot of 2 baggers, I’ll be very content with that. And if that comes in a cheap package, all the better.
If Jacobs out-performs Murph, so be it. It just seems to fit the Mets supposed plan for speed, D and such to go with Murph.
Kingman 26
2/15/2010-10:50am at 10:50 am (UTC -4)
“If you get good D, decent average with alot of 2 baggers, I’ll be very content with that. And if that comes in a cheap package, all the better.”
I agree….but Jacobs is a terrible fielder, with a terrible BA, and an almost off the charts horrible OBP. And Murph beat Jacobs’ career high in 2B last year.
Again, many of Jacobs’ stats have been on steady decline, as he is a mistake hitter.
And 31 errors in 394 games at 1B??
“It just seems to fit the Mets supposed plan for speed, D and such to go with Murph.”
Now I agree with this 100% and more!!
Kingman 26
2/15/2010-10:44am at 10:44 am (UTC -4)
I have to respectfully disagree about Jacobs. Jacobs’ OBP has decreased every year of his career, and that HR average is very misleading, as he has topped 20 HR once. His 2B production has dropped dramatically too. Murph’s career MLB OBP is significantly higher than Jacobs’ over the last 3 years too. And, regardless of the difference, Murph strikes out about 40% less than Jacobs, so at least some of those outs move runners over and accomplish something. Murph had more SF last year than Jacobs has ever had, and I believe Jacobs has never once laid down a sac bunt. His skills are very, very, very limited and amass less results every year.
Murph might indeed get better; maybe even a lot better. Jacobs almost certainly will not.
I still think Omar must be fielding trade offers for Murph, and that Jacobs then would play until Ike Pujols is ready.
I cannot believe I am saying this, but Jacobs really is a poor man’s Dave Kingman. And that is not much.
GravediggerHebner
2/15/2010-11:03am at 11:03 am (UTC -4)
You won’t get much if any argument from me on any of the points you make here. I was simply putting forth one way of the many possible ways the Mets might be approaching this. I think the lingering minor league option that Murphy has, as they say in court, “can be used against him” and is the only reason I even consider the scenario I put forth at all.
My hope is that Murphy shows enough all around to simply win the job and Jacobs can go back into the pleasant memory file for his rookie power explosion that brought us Delgado. I’m simply trying to look at it a number of ways so I don’t go into shock if Murphy doesn’t win the job.
trs86
2/15/2010-11:09am at 11:09 am (UTC -4)
It’s also possible that Jacobs heads to AAA until say May and they reassess.
GravediggerHebner
2/15/2010-11:16am at 11:16 am (UTC -4)
Yes, hence “one way of the many possible ways.”
I hope neither my nor your scenario plays out though. Otherwise it would seem to imply Ike Davis starts the season in AA and I see no ‘good’ reason for that. There’s already a AAA logjam at 1B, Jacobs or Murphy being in Buffalo only add to that in what I see as a negative way (unless we move into yet another scenario in which Murphy starts his ‘super utility’ training).
trs86
2/15/2010-11:19am at 11:19 am (UTC -4)
That would be my thought that perhaps Murphy goes back to work on 2B. I guess there is also the possibility that some of that fluff goes away. Do we really need Val and Hessman?
Kingman 26
2/15/2010-11:24am at 11:24 am (UTC -4)
Why would we send Jacobs to AAA? He plays 1B and C.
Do we want him, in any way shape or form, taking time from Davis or Thole?
Or, even more horrifying, do we want him influencing them?
Yikes.
trs86
2/15/2010-11:26am at 11:26 am (UTC -4)
Kingman, if those AAA players can be influenced into a low OBP then I am sure the pitchers would have a field day with them anyway.
He would not be taking any playing time away from either. More likely he would take away playing time from Val and Hessman.
GravediggerHebner
2/15/2010-11:35am at 11:35 am (UTC -4)
I don’t like the idea either Kong but Jacobs did sign minor league contract and I believe it was future Met minor league coordinator Adam Rubin who recently noted that the Mets “don’t usually include out clauses in those” so Jacobs seemingly came in eyes wide open to the possibility of playing in AAA and I think if the team assigns him there he has to go or retire.
