The LoHud Mets Blog

If you’re like me, and I know you are, you’ve spent an inordinately large amount of time going to this page over at MLBTradeRumors.com and looking at the various players available to the Mets this winter via free agency. Prince Fielder! C.C. Sabathia! Nick Punto! The imagination can quickly run wild.

I’ve made an attempt to pare this concept down using the specific conditions that exist for the 2011 Mets, however. So I’m going to be writing about free agents by answering the following questions:

1. Can this player help the Mets?

2. What kind of contract can he expect?

3. Can the Mets afford him in 2012?

4. What is the maximum amount the Mets should offer him?

5. What are the chances I think he is a Met in 2012?

This set of questions moves beyond the simple binary questions and answers (Is Prince Fielder very good? Yes!) into how the specific inventory available to Sandy Alderson comports with what he has to spend, what else the Mets already have, and what it will take to add. I plan to apply this criteria to various players- some in the news, some I particularly like, some that are just interesting case studies in what the Mets can/should and can’t/shouldn’t do.

But I’m starting with Rod Barajas because he’s been at the top of MLBTradeRumors.com’s list for a long time, thanks to being the first catcher available alphabetically. He was also once on pace, as a Met, to hit 50 home runs in a season.

1. Can this player help the Mets? Sort of. The Mets have Josh Thole in-house for 2012, and Thole can hit righties pretty well and is young enough to catch the majority of games. So in a vacuum, adding Barajas to hit some lefties and back him up sounds like a good plan. But the beauty of Rod Barajas is that he isn’t a lefty masher or a righty masher. In true democratic fashion, he swings really hard, often misses, and sometimes connects against pitchers of all arms slots and sides. He’s got a .694 OPS career against righties, .710 against lefties.

So if the Mets are looking for a Thole partner- and they should be- there are better options than Barajas. The 36-year-old ranks middle of the pack among free agent catchers hitting lefties over the past three seasons. Guess who is at the top of the list, by the way: Ramon Castro. We’ll be discussing him in a future Free Agent Fit, I am sure.

2. What kind of contract can he expect? He signed for one-year, $3.25 million in 2011. It doesn’t seem implausible that he’ll get a similar deal for 2012, since his 2011 was quite similar to his 2010.

3. Can the Mets afford him in 2012? They can, probably- but with a limited budget to add players, spending that much on a backup catcher who doesn’t fit with Thole doesn’t really work.

4. What is the maximum amount the Mets should offer him? They probably shouldn’t bid here.

5. What are the chances I think he is a Met in 2012? Non-zero, depending on how the Mets do with their other backup catcher targets, and how much they want Barajas for his defensive prowess/communication with pitchers/teaching Josh Thole skills. He’s also a super-nice guy, and bright- two things the Mets have valued under Sandy Alderson.

 

ESPN’s Jayson Stark caused a fuss yesterday by discussing a potential Mets-Phillies trade. The parameters: pitcher Vance Worley, outfielder Domonic Brown and at least another top piece for David Wright.

Before we get into the specifics here, a few words of warning about those who would dismiss the rumor for one reason or another.

To those who would take issue with Stark, since he is a Philly guy, I’d respond: you aren’t paying attention. Stark is one of the best, most plugged-in writers in baseball, and has been for decades. Whether his loyalties as a fan are with the Phillies, or any team, it is his professional responsibility to get it right. Over and over again, he does. That’s what matters.

And for those who claim the Mets will suffer an attendance hit by dealing Wright- have you been paying attention since 2009? Attendance went from 3.1 million in 2009 to 2.56 million in 2010 to 2.35 million in 2011. But attendance, absent Reyes, won’t keep dipping in 2012 because the Mets keep Wright? I’m sorry, but “Hey, we didn’t lose both cornerstones!” isn’t a slogan bringing fans into Citi Field in droves.

As for the idea that if the Mets trade Wright, it shouldn’t be in-division: I don’t get it. Sure, the Phillies are a direct rival, so giving them David Wright makes no sense. But the Mets wouldn’t be giving Philly anything. They’d be trading. And the essential aspect of a swap is that you are getting something in return. Moreover, if you are making the trade, you at least think you are receiving more than you are giving up.

By that standard, isn’t an in-division trade ALWAYS better than a trade with, say, someone in the AL West? It is the equivalent of an in-division game: you get to help yourself and hurt an opponent at once! I’d also bet on Sandy Alderson over Ruben Amaro, Jr. in trade negotiations.

