Apology or no apology, what Fred said to the New Yorker will damage his team more in the long run than short. When all is said and done, it wouldn’t be Bernie Madoff that did the Mets in, if would be Fred Wilpon who put the his own team in ruin trying to imitate the deceased owner of the New York Yankees.
The only difference was, the Yankee players expected their owner to be outspoken and took it because that’s what you had to endure to be a New York Yankee. Fred is going to realize that players don’t need to endure his comments to play for a team that, as of now, is going absolutely nowhere.
In the 1980′s my father, the avid Yankee fan, shut off the TV and stopped watching his team. He hated Steinbrenner for his antics and decided to stop watching. He turned to the Mets because he is a baseball and New York fan, and rooted for them. He went back to the Yankees only when Steinbrenner was kicked out of baseball.
It might not be that time yet but there are going to be some dark times ahead for Mets fans. You see, I have no problems with what Fred said. Honestly, I’m sure that it was building up in him. Let’s remember, this is the guy who has dropped a lot of money and has watched his team, miss the World Series by a swing, collapse in front of the country, come up short by a game to make the playoffs, literally lose every starter to injury.
In my opinion, I’m shocked his frustration didn’t come out any sooner.
But here is the kicker, the difference between him and the Steinbrenner is that King George would say something but then back it up with money-lots of money.
Fred doesn’t realize he now has to put up or shut up. And there is no way he can “put up”.
I’m now looking it this way, if might be time to root for Picard and his billion dollar lawsuit. Maybe this might get Wilpon out and a new owner in. In might be the only salvation Met fans have.
I know one thing for sure, Reyes, Beltran and Bay are going to play there butts off hoping that they get traded and get off this sinking ship.
88 comments
TRS86
5/25/2011-8:10am at 8:10 am (UTC -4)
The thing is most of what he said could be read as not true. I keep reading how he said what we were thinking. Hell I was not so keep the we out of it.
He did however say some partial truths. Reyes will not get a Crawford contract. Injuries will play a part in it but so will the fact that the Nats and Sox were both idiotic for the contracts they gave out this past off-season. Just because at one point Carlos Silva got a 40+ million contract does not mean he could do it again.
Beltran? What percentage did he expect Beltran to be at just a couple of weeks into the season after missing all of ST? However, to call himself out as foolish for the contract? How can that not be taken as a slap to Beltran. For my opinion Beltran has more than earned his money here.
Wright, to me this one is the most damning of all. This guy is your face of the franchise. To say he is not a superstar shows a clear misunderstanding of the word superstar and actually places more pressure on a guy that has been trying to carry the team since 2007. Saying Wright is not a superstar to me is significant and in some ways shows why Keith has not had his number retired as well. Being a superstar is much more than just numbers. It’s about being there both on an off the field 100% of the time for your team. Being a guy that represents the franchise in a way that brings respect to the player and the organization. If Wright stays through the rest of his contract he will own almost every offensive record the Mets have, yet this player is not a superstar? What does this say about your organization? What does this say about your ability to take 150M every year to build a team and yet your franchise player is not a superstar?
Again, a joke.
kingman 26
5/25/2011-8:24am at 8:24 am (UTC -4)
If Jose finishes this year as he did 2006–2008, he will get a deal like Crawford.
Beltran had three MVP-caliber years for a crazy, insane 7-year contract which was way too much.
And I am Wright’s biggest supporter, but if he ever was a superstar—which is highly debatable–he surely last was one in 2008.
fongy2
5/25/2011-8:37am at 8:37 am (UTC -4)
Agreed!….No surprise there…..With Freddy, it just goes to show
that if enough pressure is provided, the truth comes out.
This is a “sh*tty team” which is a long way from winning anything
again. Anyone else notice yet how bad our AA team is???….
I also have recently noted a few postings both here and on mattsblog compairing our current situation to that of the late 70s,
I think I was leading that bandwagon as far back as S.T..
Lastly, I no longer find it funny or sweet (in a loyal way) that there
are still many Met fans who believe the F.O. will spend ANY of the
40 to 50 million coming off the books at seasons end.
At this point, I just feel sad for those fellow fans………
kingman 26
5/25/2011-8:48am at 8:48 am (UTC -4)
Hey buddy!
Yeah, I think I am less optimistic than I have been since the Howe era.
The minors are completely barren and we are trying to get excited about a handful of good starts at A ball by Harvey, who wasn’t even that great in college.
The next shoe to drop, the coming SI article, could be another step in the forced sale by Wilpon.
Not sure at this point if there is any reason for optimism for the next few years except hoping that Alderson really can make several great draft picks and work magical trades.