There has been no mention (thus far) of one of those “if he isn’t on the Major League roster by May 15th” things that sometimes guys have. I also think (need to check to be sure) that Jacobs still has an option left so the Mets could bring him up and down all year if they choose but as of right now that doesn’t matter because he’s not even on the 40 man roster let alone the 25 man.
Again, not putting forth my desires, just possibilities.
trs86
2/15/2010-11:39am at 11:39 am (UTC -4)
Agreed. There could also be just the ole gentleman’s agreement that if not on the team by… then I get greener pastures.
Kingman 26
2/15/2010-12:02pm at 12:02 pm (UTC -4)
Gotcha…and love the Rubin line!
trs86
2/15/2010-10:52am at 10:52 am (UTC -4)
Jacobs OBP has declined but his OPS+ had one off year.
He has been at 179, 106, 100, 108, 83.
I think we would all take a 100+ OPS+ from whoever our 1B is.
trs86
2/15/2010-10:55am at 10:55 am (UTC -4)
Also interesting is that his UZR really tanked only in 2008. The other years he was only slightly below average. (I still hate using UZR for 1B).
I have a hard time thinking a guy who has played 100 games at 1B is better than a guy who has played 400.
Kingman 26
2/15/2010-11:26am at 11:26 am (UTC -4)
31 errors in 394 games at 1B??
Wow.
trs86
2/15/2010-11:29am at 11:29 am (UTC -4)
Well lets see that’s 12.7 per 162 games. Last year Pujols (no I am not honestly comparing Pujols defense or overall game to Jacobs) had 13 in 159 games. The error total is not that surprising.
Kingman 26
2/15/2010-11:35am at 11:35 am (UTC -4)
And Pujols had 20 in 441 games the previous three years.
And I would go out on a VERY long limb and say that Pujols brings a TAD more to the table than Jacobs.
This is really, really thin and very silly ice.
trs86
2/15/2010-11:38am at 11:38 am (UTC -4)
I even said that Pujols brings more to the table. Just having a discussion on errors.
As I stated below, Murphy’s error rate was even more.
trs86
2/15/2010-11:37am at 11:37 am (UTC -4)
By the way, just for comparison, Murphy’s rate is 16.7 per 162 games.
trs86
2/15/2010-10:58am at 10:58 am (UTC -4)
Again, don’t think I am campaigning for Jacobs. I am saying it is not a clear cut decision. While Murphy might get better, Jacobs could also return to his 105+ OPS+ after one off season. Murphy’s season last year was not as good as Jacobs career averages for OPS+ by far. So it will be the Mets who determine if Murphy is more likely to improve or Jacobs is more likely to return.
The debate with Jacobs seems to get lost in his OBP, which I agree is a very important stat. However, a guy with an OPS+ of over 100 still has something to offer.
stickguy
2/15/2010-11:13am at 11:13 am (UTC -4)
when in doubt, follow the money.
Murphy will be a couple million cheaper than Jacobs.
So, if it is a coin flip, guess which one wins?
trs86
2/15/2010-11:14am at 11:14 am (UTC -4)
Hmmm, not sure about that yet. You also get to keep a MLB ready player at the minors for low salary. Keep in mind that Jacobs salary also includes a minor league option.
I think this one really may be an open competition.
oleosmirf
2/15/2010-11:18am at 11:18 am (UTC -4)
is it possible that Jacobs starts off in AAA or on the bench and Murphy plays everyday…then either 3 things can happen:
1) The Mets are sellers and they trade Murphy and lets say Francouer (knowing that Davis and F-Mart will be starting in 2011) and Jacobs is our stop gap 1B.
2) The Mets are in position to make the playoffs and package Murphy in a deal to bring in a legit #2 SP
3) Murphy just falls off the map and is relegated to bench or AAA.
njstuckintx
2/15/2010-11:23am at 11:23 am (UTC -4)
I have been leaning or thinking #2 is a greater possibility every day. I love me some Murph, but I have this odd feeling that him not being a prototypical position player (for any position, really) that he won’t translate into the Mets plans. Hopefully they will play this right and maximize Murph’s stock and sell at the right time.
trs86
2/15/2010-11:24am at 11:24 am (UTC -4)
But as I have stated on this topic a few times, because of why the Mets needed a 1B would trade him is exactly why he would not have a high trade value. He would have a higher trade value if he could prove that he could handle multiple positions than he would as just a 1B.
stickguy
2/15/2010-11:25am at 11:25 am (UTC -4)
all quite possible.
