“A lot of people had a lot of opinions about my defense, which is fine; you can have your opinion. But a lot of people were basing it off these metrics… and no one ever watched you play. So that’s what kind of bothered me, was that everything was tied into this one number, and people hadn’t put eyes on you or seen it and just kind of labeled you.”
In an interview posted on Metsblog a few days ago, Jason Bay provided this juicy little nugget about fielding metrics. While he does not outright claim that advanced defensive statistics are useless, he does echo the strong sentiment of many less-saber-inclined baseball fans: you cannot judge a player’s performance by his statistics. You have to watch him play and that will you tell you what you need to know. And this feeling holds doubly-true for defense. At least when batting there are countable events such as a home run or stolen base that make nice, easy-to-understand statistics, but with fielding that is not the case. Basically, the only numbers we have are fielding percentage, putouts and assists, and those numbers just do not tell us a whole lot. Thus, to judge a player’s fielding, you have to watch him play, and those fancy schmancy numbers like Ultimate Zone Rating (UZR) or Defensive Runs Saved (DRS) really mean nothing.
Well, there’s another defensive metric, created by the immortal Tom Tango, called the Fans Scouting Report (FSR). Fans like you and me who regularly watch baseball games are asked to rate players on their favorite team in a variety of fielding categories: reaction/instincts, acceleration/first few steps, velocity/sprint speed, hands/catching, release/footwork, throwing strength, and throwing accuracy. Tango’s system then combines all the different scouting reports into one number with the player’s overall defensive rating.
Tango writes this on the introduction page to the FSR:
“And, most importantly, do not, absolutely do not, look at any numbers. Don’t look at his fielding percentage, range factor, zone rating, UZR, or anything else that someone else is telling you. I just want you to rely on your eyes. You are the scout. I need you to rely completely on your own observations.
We know the fans know what they are talking about. We know they know how to observe good and bad fielding. Now, I just want to know what the fans know.”
So Jason, you want a defensive metric that does not rely on 64 separate “zones” on the field or run expectancy charts like UZR and DRS do, you got it. I decided to look at Jason’s FSR numbers over the past four seasons and see what the fans have to say about him, as well as how they compare to his UZR and DRS. First, the FSR numbers (50 is average, and the ratings are compared to the average fielder, not the average player at a certain position. FSR numbers from Tangotiger.net for 2007-08, and fangraphs.com for 09-10):
| FSR | Reaction/ Instincts | Accel/First Steps | Speed | Hands | Release/ Footwork | Throwing Strength | Throwing Accuracy | Overall |
| 2007 | 34 | 34 | 49 | 50 | 27 | 2 | 19 | 33 |
| 2008 | 58 | 56 | 59 | 57 | 57 | 49 | 57 | 56 |
| 2009 | 31 | 32 | 44 | 44 | 40 | 34 | 42 | 38 |
| 2010 | 42 | 39 | 45 | 46 | 44 | 33 | 46 | 42 |
It seems that even the people who watched Jason play rate Jason as a below average defensive player. The FSR ratings, just as UZR and DRS, do not tell the whole story, but they do provide a very different type of defensive statistic, the type that scouts and more traditional fans might be more receptive to. For reference, Bay’s score of 38 in 2009 rated as 3 runs below average.
Now let’s take a look at his UZR and DRS numbers:
| DRS | rARM | rHR | rPM | Total DRS |
| 2007 | 1 | 2 | -11 | -8 |
| 2008 | -3 | 2 | -7 | -8 |
| 2009 | 3 | 0 | -5 | -2 |
| 2010 | 1 | 0 | -1 | 0 |
| UZR | Arm | RngR | ErrR | UZR |
| 2007 | -1.7 | -16 | -1.2 | -19 |
| 2008 | -4.8 | -14.5 | 1.1 | -18.2 |
| 2009 | 1 | -1.1 | 2.1 | 2 |
| 2010 | 0.6 | -2.6 | 0.1 | -1.9 |
While DRS and FSR both have Jason being below average over the four seasons, UZR blows them out of the water in its Jason Bay negativity. According to UZR, Bay cost his teams nearly four wins due to his sub-par defense in 07-08. If Jason was referring to those UZR numbers, he would be correct in claiming that those stats are not indicative of his defensive talent. Whenever one of these metrics strays that far from the other two or career norms, you know you need to double-check your numbers, and it would be unfair to take merely one stat as gospel.