We are the fourth best team in this division, quite clearly. And when the Nats have Strasburg and Harper next year?
Ouch.
fongy2
5/25/2011-9:03am at 9:03 am (UTC -4)
AND there are a few more future MLBers on their way to
D.C., a SP named Peacock and the son of the old Twins 2B
Lombardozzi are very close.
Believe me, I take no joy in being right about whats happening with our Mets….It’s very painful.
I just won’t get fooled again. I was always a defender of Mr. Wilpons…..BUT at some point, like with Omar, the guy in charge HAS TO come clean and then be held responsible.
Sadly, it sounds like that now, really for the first time everyones looking at Freddy as the ultimate source of the
problems, HE feels the best move is to blame the guys who
cash checks that HE signs…………O.K.. ……………………….
That still doesn’t address the problems.
TRS86
5/25/2011-9:25am at 9:25 am (UTC -4)
While I rarely agree with you “I was always a defender of Mr. Wilpons…..BUT at some point, like with Omar, the guy in charge HAS TO come clean and then be held responsible.” this is exactly where I am coming from since this article. It was the last straw IMO.
njstuckintx
5/25/2011-9:01am at 9:01 am (UTC -4)
Agreed on Reyes… He’ll be dancing all the way to the bank.
As for Beltran, I think the contract was worth it. It’s tough to look at it and say it was a flop, as injury screwed it all up. We do blame him for not taking the bat off the shoulders against one of the most wicked curveballs I’ve seen since Doc K’s, but in the end the blame should not rest on Beltran. Taking out the injury, he’s been worth his contract. Yes, the injuries chalk up some wasted salary, but that happens. I’d still sign him again when the Mets did. That first year wasn’t spectacular, but after that he was as good as advertised. He’s the 2nd best hitter on the team today, but I’m not sure that is a testament to his ability or the brick wall that Wright hit or the cliff Bay fell off of.
As for Wright, we all are starting to see that he may not be a “superstar”, but he is a star, and slamming the face of your franchise ranks high on the “I probably wouldn’t do that if I were you” list.
And to sum all this up, all the stuff that Wilpon said, correct or incorrect, should have been said to his butler or his driver or his maid or his gardener or his pool boy or his personal attendant or his Oompa Lumpa he has back at Wilpon Ranch. Not in public.
kingman 26
5/25/2011-9:07am at 9:07 am (UTC -4)
Well, as usual, I agree with just about everything.
And yes, at the time I was thrilled we signed Beltran, I do not blame him for that curveball, and he was great for three years.
But in retrospect–and ONLY in retrospect–I think the deal was excessive.
njstuckintx
5/25/2011-9:15am at 9:15 am (UTC -4)
Yeah, the hindsight is always mad dog 20/20. Had he not succummed to injury and given another season or so of normal production, he’d be about the top of most Met statistics. You can’t argue with that, but with facts being facts, yeah, for the overall numbers he provided vs. the salary paid, it probably was excessive.
rustyjr
5/25/2011-9:17am at 9:17 am (UTC -4)
Verytrur
TRS86
5/25/2011-9:22am at 9:22 am (UTC -4)
It depends on what is excessive. When you sign a player to a 7 year deal you are admitting that you will lose 1-2 years to injury, especially a CF. Expecting less injury time than that to me is foolish. You also have to remember where the Mets were at that time and how they had to overpay to get top talent. That being said, Beltran has certainly earned the salary he has received. I am sure many of us are bias or jaded at the moment and the 1.5 years away certainly are more on our mind than the 4 years of great production from the best CF the Mets have ever had.
kingman 26
5/25/2011-9:24am at 9:24 am (UTC -4)
3 years.
Are you forgetting 2005?
TRS86
5/25/2011-9:40am at 9:40 am (UTC -4)
2005, Beltran was paid 11.6 million and according to fangraphs put up a 9.6 million year. So yeah he obviously underperformed.
However, I was not singling out any one year because I would say that 2005 was completely off-set by 2006 which debatably may be the best offensive season ever by a Met.
My point is that using 2005-2008 he was by far the best CF in the NL. There’s no one eve CLOSE to him using that four year period.
1st in Runs by around 90.
1st in RBI by around 50.
1st in doubles
2nd in HR to A Jones by 4
1st in OBP by 7 points.
1st in SLG
1st in Runs Created
1st in Base running
1st in “batting” actually doubling the next closest guy 103 to 50.
Again, hard to say that for that 4 year period he was not the best CF in the NL>
1st in WAR by 6 points
kingman 26
5/25/2011-9:53am at 9:53 am (UTC -4)
Yes, but it was THREE years not FOUR.
In 2005 he was mediocre, crappy, and nowhere closer to being the best than he was last year.