There is also option #4: Murphy plays everyday, and has a much better year at bat and in the field, and cements the job at least for this year, and Jacobs just goes away.
But, that’s why they actually play the games, and not just present the trophy to the team that SI says is going to win it all!
trs86
2/15/2010-11:27am at 11:27 am (UTC -4)
4 is a very realistic option as well.
trs86
2/15/2010-11:21am at 11:21 am (UTC -4)
Honestly I like Murphy. But chances are he is not our future 1B nor is Jacobs. Would it be just as wise, if we think they would produce similar results, to have Jacobs as 1B and Murphy learning to be a utility man so he would actually have a role for the Mets in the future?
oleosmirf
2/15/2010-11:24am at 11:24 am (UTC -4)
i agree with that. Would love to see him try 2B!
trs86
2/15/2010-11:25am at 11:25 am (UTC -4)
I seriously wonder how much lower his UZR would be than Castillo. Again I am not the one to judge a players fielding by just UZR but I would think that Murphy’s would be similar. I have nothing to back that up.
stickguy
2/15/2010-11:58am at 11:58 am (UTC -4)
well, just speculating from how wide a range he has at 1B, maybe he could cover more ground than Slappy (although I am sure it won’t be pretty, but as long as it is effective, what the hell)
oleosmirf
2/15/2010-1:19pm at 1:19 pm (UTC -4)
i would think so too but that .280 15 HR 70 RBI out of the 2 hole would be nice…
njstuckintx
2/15/2010-11:25am at 11:25 am (UTC -4)
Having him as a super utility guy is nice, but by the time he learns all to positions he is supposed to, he’ll be 38. He’ll be a professional student!
Kingman 26
2/15/2010-11:28am at 11:28 am (UTC -4)
I am not sure I get how we can look at a guy who had Murph’s success in the minors, who has barely over 1 yr above AA ball under his belt, who did hit 38 doubles and adjusted well to 1B, and say he should go to the minors or be a utility guy!
Shouldn’t we give him at least one full year before determining this?
Strange guys, really strange.
trs86
2/15/2010-11:32am at 11:32 am (UTC -4)
I don’t think he has the stick to stay at 1B. We shall see. I hope I am wrong. Yes a team can live with .280 .340, .750 at 1B but most will chose not to. Again, I hope I am wrong. As to your point about him not having much minor league experience, while true that does not make our position any better.
Kingman 26
2/15/2010-11:40am at 11:40 am (UTC -4)
If a team can live with .280 .340, .750 at 1B, then Jacobs is, thankfully, out of the running.
Whew.
trs86
2/15/2010-11:42am at 11:42 am (UTC -4)
Perhaps, but a team could also live with
.247 .299 .514 .812 which are Jacobs #’s from 2008.
Again, neither at this point are great ball players. The Mets will have to make a decision if they think Murphy can improve or Jacobs can return to 2008 #’s.
trs86
2/15/2010-11:43am at 11:43 am (UTC -4)
Thing is right now Kingman Murphy has not shown he can even do that line above.
.266 .313 .427 .741
stickguy
2/15/2010-12:06pm at 12:06 pm (UTC -4)
My prediction (very scientific, although I didn’t use a calculator) is that he will increase all of his slash numbers by just around 10%.
Putting his OPS at ~.810-.820.
trs86
2/15/2010-12:26pm at 12:26 pm (UTC -4)
I don’t see anything near an OPS over .800.
Kingman 26
2/15/2010-11:32am at 11:32 am (UTC -4)
Murph should play 150+ games this year, unless he is hitting .200 in mid-May, and if Ike Davis is ready for next year, then Murph gives a serious full-on effort to learn 2B next winter and becomes our 2B next year.
Unless he is traded soon, which I still say is the ONLY reason to have Jacobs on this team.