A few interesting tidbits from the numbers:
Bay massively improved in 09-10 according to both UZR and DRS, and he checked out as average. The fans, however, actually saw his skills decline these last two seasons. If people merely looked at UZR and DRS to gauge Bay’s defense the last two years, they would actually have found him to be a better defender than if they had watched him play.
An interesting disagreement is how the three systems view Bay’s arm. UZR and DRS both have Bay’s arm right around average, whereas FSR sees Bay’s arm as notably below average (outside of that insanely flukish outlier performance in all respects in 2008). If UZR/DRS disagree with FSR on arm quality, I would tend to stick with the FSR, the fans’ subjective views. It is hard to judge range because positioning, immediate reactions, and route selection are often hard to observe while watching a game. But when a defender throws the ball, everyone in the stadium is focused on that player and that throw.
And I am very curious as to what happened in 2008. FSR had Bay as about 3-5 runs above average, while UZR had him at -18.2 runs and DRS at -8 runs. There’s a one win to 2.5 win difference in those evaluations. In other words, if Bay was an average starter with his FSR, he would be below replacement level with UZR. That is just a massive difference over a whole season, and it’s discrepancies like this that keep people away from defensive numbers.
But while it is right for us to take a defensive metric with a shaker of salt, we cannot ignore them completely. The fact is that none of these metrics rate Jason as a good defender, while they all have shown him at times to be below average, perhaps horrible, in the field. While I would not feel comfortable saying Jason is a -7.5 run defender over a whole season, or something equally as specific, I feel confident saying that he is somewhere in between bad to average, probably a little bit below-average range. At a certain point we can draw some conclusions, and I think with Jason we have enough data in rough agreement to make an assessment. And much of the data is in fact just our own personal opinions.
That is the beauty of the Fans Scouting Report. It can provide a number of runs saved that can be incorporated into WAR (can’t you just feel Francesa squirming?), but the numbers are entirely subjective, and based purely on scouting. FSR can be a very useful tool, especially if you carefully consider when it would best be used. As far as Jason goes though, if people waited to watch him to judge his defense, he might actually be worse off.
71 comments
metsfan4decades
12/26/2010-1:54pm at 1:54 pm (UTC -4)
I never really saw Bay play (other than a game or two) before he came to the Mets.
Watching just about every Met game each season, I actually thought he was better on defense than the critics and numbers were touting when he signed with the Mets. I don’t know about his range coming in, going out or left to right, but if I had to gauge that I would say about average or tad below. I actually thought thought he did a fine job of catching any ball he got to and got rid of the ball quickly and accurately – if it called for it.
I can’t buy the label ‘horrible’. To me, horrible is reserved for the likes of what we saw Murphy do out there in left field.
kingman 26
12/26/2010-4:15pm at 4:15 pm (UTC -4)
“I feel confident saying that he is somewhere in between bad to average, sitting somewhere in that below-average range”
Saying Bay is anywhere near “bad” is a bad joke.
The classic case of meaningless sabermetrics.
In his 199 games in LF at Fenway (and fans who know the game might suggest that this MIGHT not be the game’s easiest defensive position) Bay made 1 error and had 20 assists. No manipulation of stats can suggest this is a bad outfielder.
Precisely the same situation as any number which says that Angel Pagan is one of the game’s ten best outfielders based on a few good months as a starter.
I am 44 and have felt that WHIP and OBP have been among the best ways to judge players since the 1970s–long before they were universally accepted. So I am definitely not anti-sabermetrics—but the gymnastic manipulation of numbers sometimes just does not reflect reality.
The use of sabermetrics to rate Bay and Pagan the way they do is comedy, and what gives sabermetrics a bad name among so many.