Come on TRS.
2006, 2007, and 2008 he was outstanding.
He wasn’t outstanding the other four years.
TRS86
5/25/2011-10:27am at 10:27 am (UTC -4)
Are you denying that looking at it as a whole from 2005-2008 he was the best CF in the NL during that period? Again, I have chosen not to single out 2005 just as I have chosen not to single out 2006. FROM 2005-2008 Beltran was healthy and during that period he was the best CF in the league.
TRS86
5/25/2011-10:29am at 10:29 am (UTC -4)
Also, you are adding 2011 in as a year that he is not good. When is the last time we had a 150 OPS+ from a RF?
TRS86
5/25/2011-9:18am at 9:18 am (UTC -4)
It still does not matter, Jose would have to win the MVP to get a deal like Crawford. His injury history and maturity issues will keep his numbers down. I suspect at most 6/18 per. 7/142? No way do I see that.
Also, thinking that Beltran has not earned his money while here is just plain faulty at best. Sorry I will never agree here. Yeah when you sign a player to 7 years you run the risk of injury. However, during that span of 4 years he was the best CF in the league. His earnings based on stats would have been, (remember this is based on what other players do that season, 9.1, 29.1, 22.5, 34.3, 13.5, 3.2, 8.1 so far this season. While you may not believe in these stats as gospel, I think they more than show that he has been worth his contract.
Wright? Seriously I disagree on this one. No he is not an ELITE. I agree. Very few are elites, that term is saved for the Pujols of the game. However, superstar? Every bit of it. 29 HR, 100+ RBI, 19 steals last year from 3B while being great in the clubhouse, off the field, pristine in every interview, standing up when other shy away, playing through pain, adversity…. yeah just as Keith was a superstar, so is Wright. Yeah, I know Keith won a WS but I think the talent surrounding him in 86 was far greater than the talent that has even thought about surrounding Wright.
To me what is much more damning with this comment is that with a 150 million dollar payroll you are admitting that your franchise player is not even a superstar and you basically don’t have one on your team. Hell that alone then should warrant criticism of Fred to the utmost.
njstuckintx
5/25/2011-9:33am at 9:33 am (UTC -4)
On Reyes, Why? Crawford got a “crawford like” contract and he was never MVP? You can bring up “crawford isn’t a leadoff hitter (3 hole hitter)”, but I’ll bring up “Reyes is a shortstop”. I think that balances out the 2. Even if he “only” gets 18 per, he’ll get 7 years. 7/126 is close enough to Crawford money. We can quibble over +/- 10 million or so, but at that point, does it really matter? He’s getting 7 years. If Werth of all people can get what he got after only 2 pretty good years and play OF and be 30 yrs+ of age, my skills in algebra come up with If A = B and B= C and C= D then A = D and Reyes = 7 years and big money.
Maybe we just see it differently, which is fine. The above is just my 2 cents on the matter.
kingman 26
5/25/2011-9:37am at 9:37 am (UTC -4)
If, and again this is still a decent sized if–he finishes this year playing 155+ games, and with the numbers he is on pace for, he will be 28, with 5 of 7 seasons healthy and hugely productive offensively, with great speed, and with excellent fielding ability.
The Phils, Angels, Yanks, Red Sox, Mariners at least–ALL high-spending teams–will be stepping over each other to offer him a Crawford deal.
Crawford is a LF; BIG difference.
Think of the teams who need a long-term SS answer! DEEEEEP pockets.
TRS86
5/25/2011-10:12am at 10:12 am (UTC -4)
Yeah he will be in high demand. However, I do not see him getting 20M a year for 7 years.
Lets look at Reyes and Crawford.
Since 2004
Reyes .284, .335, .434, .768, 101 OPS+
G 855, R 587, H 1035, 2B 179, 3B 79, HR 69, RBI 347, SB 318/82 CS.
Crawford .301, .344, .461, .806, 113 OPS+
G 1021, R 662, H 1236, 2B 186, 3B 90, HR 97, RBI 508, SB 345/75 CS.
Crawford in September for his career: .305 .347 .453 .800 best BA of any month.
Reyes in September for his career: .250 .306 .389 .696
Last year in September for Crawford in a heated pennant race: .360 .402 .588 .989
2007 with the Mets in a heated pennant race and collapsing, Reyes: .205 .279 .333 .612
High leverage for career:
Crawford: .295 .344 .452 .796
Reyes: .263 .332 .367 .699
WAR since 2004: (Factors in offense, defense, base running, position, park, league)
Crawford 33.3
Reyes 27.2
Value:
Crawford around 130M from 2004-2011
Reyes 115M from 2004-2011
I just think there are some things that will keep his salary down. The health will be the primary factor but there are other things that show Crawford to be the superior player.
kingman 26
5/25/2011-10:17am at 10:17 am (UTC -4)
Well, first off, SS vs LF? Jose’s defensive value offsets some of this for sure.