Jacobs is useless as a fielder and a runner, and is an absolutely horrible PH off the bench candidate.
trs86
2/15/2010-11:34am at 11:34 am (UTC -4)
See I think this is a case of you getting something set in your mind and refusing to budge. I see both sides on this one. Perhaps Murphy’s numbers from last year are what he is. Perhaps Jacobs last year numbers were a down year. If Murphy stays the same and Jacobs returns to 2008 he would have a better OPS.
trs86
2/15/2010-11:41am at 11:41 am (UTC -4)
Look, I am not trying to convince you that Jacobs is the better option or that he is even a good ball player. Only thing I am saying is this competition is not clear cut at all. Like it or not at this point we have to assume the Mets don’t think it is either.
Kingman 26
2/15/2010-11:45am at 11:45 am (UTC -4)
TRS, I am indeed stubborn, but what are you talking about with this line:
“Perhaps Jacobs last year numbers were a down year.”
Other than doubles and a lower BA, ALL of his numbers were right where they are every year, with the OBP continuing its annual decline.
We are not talking about all numbers declining, just 2B, and hence SLG/OBP following the decrease in 2B. Every other stat is consistent and bad.
trs86
2/15/2010-11:52am at 11:52 am (UTC -4)
Kingman, I am sorry but when I am comparing one player’s 95 OPS+ to another’s 108 OPS+ I can’t say that all of his numbers are bad or declining.
Jacobs’ best OPS+ year was in 2008 at 108. How does that speak to declining numbers. He is obviously an all or nothing guy that had gotten enough all during his career to have some value as a hitter until last year.
trs86
2/15/2010-11:54am at 11:54 am (UTC -4)
Seriously, how is this line:
.228 .297 .401 .698
not a decline from this line:
.247 .299 .514 .812
Or perhaps his career line of:
254 .313 .476 .789
To me if I was honestly looking at stats I would say that the first line could very well be a down year. Considering his OPS was 90 points lower than his career average and 114 points lower than the year before.
Kingman 26
2/15/2010-12:00pm at 12:00 pm (UTC -4)
Still, all it reflects is a decrease in doubles. Nothing else, in any phase of his game.
Let’s agree to disagree.
trs86
2/15/2010-12:04pm at 12:04 pm (UTC -4)
Agreed, but final thought. Last year not only did he not hit the 2B’s he just did not hit. Thus why his BA and OPS were much worse.
jaydh
2/15/2010-12:07pm at 12:07 pm (UTC -4)
not only is it a decrease in doubles, the avg decreased, and the strikeouts severely increased.
Kingman 26
2/15/2010-12:12pm at 12:12 pm (UTC -4)
Totally agree.
But we were just talking about his decrease in OPS, which is simply a reflection of his decrease in doubles over the previous three years.
The one season above 20 HR can be seen as an aberration.
And as I mentioned above, yes sir, his OBP has rather impressively decreased every year of his career.
trs86
2/15/2010-12:21pm at 12:21 pm (UTC -4)
Can’t call a decrease of .299 to .297 a substantial decrease.
trs86
2/15/2010-12:22pm at 12:22 pm (UTC -4)
I would think his one year of over 20 HR could be compared with his one year of under 100 OPS+.
Mr North Jersey
2/15/2010-12:33pm at 12:33 pm (UTC -4)
I agree with TRS on this point. That we don’t know if Murphy can continue to grow beyond what he has given us already.
That is why many fans hoped that the Mets were going to try and improve at 1st base this off season.
Murphy has to have a great Spring while also hoping the competition doesn’t or he may just lose his position at 1st.
Can Murphy continue to get better at 1st?
Can Murphy show he can hit for average?
Can Murphy show he has good power to the gaps?
Murphy is a kid that had a good 2008 and the Mets in need of LF hoped he could fill in at LF in 2009 but failed miserably and because of Delgado’s injury at 1st got a shot at 1st and made the best of a terrible situation. If not for that who is to say if he was sent down last year.