Bay is at least an average OF and Pagan is, thus far, a pretty good overall player and nothing more.
oleosmirf
12/26/2010-5:19pm at 5:19 pm (UTC -4)
how much longer does have Pagan have to keep it up for it to change your opinion?
kingman 26
12/26/2010-5:22pm at 5:22 pm (UTC -4)
How about he does for one full season what he did for half of 2010 before he is anointed as a top ten player??
oleosmirf
12/26/2010-5:34pm at 5:34 pm (UTC -4)
well every player has a slump so is he allowed to have a bad month?
kingman 26
12/26/2010-5:36pm at 5:36 pm (UTC -4)
Sure. Pagan was awful for about half of of 2010, not one month.
Why is this so hard to accept?
TRS86
12/26/2010-5:34pm at 5:34 pm (UTC -4)
What if he did it for 1,000 AB’s?
.294 .344 .441 .785 while with the Mets. Granted those are only average to slightly above average offensive numbers for a CF however factoring in his defense you get what the WAR people keep pointing to with Pagan.
kingman 26
12/26/2010-5:38pm at 5:38 pm (UTC -4)
I am sick of this argument.
Pagan is a good player.
He is not a top ten at his position.
He is decent offensively.
He is very good defensively.
He is very fast.
He is nothing special offensively and not a gold glover.
TRS86
12/26/2010-5:41pm at 5:41 pm (UTC -4)
You will keep hearing the argument as long as he continues to put up those numbers above while being ranked a top defensive player. I think both sides have merit.
That being said, to be so tired of it, you do bring it up quite often.
rustyjr
12/26/2010-5:59pm at 5:59 pm (UTC -4)
In regards to pagan – I agree with kong – it’s too small a sample size to call him a everyday player
TRS86
12/26/2010-6:01pm at 6:01 pm (UTC -4)
1,000 AB’s is too small? 1100+ PA?
rustyjr
12/26/2010-6:06pm at 6:06 pm (UTC -4)
That’s over 3 years – 2 of those seasons were as a bench player so if you average it out he has had 333 plate appearances per season – not good for a 29 year old
kingman 26
12/26/2010-6:15pm at 6:15 pm (UTC -4)
THANK YOU!
ABs as a part-timer/bench player are not the same as ABs as an everyday player.
TRS86
12/26/2010-6:38pm at 6:38 pm (UTC -4)
Only 91 of those came in 2008 as a bench player.
Since 2009 he has been a starter.
rustyjr
12/26/2010-6:47pm at 6:47 pm (UTC -4)
He was on & off the d.l for the first 3 months of ’09
kingman 26
12/26/2010-6:54pm at 6:54 pm (UTC -4)
He played in 88 games in 2009!
Do you just enjoy arguing regardless of how ridiculous what you write is?!
TRS86
12/26/2010-7:10pm at 7:10 pm (UTC -4)
He played in those games as a starter. He was injured the other part of the season.
Make it personal again Kingman.
kingman 26
12/26/2010-7:12pm at 7:12 pm (UTC -4)
It’s not personal.
TRS86
12/26/2010-7:15pm at 7:15 pm (UTC -4)
Sure it is. You can’t call someone’s argument based on stats and facts, even if you don’t agree with them, ridiculous just because you don’t agree. I am sure that there are plenty of those who agree with you on Pagan and plenty that agree with me. That is what is great about baseball.
Would you champion the cause if I said, “Pagan is an average player and is overrated, he has not produced for a long enough time and WAR is not an accurate way of looking at him.”?
Would that statement also be ridiculous? Even though I provided no measurable fact or stat?
kingman 26
12/26/2010-7:42pm at 7:42 pm (UTC -4)
Look, all I was calling ridiculous was referring to him as a starter for playing 88 games in 2009 and starting for the first time ever.
I apologize.