Also, did the Angels crunch the numbers before taking on Vernon Wells’ salary?
How would an analysis like the above work for Jayson Werth, with two very good years and turning 32?
Seems crazy I know, but I just have to think that when one considers the teams who clearly need a new SS, and the numbers Jose could put up, his age, etc., he will get a lot of years and a lot of money.
TRS86
5/25/2011-10:24am at 10:24 am (UTC -4)
Werth is regarded as one of the worst contracts of all time and it’s clear the Nats had to overpay just to get anyone of substance to come to their team.
However, WAR and Value both factor in SS vs LF. While SS is much more of a premium position, Crawford’s defense in LF is so far above anyone else in LF that it balances out.
One other thing to keep in mind is that Crawford has shown the ability to hit 1-3 in the lineup, something that Reyes basically refuses to do.
TRS86
5/25/2011-10:25am at 10:25 am (UTC -4)
This is making me look anti-Reyes. I love Reyes and hope the Mets keep him. I just don’t think he will get Crawford money. Not unless somehow the Yankees get in the bidding and I am not sure they are ready for that controversy.
kingman 26
5/25/2011-10:31am at 10:31 am (UTC -4)
I both love and hate Jose, and truly hope they sign him for 8 years. Yeah, his antics, lack of focus, baserunning errors, and Sept collapses madden me, but I have followed the guy since the low minors like I did with Gooden, Straw, Tim Leary, and others.
Agreed on the LF/SS idea, but still, LFs just do not have as much of an impact on the game as SSs do I think.
And it is not just the Yanks–seriously—Mets, Yanks, Red Sox, Angels, Phils, Mariners—ALL need SSs.
Think of the contracts those teams have given the last five years.
Jose and his agents must do serious handshake dances every time they get together and think about this!
TRS86
5/25/2011-10:36am at 10:36 am (UTC -4)
You honestly think the Yanks will move Jeter off SS next year? I am not so sure. Also, do the Redsox want to pay the luxury tax? They have holes in the rotation that need to be fixed. There will be plenty of bidders but for it to get to Crawford level I think the Yanks and Redsox would have to both be in the bidding for real, not just price driving.
kingman 26
5/25/2011-10:51am at 10:51 am (UTC -4)
Jose is a unique talent, and with the other players the Yanks and Sox have, he might do a lot more growing up.
Hate to admit it, but being around Jeter, Mariano, Tex, ARod, Youkilis, Ortiz, etc., might make Jose grow up and focus a hell of a lot more then being around what we have.
And sure they might move Jeter and sure he might willingly move to welcome Reyes and also to show his legacy as a “leader” and a “team-first guy” just as ARod moved to third.
kingman 26
5/25/2011-9:33am at 9:33 am (UTC -4)
I love Wright, I hope he one day holds the WS trophy as a Met, looks into the camera and gives the middle finger to every loser idiot “fan” who bleats the “unclutch” hosesh*t.
But last year? A .283/.354/.503 line? 161K? Indisputably worse defense? Calling Wright a superstar in 2010 is outright ridiculous.
TRS86
5/25/2011-9:42am at 9:42 am (UTC -4)
29 HR, 100+ RBI and 19 SB from a 3B with little to no protection in the lineup who takes the field everyday and while being a leader both on and off the field? yeah, I guess I am ridiculous.
kingman 26
5/25/2011-9:59am at 9:59 am (UTC -4)
Superstar numbers last year?
You are being VERY ridiculous.
Look at Wright’s 2007–2008—hits, K, BA, OBP.
Look at a Pujols year. An ARod year. Those are superstars.
Wright’s a star and a great guy, and from 2005–2008 was on the verge of superstardom.
He has gone backwards the last few years, indisputably.
It’s not all HR and RBI, as you know. His BA, OBP, BB, and K have all declined, as has his fielding. He’s been in decline since 2008.
TRS86
5/25/2011-10:21am at 10:21 am (UTC -4)
Kingman, you are getting IMO superstar and elite mixed up. Pujols and Arod are elites, based on numbers alone no doubt HOF.
Even since 2009 Wright is 2nd in the NL among 3B with at least 1200 AB’s in WAR.
Obviously his stats have declined the last couple of years but when you take 2005-2011 you get by far the best 3B stats even surpassing Chipper. Of course in terms of ranking a player longevity counts. Comparing him to Kranepool is much more ridiculous than me saying that he is a superstar.
kingman 26
5/25/2011-10:26am at 10:26 am (UTC -4)
I wasn’t comparing him to Kranepool; that was meant to illustrate that being a franchise leader in stats–for a younger franchise with VERY few great offensive players—can have a lot more to do with longevity and the particular team than it does with being a superstar.