Now in 2010 the Mets with no better options at 1st hope Murphy can hold the line until a better option becomes available either by trade free agent or within their system.
trs86
2/15/2010-12:39pm at 12:39 pm (UTC -4)
My thing with Murphy was how shocked I was with his low OBP. I know Jacobs is worse but that’s a different discussion. We know Jacobs is more of a power guy than Murphy. To me Murphy’s value was going to be having that high OBP. I loved his approach at the plate in 2008. Last year in my opinion his approach was all screwed up. Who knows if that was pitchers adjusting or just Murphy revealing his true self? An SLG in the low 400′s won’t last with an OBP in the low 300′s.
stickguy
2/15/2010-12:46pm at 12:46 pm (UTC -4)
I think it was the approach issue.
And I really think it had a lot to do with the incessant harping on power (meaning HRs), and how he needed to hit more, wasn’t good for a 1B, etc. Plus of course, a turn at clean up.
Basically I am blaming the FO and manager for letting the background noise (from the fans and media) get into his head.
Hey, if I told you that unless your students got 10% higher standardized test scores in math you were getting fired, you think you might concentrate on trying to get that math score up?
I think the same happened to Murphy. His approach through the minors (and 2008) seemed to be patience, work the count, take a walk if that was what came, and look to lash a lot of doubles.
COme last year, and it changed to looking more for HRs, and screw OBP.
Was this really the case? Who knows, but probably not the entire problem, but it certainly could have been part of it.
One reason, along with more ABs, that I think he will bump up to at least the .340 range this year if he gets to play regularly.
trs86
2/15/2010-2:37pm at 2:37 pm (UTC -4)
I would be astonished to see Murphy’s OBP rise 30 points this season. I would be quite happy with a bump to .325. All messed up or not, you don’t usually see a 30 point increase.
GravediggerHebner
2/15/2010-3:01pm at 3:01 pm (UTC -4)
This is not the perfect way to go about this (if there even is a perfect way) but baseball-reference compares players to 10 other players based on their age during their most recent season. Murphy was considered 24 for this purpose.
This is the OBP difference in the 10 comparable players from age 24 to age 25, which in some cases but not most was from their 1st full season to their 2nd.
Lee May: + .029
Bob Chance: – .117
Adam Lind: + .054
Harry Stovey: + .035
Jeffrey Hammonds: + .022
Norm Siebern: – .047
Conor Jackson: + .000 (.368 OBP both years)
Chet Ross: – .004
Jack Fournier: + .061
Reid Nichols: – .045
So what that tells us about Murphy I can’t say, I guess my only conclusion would be the concept of a .030 jump is not impossible or even unlikely.
jaydh
2/15/2010-11:53am at 11:53 am (UTC -4)
My fear is that Murphy will be platooned since Manuel is totally clueless. If thats the case i will be hoping for a bad start so that management gets the ax.
trs86
2/15/2010-11:55am at 11:55 am (UTC -4)
Murphy should not be platooned for sure. Tatis is not an option in my mind for a platoon partner, it weakens his most important role of being the RH utility guy.
stickguy
2/15/2010-12:02pm at 12:02 pm (UTC -4)
tell that to Jerry the Genius.
GravediggerHebner
2/15/2010-12:12pm at 12:12 pm (UTC -4)
Patrick Flood did a multi-point statistical/opinion combination breakdown of the Mets 1B options and concluded that a Murphy-Tatis platoon is the best case scenario using a mix of both offensive and defensive stats & his opinion. He does note at the end that at least in part he comes to the conclusion that a platoon is best because the post was “about platoons.” If I’m reading between the lines correctly it seems Murphy should just play every day.
Based strictly on offensive platoon stats alone the team “should” play Jacobs versus RHP and Murphy verus LHP.
My opinion based on using all the stats he put forth is Murphy should play every day.
http://www.patrickfloodblog.com/2010/02/two-headed-platoon-monster-first-base.html
jaydh
2/15/2010-12:15pm at 12:15 pm (UTC -4)
In order to properly develop Murphy, you have to start him fulltime this early in his career. If he proves to struggle vs lefties then in the future he is a platoon candidate, but not now.
GravediggerHebner
2/15/2010-12:20pm at 12:20 pm (UTC -4)
Not only do I agree but based on OPS Murphy performs the best offensively of all the Mets current 1B candidates versus LHP. Flood was simply being cute (in my opinion) in concluding the platoon was best since his article had “platoon” in the title and featured a picture of a two-headed monster.