TRS86
12/26/2010-7:48pm at 7:48 pm (UTC -4)
Thing is Kingman he became the starter in May of 2009 and was the starter from that point on except when on the DL obviously. So all but 8 of his games in 2009 were as a starter and he started almost every game that he was on the team from that point on. I can’t hold that injury against his time as a starter.
reyordonezrevival
12/26/2010-7:14pm at 7:14 pm (UTC -4)
A couple points. Errors are hardly a good way to judge any defensive player. You can’t make errors if you don’t get to the ball, so in order to commit an error you have to have done something right. If you have below average range, as most believe Bay has, he simply won’t have as many opportunities to make a tough play, meaning less errors. I really could not care about his only having one error (obviously if you are going to drop easy pop-ups every few days that is different, but you don’t make it to the majors if you do that. at this level, errors really are not the most useful of stats).
“Saying Bay is anywhere near “bad” is a bad joke.
The classic case of meaningless sabermetrics.”
You say this, yet people who rated Bay on nothing but their subjective opinion find him to be pretty consistently below-average, according to the FSR. Saying he is “anywhere near bad” is not only what advanced statistics say, it’s what observers say.
TRS86
12/26/2010-7:17pm at 7:17 pm (UTC -4)
I think the problem you have is those fans are just as likely to be affected by press, people and stats as well. There truly is no stat to accurately measure defense. You have to use a combination of things. Bay is based on MY eyes average to above average. I think he is solid, not fast, has an accurate but not especially strong arm. I also think he has the ability to read balls off the bat well and know what he can get to and what he can not, thus keeping balls in front of him and making the safe plays.
reyordonezrevival
12/26/2010-7:25pm at 7:25 pm (UTC -4)
It certainly isn’t possible for fans to be completely unaffected by outside factors, but if we don’t want to rely on stats, subjective opinions are our only other option. This is the best we can do on that front.
FSR comes as close as possible to quantifying that other option, and the results are pretty much the same. But I agree that defensive metrics are certainly very suspect. That’s why I decided to look at a variety of them. When myriad different ways of answering the same question all lead to the same answer, at a certain point you have to accept it.
Normally when I judge a player defensively, I basically average all the advanced metrics into one number and look at that as half the equation. For the other half, I will just use someone’s defensive reputation and scouting reports. That’s as good a way of balancing as I can find.
Bill James said something along the lines once that a good statistic should verify what you believe 80 percent of the time and surprise you 20 percent of the time. Perhaps Bay’s defense is just one of those surprising things.
Either way, we certainly should not trust defensive metrics in small samples, and even in big samples we have to balance their use with scouting. You are right on this.
TRS86
12/26/2010-7:30pm at 7:30 pm (UTC -4)
I think these stats are good to use if you have not seen a player play often. So in other words Bay is right to some degree.
oleosmirf
12/26/2010-7:19pm at 7:19 pm (UTC -4)
after watching Bay last season, i dont see how he can be a below average defensively. I believe the majority of the negative stats towards Bay stems from Pagan/Beltran covering more ground, thus calling off a greater number of potential fly balls.
I have nothing against sabermetrics but I dont believe any statistics can accurately measure defense.
reyordonezrevival
12/26/2010-7:28pm at 7:28 pm (UTC -4)
The fact is that defensive metrics, more often than not, agree with scouting. To say they have no level of accuracy is just ignoring the fact that the vast majority of the time the defensive metrics say a player is just as good as we would have believed. They definitely are picking up on something true when they judge players. The likelihood that defensive metrics would so often agree with people by chance is effectively zero.
They are accurate to a certain degree in large samples. They are not exact and require a lot of playing time to become reliable, but they are not useless.
TRS86
12/26/2010-7:32pm at 7:32 pm (UTC -4)
Let me ask you this. UZR changed their formula “slightly” and Bay went from something like -19 to +2 on that slight change. Doesn’t that worry you a little with UZR?
reyordonezrevival
12/26/2010-7:39pm at 7:39 pm (UTC -4)
That change was purely a change to Park Factors, and the only change came to Bay’s performance in Fenway Park. Fenway is a totally unique playing environment, so the fact that UZR had no idea how to deal with it is not that surprising.