And to me, “elite” and “superstar” are sports synonyms. Mariano. Pujols. ARod. Griffey. LeBron. Wade. Kobe. Brady. Pagan. They are elite and they are superstars.
Wright’s a star, an all-star, a great player, but not an elite superstar.
TRS86
5/25/2011-10:34am at 10:34 am (UTC -4)
To me those 2 words are completely different things. Reyes, Wright and Beltran all super-stars in terms of career.
To me HOF is elite and many superstars will and should not ever get in.
kingman 26
5/25/2011-10:48am at 10:48 am (UTC -4)
Totally disagree, and I think common usage of the words would too.
There aren’t dozens and dozens and dozens of “superstars.”
Beltran’s no superstar; maybe he was for three years. Reyes maybe was one for three years thus far.
Pujols, Mariano—they are superstars.
TRS86
5/25/2011-11:09am at 11:09 am (UTC -4)
Actually they were having this debate on ESPN and you would be surprised.
kingman 26
5/25/2011-10:01am at 10:01 am (UTC -4)
Of course he was a star and very good and an excellent person as always, but “superstar” in 2010?
Not true by any stretch of the imagination.
kingman 26
5/25/2011-8:26am at 8:26 am (UTC -4)
Ed Kranepool once held many Met offensive records.
Longevity does not always equal true greatness.
I guess the way you are acting about this makes me understand the way you feel when you think I am dramatically overreacting to something.
The team has little talent. Tejada, FMart, Paulino, and Misch are not everyday MLB players right now.
rustyjr
5/25/2011-8:35am at 8:35 am (UTC -4)
Very true about Krane – but he still is a Met legend – whether he was a star or not btw no one expected 2/3 of the infield to be out and our best pitcher ( young) to get knocked out one month into the season – snakebit is right
kingman 26
5/25/2011-8:41am at 8:41 am (UTC -4)
True, but you must admit my friend, what we have on the bench and in the minor leagues is basically a bunch of minor leaguers.
Our depth and kids: Hairston, Harris, Pridie, Duda, Paulino, Tejada, FMart, Misch, Thole, Niese….
Terrible, mediocre, and/or not ready.
Turner had a good couple of weeks. Murph? He might simply be a hustling guy who hits .250.
The legacy of Omar is that of a Potemkin Village—a shiny facade fronted by star players, with a rotten foundation and literally zero depth.
rustyjr
5/25/2011-8:49am at 8:49 am (UTC -4)
No doubt – still waiting for your comment on my latest column lol ( yes I am obsessive about feedback lol)
kingman 26
5/25/2011-9:07am at 9:07 am (UTC -4)
Wait no longer!
rustyjr
5/25/2011-9:11am at 9:11 am (UTC -4)
Comment…
saltygary
5/25/2011-10:59am at 10:59 am (UTC -4)
I’m really starting to enjoy Jim Bowden’s new blog on ESPN. Below is the link to the home page. The top article is some trade analysis and the next one is about Wilpon’s comments. I fimd his opinion interesting seeing he was with the reds during the Marge Schott era.
http://espn.go.com/blog/the-gms-office
njstuckintx
5/25/2011-11:10am at 11:10 am (UTC -4)
It’s getting close to where we’ll start seeing some of these moves happen. June is next week…
stickguy
5/25/2011-12:50pm at 12:50 pm (UTC -4)
He writes good stuff.
Interesting though he specifically said beltran had microfracture surgery. I thought they always denied that?
and sadly, he did not list bay as a prime trade guy!
TRS86
5/25/2011-11:16am at 11:16 am (UTC -4)
Interesting take from Bowden being a former GM:
“My opinion: David is a really good kid, a very good player and is developing into a superstar. The huge outfield dimensions at Citi Field have changed his approach and swing. He may not be Albert Pujols, but put him in Great American Ball Park or Citizens Bank Park and he’ll be a 40-homer, 120-RBI superstar in time. He ranks among the top five third basemen in baseball. “
kingman 26
5/25/2011-11:33am at 11:33 am (UTC -4)
What I was saying.
He’s no Pujols-level superstar, but he was on his way before the last 2 years.
Top 5 isn’t superstar; top 1-2 is.