I truly think the not so hidden message in his post was that Murphy should play every day. Even in concluding in favor of the platoon he noted part of the reason it worked was Tatis’ overall positional versatility fits well on the 25 man roster. It seems to me Tatis getting occasional (but not strict platoon) work at 1B is more to keep his bat fresh than anything else, which is a scenario I can roll with (Tatis playing 1B say once every 7-10 days, Murphy the rest).
Kingman 26
2/15/2010-12:46pm at 12:46 pm (UTC -4)
Agreed 100% here Jay!
Mr North Jersey
2/15/2010-12:54pm at 12:54 pm (UTC -4)
Agreed if Murphy is going to be on the team you have to play him. If not then Minaya’s Hot Stove talking about how much better he got in 2009 is B.S.
If you truly believe that Murphy grew toward the end of the season and those numbers are not the product of expanded rosters in September. You have to let the kid play the same that you have to let Davis play if he was on the team and Fmart play if he was on the team and even Thole play if he was on the team.
GravediggerHebner
2/15/2010-12:58pm at 12:58 pm (UTC -4)
That’s the (a) problem with Manuel. When the 2009 season was hopelessly lost and he should’ve been playing the rookies with upside he still went with veterans (Tatis) or rookies with no upside (Santos) instead of Murphy and Thole.
So to me it’s less about Omar BSing and more about Manuel playing guys for the wrong reasons (to win 72 games instead of 68 but getting the young guys valuable experience).
GravediggerHebner
2/15/2010-1:17pm at 1:17 pm (UTC -4)
As far as numbers being the product of expanded rosters in September I don’t know quite what to make of that. I understand it’s relevance as a theory but on closer examination I’m not sure how it holds up.
From 9/1 through the end of the season Murphy had 9 multi-hit games:
9/3 – 2 for 5, 2B off Marquis, HR off Beimel;
9/6 – 3 for 4, HR off Wells, RBI 1B off Wells, 2 RBI triple off Gregg;
9/12 – 2 for 4, 2B off Moyer, RBI single off Park;
9/15 – 2 for 4, 2B off Hanson, 1B off Hanson (Hanson 7 IP, 3 H allowed);
9/17 – 3 for 4, 1B off Jurrjens, 2B off Jurrjens, HR off O’Flaherty;
9/20 – 2 for 4, 2B off Mock, 3B off Mock;
9/21 – 2 for 4, 2B off Lowe, HR off Lowe;
9/25 – 2 for 4, 2B off Nolasco, 1B off Nunez;
10/3 – 2 for 5, 2B off Bazardo, 1B off Hawkins;
Zero of those pitchers were September call ups and most of them are established ML veterans.
Mr North Jersey
2/15/2010-1:44pm at 1:44 pm (UTC -4)
Looking at it like that your right it doesn’t really hold up.
I must have been mistaken but for whatever reason I recall his numbers being questioned as a possible product of being padded when teams were already looking ahead to the next season.
I admit though on the surface just looking at what you displayed he definitely doesn’t seem to have benefited from call-ups.
GravediggerHebner
2/15/2010-2:06pm at 2:06 pm (UTC -4)
The whole “April & September” thing is an age old baseball axiom that I’m sure is reality based and I think was more meaningful years ago when there were fewer baseball teams and the overall quality of players was better.
It’s my opinion with 30 teams the quality is pretty bad already so when guys get called up the drop in talent isn’t as noticeable.
As far as whether the opponent is indifferent with one foot already on their plane to the off season or something like that I would say sure it’s possible but that it’s dangerous to just generically apply that logic to all players as Mike Francesa does as the loud proponent of this philosophy.
Even that fails the test in the case of Murphy because with the exception of 9/20 vs WAS and 10/3 vs HOU all these teams were in the race.
Mr North Jersey
2/15/2010-2:25pm at 2:25 pm (UTC -4)
You make valid points.
I do feel that hitting when your team is in a pennant race as opposed to out of it is something that should be looked at but agree one can’t generically apply that logic across the board to everyone.