The fact is that very few players were affected significantly by the change. Only people on the extremes in terms of parks, like left field in Boston, had notable changes. A positive change to a stat that more accurately reflects what people think does not really worry me.
But again, I will stress that I do not buy into defensive metrics 100 percent. They have a loooong way to go, and we definitely should question its results.
TRS86
12/26/2010-7:47pm at 7:47 pm (UTC -4)
Agreed, however most of the thoughts on Bay when we signed him were being based on those negative UZR stats when it turns out they were positive. LOL. That for sure made a lot of us not trust UZR that along with how it has dramatic changes year to year for certain players and just seems to often disagree with a lot of our eyes or common logic. Example UZR has never been VERY friendly to Beltran either.
kingman 26
12/26/2010-5:44pm at 5:44 pm (UTC -4)
“You will keep hearing the argument as long as he continues to put up those numbers above while being ranked a top defensive player.”
Ah, we have reached the key point!
I just want him to put those numbers up for more time than he has!
That is all.
TRS86
12/26/2010-5:52pm at 5:52 pm (UTC -4)
And yet to me 1,000 AB’s is a pretty good sample size.
oleosmirf
12/26/2010-6:38pm at 6:38 pm (UTC -4)
in 1013 AB dating back to 2008 as a NYM, Pagan has averaged .294/.344/.441/.785 with plus speed and plus defense. How much more do you need?
kingman 26
12/26/2010-6:56pm at 6:56 pm (UTC -4)
How do we account for the incredible amount of idiotic mistakes he made on the bases AND in the field in 2009, when he was nothing close to what he was in 2010?
oleosmirf
12/26/2010-7:14pm at 7:14 pm (UTC -4)
would you agree then that had he not made those idiotic mistakes in 2009 he would have put up basically the same numbers as he did in 2010???
TRS86
12/26/2010-7:18pm at 7:18 pm (UTC -4)
Actually offensively he was incredible in 2009.
rustyjr
12/26/2010-7:27pm at 7:27 pm (UTC -4)
I’m not arguing with u btw – just stating my opinion
TRS86
12/26/2010-7:33pm at 7:33 pm (UTC -4)
It’s fine to argue Rusty. But yeah I got you. You have a point that he does need to produce again to get rid of the critics. My question is how many AB’s does he need? If he produces again this year will that be enough?
Mr North Jersey
12/26/2010-7:12pm at 7:12 pm (UTC -4)
Ahh the sounds of baseball….
rustyjr
12/26/2010-7:23pm at 7:23 pm (UTC -4)
Did u se my Xmas gift ? Btw I learned how to upload my pictured from my iphone
reyordonezrevival
12/26/2010-7:30pm at 7:30 pm (UTC -4)
I believe it is time for me to write my “Case for Angel Pagan” article. The debate is pretty heated, and I will try to to clarify some of the points of the pro-Pagan side (of which I am a part).
TRS86
12/26/2010-7:35pm at 7:35 pm (UTC -4)
Sounds good. Just a warning, LOL. Make sure to use a lot of stats other than WAR to backup your point. WAR is not trusted by a lot of our readers.
reyordonezrevival
12/26/2010-7:43pm at 7:43 pm (UTC -4)
When it is all said and done, WAR is the single most important statistic. Even if our methodology isn’t perfect, in the end baseball is about winning games and WAR is the only stat that tries to put a player’s production into his ability to win games. I will however, not even look at his previous WARs until I have made my predictions for his underlying performances. Then I will merely take what I think he will do offensively and defensively and say how that translates to WAR. But the entirety of the research will not use WAR. WAR will only be the end result of the research. If you choose to ignore it and just look at my offensive and defensive predictions, fine by me.
TRS86
12/26/2010-7:44pm at 7:44 pm (UTC -4)
I am warming to WAR but it’s taking a lot of time. Some of our readers however do not value it at all.
metsfan4decades
12/26/2010-9:55pm at 9:55 pm (UTC -4)
I’ll be looking forward to reading that.