TRS86
5/25/2011-11:41am at 11:41 am (UTC -4)
OK then for the last 5 years combined he was top 2. That makes him a superstar. Yeah his numbers have not been as good the last 2 years but that does not take away what he has done for 5.
kingman 26
5/25/2011-12:23pm at 12:23 pm (UTC -4)
Here’s Toobin’s take:
“But is he Albert Pujols? Is he A-Rod? Is he Ryan Howard? I think its quite obvious that he is not.”
Wright’s not a superstar, unless the definition is greatly expanded and redefined.
Under the commonly used definition for superstar–ARod, Pujols, Mariano, Halladay, etc., Wright’s not. Was on the way from 2005–2008, never quite got there, and is not even reasonably arguable as one since the beginning of 2009.
stickguy
5/25/2011-12:45pm at 12:45 pm (UTC -4)
Sometimes, you 2 remind me of my kids. They can argue about anything, and sometimes it seems they change sides in the middle.
TRS86
5/25/2011-12:47pm at 12:47 pm (UTC -4)
Still disagree on what makes a superstar and I think it very much differs from the elite. There are tons of superstars that will never be in the HOF.
TRS86
5/25/2011-12:50pm at 12:50 pm (UTC -4)
To me superstar factors in more than just offensive stats but includes on the field, off the field, clubhouse, overall value to the team, the organization, value to the fans…
kingman 26
5/25/2011-12:54pm at 12:54 pm (UTC -4)
“There are tons of superstars that will never be in the HOF.”
No, there aren’t. You have a very unusual definition of superstar. Superstar, elite, and HOFer are largely the same to me, and to most people.
Mays, Mantle, Aaron, Seaver, Piazza, Pujols, Gibson, Randy Johnson, Bonds, Mariano—-Elite. HOFers. Superstars.
Wright, Reyes, Holliday, Utley, Berkman, Youkilis, Crawford, Schilling, Koosman, Gooden, Strawberry–all-stars, stars, NOT superstars.
All-stars and stars are not what the overwhelming majority considers superstars, even if you do.
Even your little friends over at Moronblog disagree with you.
TRS86
5/25/2011-1:02pm at 1:02 pm (UTC -4)
My little friends at Moronblog? What the hell are you talking about and what is the need for potshots during a disagreement?
Again, I am not sure either of us are right or wrong on this and it is not black and white. I completely disagree that those 3 words are the same and saying that your opinion concurs with most people to me would also be incorrect. Think about the NBA for example. What defines a superstar there? Is Carmelo Anthony a superstar? How about Dirk? NFL, Big Ben? Was Tiki Barber? Again, I don’t think those lines are clearly drawn at all. I don’t think superstar is limited to just the Pujols, Jordan, Payton types. I think it also includes a much broader group of players and includes much more than stats.
kingman 26
5/25/2011-1:05pm at 1:05 pm (UTC -4)
Oh please, I just was referring to people on Metsblog since I happened to peek at the comments there.
It’s not a potshot.
Geez, stop being so hypersensitive.
Carmelo and Dirk are superstars and almost certain HOFers.
Tiki absolutely not, Big Ben probably not, but too early to judge.
kingman 26
5/25/2011-1:07pm at 1:07 pm (UTC -4)
You are the one whose definition of “superstar” is very different from the common usage by fans, ESPN, authors, the media, the common vernacular etc.
Elite/HOF/superstar are virtual synonyms.
Star/all-star/David Wright are virtual synonyms.
I admit I am wrong all the time.
You can too; it would be good for you.
TRS86
5/25/2011-1:08pm at 1:08 pm (UTC -4)
Considering that some of our own post at Metsblog I find it a little off to call them all morons. There are a few intelligent posters there stuck in never-land. Also, by saying you mean nothing by it why call them “my little friends” are they not your friends as well? Considering they are morons why should we care what they have to say on the issue?
TRS86
5/25/2011-1:09pm at 1:09 pm (UTC -4)
Really? So HOF and Superstar are synonymous yet you do not believe that Eddie Murray is a superstar? Which is it?
TRS86
5/25/2011-1:10pm at 1:10 pm (UTC -4)
Why the hell would I admit I am wrong on something that is not measurable and is a choice of opinion? This is not a right or wrong debate.
kingman 26
5/25/2011-1:13pm at 1:13 pm (UTC -4)
OK, all superstars are Hall of Famers.
Not all Hall of Famers are superstars.
Superstar means elite, among the VERY best.
Ruth, Aaron, Mays, Brett, Seaver, Walter Johnson, Gehrig, etc.
Niekro and Eddie Murray and Don Sutton are HOFers, but because they were stars who played a very long time.
Wright could be a HOFer if he does what he did last year for another 10–12 years, but he will certainly not be at the level of Pujols or Bonds or Aaron.
kingman 26
5/25/2011-1:14pm at 1:14 pm (UTC -4)
Superstar means icon, known nationally and maybe internationally by non-fans, league leader in lots of things.