This season will be interesting because Wright for example is a streaky hitter and I don’t know what will happen if it takes Wright till May to really get going or any other core players for that matter.
How many starts by Santana where he gives up 2 runs or less and the team fails to score for him can this club withstand?
GravediggerHebner
2/15/2010-2:45pm at 2:45 pm (UTC -4)
I agree a better test will be when Murphy’s team is in contention. Then the pressure would at least in theory be greater on him.
I also agree a quick start for the Mets could be very important. A slow start may very well snowball out of control, fed by booing fans and media reproach.
trs86
2/15/2010-2:46pm at 2:46 pm (UTC -4)
At least we already got those last 2 going for us now so they won’t be caught off guard.
trs86
2/15/2010-12:23pm at 12:23 pm (UTC -4)
I read that, based on his thoughts he went with a platoon of Murphy and Tatis as the best option.
Kingman 26
2/15/2010-12:03pm at 12:03 pm (UTC -4)
I LOVE it when you come on here and threaten to root against the team!
That’s GRRRRRREAT!!
jaydh
2/15/2010-12:05pm at 12:05 pm (UTC -4)
Delusion is never good. Manuel will never get the most out of this team.
Kingman 26
2/15/2010-12:13pm at 12:13 pm (UTC -4)
Jay, I could not agree more.
I detest Jerry, and even when I am in full-bore Catatonic Optimist mode, I still detest him.
jaydh
2/15/2010-12:17pm at 12:17 pm (UTC -4)
I want this team to win, but it pains me that Jerry is in charge with our allstars in their prime or just entering it. And if a slow start is the only way to change that, then so be it.
GravediggerHebner
2/15/2010-12:15pm at 12:15 pm (UTC -4)
I wish I had some basis to argue against that.
For all the flack Omar gets about not being a multi-tasker, how about Jerry? Last year all the team really did was the opposite field 80 pitch curve drill. I read an article yesterday about how Jerry did “not concentrate on defensive fundamentals and by the time it became apparent the team was flawed in that regard it was ‘too late’ to do anything about it.”
So this spring training Jerry is going to emphasize defensive fundamentals according to this article. By 2038 under his managing the team will be extremely well rounded.
trs86
2/15/2010-12:25pm at 12:25 pm (UTC -4)
LOL.
stickguy
2/15/2010-12:04pm at 12:04 pm (UTC -4)
I would be more willing to say roll the dice with Jacobs (with his expected offensive output) if he was a plus defensive guy. COnsidering he seems to bring nothing to the table other than his bat, if the bat isn’t showing a lot, stay away.
Kingman 26
2/15/2010-12:15pm at 12:15 pm (UTC -4)
+ Infinity!
wannybackstra
2/15/2010-12:28pm at 12:28 pm (UTC -4)
This is another example of the media making news out of non-news because they are compelled to write something.
What’s Omar supposed to say?
GravediggerHebner
2/15/2010-12:32pm at 12:32 pm (UTC -4)
“Mike Jacobs sucks at 1B worse than I suck at GM, you know what I’m sayin’? He’s just spring training fodder. By April 5th we’ll all forget we’ve ever heard of him.”
Kingman 26
2/15/2010-12:45pm at 12:45 pm (UTC -4)
Ah, I was wondering where Fong has been!
trs86
2/15/2010-12:36pm at 12:36 pm (UTC -4)
Most likely right. Of course in all honesty I don’t see why it is not a competition. Even if both of the guys we have competing are inferior. For that matter it should be open to guys like Carter and Evans too.
oleosmirf
2/15/2010-1:22pm at 1:22 pm (UTC -4)
Carter, I would like to see. Ive seen enough of Evans to know he is nothing but a AAAA guy.
GravediggerHebner
2/15/2010-12:46pm at 12:46 pm (UTC -4)
However obviously flawed Jacobs may be, his presence as a major league veteran in camp serves the purpose of showing Murphy that the job is his (Murphy’s) to win as opposed to his to lose and I think that’s a good thing. Maybe it’s purely a semantics thing.
trs86
2/15/2010-12:50pm at 12:50 pm (UTC -4)
Good point. I for one am glad that the Mets have brought in a guy and are not just trusting that Murphy will get better.