The Pagan debate among Met fans is just as heated as the Reyes debate is for some.
oleosmirf
12/26/2010-7:59pm at 7:59 pm (UTC -4)
the problem is range is statistically measured by the number of putouts which only indirectly measures range.
TRS86
12/26/2010-8:04pm at 8:04 pm (UTC -4)
Does it not measure amount of balls gotten to on the ground as well?
chaim
12/26/2010-11:42pm at 11:42 pm (UTC -4)
but rey, this doesn’t explain the “mets curse”; why Bay could hit everywhere else but not for us!
darknova306
12/26/2010-11:50pm at 11:50 pm (UTC -4)
I’m waiting for when the offensive metrics once again say that Bay is a good player…
stickguy
12/27/2010-9:32am at 9:32 am (UTC -4)
Bay is quite the lightning rod. And I am on record as saying this was a worse signing than any of Omars other winners, when you factor in length, total $, and how he is going to be clogging up the position that the Mets really need for some of the hitting prospects in the wings.
anyway, my subjective opinion is similar to MFs. Bay knows how to play LF, and while he does not have the best range, he is not terrible in that area. He positions well, seems to get good reads/jumps, and catches everything he can get to. He also seems very good knowing what to do with the ball, and making accurate throws.
So overall, not a gold glove, but someone that is solid, and at least roughly average.
one thing that bugs me about the defensive stats (even that FSR) is fluctuation year to year. IMO, defense should stay reasonable consistent for an experienced guy, even if hitting fluctuates. And what did bay do to go from 2 horrible years (07-08) to dead average (09-10)?
anyway, we are stuck with him for 3 more years, so hope he doesn’t lose too many steps, and actually remembers how to hit again.
TRS86
12/27/2010-9:47am at 9:47 am (UTC -4)
Switching to Bay’s offense, which is much more debatable, I keep pointing to the fact that he hit significantly better at home than on the road. That point makes no sense and gives me hope for next year.
.277 .371 .459 .830 at home yet only .243 .326 .354 .680 on the road. One would have to assume that Bay will eventually hit better on the road instead of at Citi. If he can even produce at .830-.900 range I will be happy enough.
TRS86
12/27/2010-9:49am at 9:49 am (UTC -4)
Also looking, he had a plain terrible July. The other months, while not up to Bay standard, were OPS’s over .800.
stickguy
12/27/2010-11:20am at 11:20 am (UTC -4)
Bay certainly had an odd year. And who knows, maybe it was just a small sample size anomaly. Or maybe a new town/new contract adjustment period?
The home/road split does seem backward, if the problem was trying to change his swing/approach to account for citi field.
to me, Bay is the biggest wild card in terms of what to expect next year on the team. beltran I think will be fine as long as he can stay on the field(which he should) and reyes is going to rebound to 2006-2008 levels.
But Bay, I have no idea what to expect.
TRS86
12/27/2010-11:22am at 11:22 am (UTC -4)
I have more faith in Bay than I do Beltran or Reyes.
stickguy
12/27/2010-11:26am at 11:26 am (UTC -4)
the only question IMO with Beltran is will his knee hold up, not if he will produce.
And I am the anti-Knog, in that I think Reyes will have a big year (attributing 2010 to the thyroid, oblique and peripheral manager nonsense, 3 things that should not exist in 2011)
Bay though could be healthy and suck, or healthy and havea .280/30/100 year. And I have no clue which.
TRS86
12/27/2010-11:30am at 11:30 am (UTC -4)
Reyes and Beltran could also injure themselves in ST or
Reyes could refuse to take a walk again like he did for no reason last year. I have no idea what to expect from any of the 3. But I think that considering Bay is most likely the healthiest of the 3 I will go with him being the more likely to rebound.
stickguy
12/27/2010-11:39am at 11:39 am (UTC -4)
anyone can injure themselves. And IMO only Beltran is a question there, but I am not actually that worried about it this year. He will miss some days, but will be productive. Reyes I expect to be good. But bay, I have no idea.