Pujols and ARod.
Not Wright.
TRS86
5/25/2011-1:18pm at 1:18 pm (UTC -4)
I thought they were synonymous?
Again there is no sports dictionary defining what superstar means and each person’s definition will differ. I personally feel that it also takes into account off the field as well as value to the team both on and off the field.
Example a guy like Jeter to me is a superstar. He has only lit up the leader board twice in his career as well but there is no doubt that he is a superstar. He may not be playing like one now but superstar none the less.
TRS86
5/25/2011-1:27pm at 1:27 pm (UTC -4)
Also, is Arod still a superstar by your definition? He has not lead the league in anything since 2008 and has an .885 OPS the last 3 years.
kingman 26
5/25/2011-4:55pm at 4:55 pm (UTC -4)
STILL?
No.
For his career?
He’s an unquestioned superstar and a 1st ballot HOFer.
If you are equating ARod and Wright, well, good for you.
kingman 26
5/25/2011-12:59pm at 12:59 pm (UTC -4)
“There are tons of superstars that will never be in the HOF.”
The more I think about this, the more I disagree.
There are MANY HOFers who were NOT superstars.
Phil Niekro? Ralph Kiner?
No way.
Seaver, Aaron, Mays, Pujols—that’s superstar level.
Can ANYONE else weigh in here please??
stickguy
5/25/2011-1:02pm at 1:02 pm (UTC -4)
Don’t sell Kiner short. In his day, he was. And he got to the HOF on that, not hanging on forever and accumulating, like neikro and many others.
In this discussion though, i lean toward your side. Superstars are the jordan types. the best.
TRS86
5/25/2011-11:21am at 11:21 am (UTC -4)
“Whether Wilpon made these comments to deflect his own personal problems, or whether he made them to prepare the fan base for the upcoming fire sale, it really doesn’t matter. The damage has been done. The public relations blunders has been made. Now Mr. Wilpon, stop talking, go upstairs and let team president Sandy Alderson and manager Terry Collins do the rest of the talking. Let them handle the damage control, and let them rebuild the relationships with the players. “
stickguy
5/25/2011-12:40pm at 12:40 pm (UTC -4)
Me? i don’t think he made them for any of those reasons. I think he was just an old guy shooting the bull watching a game, and drifted into ‘senior moment” territory and forgot who he was shooting with.
I can’t see fred as doing this as part of some big plan.
metsfan4decades
5/25/2011-12:19pm at 12:19 pm (UTC -4)
Haven’t read all the comments above yet and will get to that later but wanted to add my two cents now.
I have no problem that Fred was THINKING these things. I do have a problem that he made them vocal to a reporter doing a story. He may be a fan but he’s the owner first and foremost. If this is indeed a ‘shitty’ team well then Fred, the buck stops with you. By virtue of the FO you constructed prior to this year, Omar and Co. put this team together. And that’s the sticking point I don’t think Fred gets.
If the team has sucked, does suck, has a thin farm system, is broke, isn’t likely to contend for years going forward….does he honestly think it’s just fate? From his remarks, it sounds like he does. Time to wake up and smell the coffee. The team as currently constructly is the result of those who you hired to make it so.
stickguy
5/25/2011-12:43pm at 12:43 pm (UTC -4)
I agree that the result was largely the residue of design, and the buck stops with him (for setting the tone/direction and putting people in place).
But man, there were a few WTF moments that you can’t blame at all on Fred or the system. But maybe not that many (including injury issues that escalated, such as reyes or beltran, from improper handling early on and rushing them back).
Ah, screw it. Fred gets all the blame right back on him. And if you give some to Jeff, Fred gets that too for putting the boob kid in charge.
TRS86
5/25/2011-12:45pm at 12:45 pm (UTC -4)
That’s my point with Wright. If with a 150M payroll and unlimted resources his best player and face of the franchise is not a superstar then that is the most damning thing of his ownership there is available.
kingman 26
5/25/2011-1:02pm at 1:02 pm (UTC -4)
George Brett? Superstar. Tony Gwynn? Superstar.
Eddie Murray? Don Sutton? Bert Blyleven? No way. Great players, all-stars, HOFers due to longevity, but not superstars.
TRS86
5/25/2011-1:03pm at 1:03 pm (UTC -4)
I would agree on Bert and Don, not sure about Eddie.
kingman 26
5/25/2011-1:10pm at 1:10 pm (UTC -4)
I will give you more—leading the league in various stats.
Wright’s never led the league in ANYTHING but sac flies.
Check out the guys I mention—led in loads of things loads of times.
Wright’s very good at many things, but not among the very best at anything.
TRS86
5/25/2011-1:11pm at 1:11 pm (UTC -4)
Yet has he lead 3B in WAR for the last 5 years combined?
kingman 26
5/25/2011-1:15pm at 1:15 pm (UTC -4)
PRECISELY!
“Wright’s very good at many things, but not among the very best at anything.”
Tell me about Pagan’s WAR and Bay’s UZR again??
TRS86
5/25/2011-1:24pm at 1:24 pm (UTC -4)
Just because you do not agree with the stat does not make it faulty. Of course with any stat it has to be taken in context and it’s best to look at it over a course of time instead of one season. Pagan during that 1.5 year span was one of the top CF. Does not mean that he would continue it.
Wright we are not talking about a 1 year span we are talking about over the course of the last 5 years is at the top of most of the offensive categories for his position during that time resulting in a very high WAR. You don’t have to be exceptional in any one single category to be considered a superstar.
Let me ask you this, is Ryan Howard a superstar? Certainly not if you only go by 2010 and 2011. Is Chase Utley a superstar? .869 OPS the last 3 years combined.
Dirtysanchez
5/25/2011-2:33pm at 2:33 pm (UTC -4)
Bottom line fellas…the owner should not be saying the face of HIS franchise is not a superstar…no matter what shade of superstar David may be.
kingman 26
5/25/2011-4:54pm at 4:54 pm (UTC -4)
Agree 100%.
kingman 26
5/25/2011-4:53pm at 4:53 pm (UTC -4)
LOL!
I agree with the stats sometimes, but as my two examples show, those stats can be VERY faulty.
And I use Utley above as an example of a non-superstar.
Howard’s best years are WAY above Wright’s best years.
TRS86
5/25/2011-1:36pm at 1:36 pm (UTC -4)
2 final things on this.
Websters definition of superstar: one who is considered extremely talented, has great public appeal, and can usually command a high salary. WAY too much leeway for anyone to narrow down exactly what is a superstar and each person will differ.
Getting distracted from the true implication of this. The Mets play in NY, have a 150 million dollar payroll and have a franchise that does not have a superstar. If true then wouldn’t that damn Fred more than anything else he has done?
kistics
5/25/2011-1:56pm at 1:56 pm (UTC -4)
http://www.the7line.bigcartel.com/product/gettin-shitty-at-citi
To bring a joy in your day…
TRS86
5/25/2011-1:59pm at 1:59 pm (UTC -4)
LOL, Mets fans should do a blue out with those soon.
kistics
5/25/2011-2:02pm at 2:02 pm (UTC -4)
Great idea!
TRS86
5/25/2011-2:03pm at 2:03 pm (UTC -4)
Here’s a great question relayed by Mike Silva:
Howard Megdal lays it out best in Capital New York when he asks “how can he (Wilpon) possibly expect to hold onto the team if he’s selling 49 percent now just to cover 2011 losses, debt payments on Citi Field and a loan due back to Major League Baseball by the end of the season?”
stickguy
5/25/2011-2:13pm at 2:13 pm (UTC -4)
Make it up on volume?
actually, my smart ass comment is true. Increase attendance. Only thing that is going to keep them from going broke 9the team), unless the owners want to start liquidating other assets to pour money into the team.
the real answer? Cut expenses to line up better with revenue.
TRS86
5/25/2011-2:25pm at 2:25 pm (UTC -4)
Yet once you do that you are locking yourself into a lower quality product AND a lower attendance with little hope of increase. That still would not allow you to make payments on loans that were based on maximum attendance instead of 50% attendance. You most likely would have to cut payroll even more than what lines up with revenue.
stickguy
5/25/2011-2:54pm at 2:54 pm (UTC -4)
Gross isn’t what counts. net is. Those loans were based on higher attendance, but also higher payroll.
and cutting payroll does not necessarily mean a lower quality product, if you are replacing expensive guys like Ollie, slappy, etc. with cheaper guys like Davis.
and payroll does not correlate directly with attendance. Look at the trend the last few years, or in 1993.
people come out to see interesting, dynamic, likeable teams that are putting up a fight, with more fence sitters if they are winning a lot.
of course if attendance falls to 1.4 mill, they will be up shits creek, but at some point, it will floor out, and start to rise as the team does.
stickguy
5/25/2011-2:57pm at 2:57 pm (UTC -4)
If nothing else, Fred was a gdsend for Blog hits!
Bottom line, IMO? Fred was a dumbass showing some of his age for making the comments in public. But other than annoying a few players, it will blow over and have no real significant impact ST or LT.
Most people probably paid no attention to Fred anyway, and aren’t going to start now. And as always, money will end up doing the talking.