TRS86
12/27/2010-10:36am at 10:36 am (UTC -4)
Wow, been over at the ole blog and all I can say is I am very thankful for this community of rational posters. Ones that don’t want to pay Garland twice as much as the Dodgers just to convince him to come to the Mets. What exactly would that have done besides waste money?
njstuckintx
12/27/2010-11:12am at 11:12 am (UTC -4)
It makes sense not to overpay when you resources are limited. I know I can understand that, but there still is a little bit of me that says “This is New York! Why would a couple extra couple of million stop said NY team from get a decent pitcher?!?!”
You can get Young at a normal salary range vs. overpaying for Garland… Garland is the better pitcher so not taking money into consideration, you’d rather have Garland. Hence, the argument of “this is NY, so why should a couple million stop the Mets from having the best team possible?” drives a lot of people crazy.
stickguy
12/27/2010-11:23am at 11:23 am (UTC -4)
paying more does not mean overpaying.
If you pay more for more production, then the team is better, unless you can prove that you lost more elsewhere not having that money to spend.
TRS86
12/27/2010-11:23am at 11:23 am (UTC -4)
Problem is Garland wanted nothing to do with the East Coast.
stickguy
12/27/2010-11:27am at 11:27 am (UTC -4)
garland no, it did not seem that way. but in general, spending more money is not necessarily a bad thing!
TRS86
12/27/2010-11:28am at 11:28 am (UTC -4)
In general yes, but in a terrible market what pitcher was worth overpaying for?
njstuckintx
12/27/2010-11:28am at 11:28 am (UTC -4)
So switch Garland for “pitcher X”. It was more using his name for the sake of argument.
TRS86
12/27/2010-11:31am at 11:31 am (UTC -4)
That’s the problem. In this market who were you switching that name with?
njstuckintx
12/27/2010-11:37am at 11:37 am (UTC -4)
Koji? Kuroda? There are a couple.
Anyway, the statement was more a general one not bound by this specific offseason. If it was to be specific to this offseason, you sign Webb, Garcia, Young and Francis. Sign them all. This way you have back up to the back up of the back up. This is the “Money isn’t an issue” plan of attack and you’ll more likely than not get better production than Gee would give you. Or just Young/Francis alone.
oleosmirf
12/27/2010-1:14pm at 1:14 pm (UTC -4)
expect players arent going to agree to come here as the backup plan when they can be a #3 SP for another team.
also the Mets were never spending 13 million for Kuroda nor would Uehara be a setup man here when he can be a closer in Baltimore
njstuckintx
12/27/2010-4:21pm at 4:21 pm (UTC -4)
For enough greenbacks, you’d be surprised what players would accept.
I’m thinking you and TRS are nitpicking my argument a little with specific instances and not including all the options. The point is that people are clamoring for pitching and the Mets are not spending the $$$ for pitching. Being in NY, the extra $$$ should not be the large concern that it is being made out to be.
And I’m only arguing for the point of the New York Mets should be able to spend like a New York team. My belief is that there isn’t much out there and being frugal (which is the argument most rational fans on this site subscribe to) as well as selective on actual talent return is the correct plan of action. You can sell me on the lack of activity by the Mets due to actual talent. But there is no way I’m buying the Met’s can’t get guys because they are maxed out financially.
TRS86
12/27/2010-9:47pm at 9:47 pm (UTC -4)
Oh you won’t get that argument from me or from Sandy it does not appear. That argument is for the fire Wilpons guys. The Mets have money to spend in the right situation but overpaying the junk on this market is not wise.
Ceetar
12/27/2010-5:43pm at 5:43 pm (UTC -4)
Who’s our new backup SS? Hu.
err, no wonder he’s no longer a hot pr ospect:
“And every time, he pitches good,” Hu said, “I have a good game. Like, I had three hits a few days ago, then I went on the Internet and saw that Chien-Ming Wang had pitched seven shutout innings [on July 3, against the Twins].”
njstuckintx
12/27/2010-9:33pm at 9:33 pm (UTC -4)
well, it’s something and the dude can play 2B, so, you can never have enough guys vying for that opening 2B position.
Go Big Murph!