The proposed trade would do that, too, since the Phillies are rapidly reaching their expiration date. With some of the best starting pitching in recent memory, the Phillies won 102 games despite a below-average offense. In other words, this Phillies team will rise and fall on the performance of its aging starting pitching staff. Whether you think that happens in 2012 or 2013, it is likely to happen sooner than later, especially as the offense continues to deteriorate. The bloated salaries on the books also limit Philadelphia’s ability to retool. They’ve largely emptied the farm system, and haven’t been spending on player development over the last few years. Now, can David Wright help delay that offensive downturn? Yes, but he can’t make up for the declines of Ryan Howard, Chase Utley and Jimmy Rollins (if he even returns) all by himself.

Meanwhile, if Jose Reyes doesn’t return, and the smart money says he doesn’t, the Mets aren’t realistically looking to contend in 2012, and probably not 2013, either. In other words, they’d be getting young talent in Worley, who’d instantly become a top-of-the-rotation starter for the Mets, and Domonic Brown, who is valuable if he plays right field, super-valuable if he can stick in center field. By 2014, Wright is on his next contract, anyway- and 2013 if he gets traded, since that voids his 2013 club option.

I do feel the need to put this standard caveat in my analysis- the “this could all be avoided if ownership still had the capacity to spend generously on MLB salary, allowing them to keep Wright/Reyes, augment them, while also spending money to properly develop young talent, you know, like a big market team should” caveat. I’m providing analysis based on what is- but I don’t want people to forget that this was no more inevitable than any other man-made crisis.

So with that caveat, good luck, Sandy Alderson. If significant talent can be had for Wright, make the deal.

Jon Niese turns 25 this Thursday.  Put another way: someone was born, grew up, went through the minor leagues and established him as a major league starting pitcher since the last time the Mets won a World Series.

I’ve often thought of looking at Niese as a good measuring stick for exactly how long it has been since that elusive title. Niese is like The Portrait of Dorian Gray, growing ever older, while the memories of 1986 remain fresh in our minds, seeming to have happened yesterday. So how does the Mets Person Drought compare to other teams in Major League Baseball?

Twelve franchises have either never won a championship, or haven’t won more recently than the Mets. So while the Mets Person Drought is personified by Jon Niese, the Pirates are represented by pitcher John Ennis, whose last game in the major leagues was September 12, 2007. The Cleveland Indians are best represented by Cynthia Clawson, who in the time since the Indians last won on October 11, 1948, has won five Dove Awards and a Grammy for her gospel singing.

And while the Cubs don’t have a perfect representative born on October 14, 1908, it is worth noting that the economist John Kenneth Galbraith was born the very next day. Since the Cubs won a championship, Galbraith served under four presidents- Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson-and won the Medal of Freedom twice, before passing away in 2006.

That’s a lot of life to get in between championships. Let’s hope the Mets win another championship before Jon Niese wins the Medal of Freedom for a lifetime of public service in economics.

Chris Jaffe of The Hardball Times has a new piece up, detailing his system for determining the best postseason series of all time. He uses a similar theory to Bill James’ game score for pitchers, and the Mets placed two series in the top ten ever. At number 6, the 1986 NLCS. And at number one… the 1999 NLCS.

Color me surprised that the 1986 World Series didn’t make the top 20, and that 1999 NLCS made it to number 1. But it makes sense, if the full series is analyzed.

The 1986 World Series had a close 1-0 pitchers’ duel in Game 1, but it is easy to forget just how lopsided Games 2-5 were. Only Game 5’s 4-2 Boston win looks close, and those watching remember it wasn’t particularly eventful or suspenseful. Game 6 makes up for a lot- and Game 7 did feature the Mets coming back from an early 3-0 deficit- but up against all postseason series ever, I can see why it didn’t make the cut.

Meanwhile, that 1999 series was just ridiculous. Writes Jaffe:

“What’s really sets the 1999 NLCS series apart is how much late-inning drama it contained. Three times, a team tied the score in the eighth inning. Three times, a team took the lead in the eighth inning. Twice a contest went into extra innings. Both those contests ended in walk-off wins.”

I was privileged enough to go to Game 4, a battle that saw the Mets lead 1-0 into the eighth inning, fall behind 2-1, then execute a double steal to help power a game-winning rally in a 3-2 win. I assumed that game would go down as one of the greatest in Mets history. Instead, it was the third-best game they’d play within 96 hours, thanks to the Grand Slam Single in Game 5 and the heartbreaking Kenny Rogers Walk in Game 6.

That Game 6 would be a regular on SNY if only it had ended differently. Al Leiter, remember, got bombed pitching on two days’ rest. The Mets trailed 5-0, but rallied to 7-7 on a Piazza homer off of John Smoltz. The Mets lost two leads after that- one thanks to John Franco, the other by Armando Benitez- before Rogers came in and gave the series away.

There’s a reason that 1999 team is so beloved by Mets fans. That postseason provided more excitement than nearly any other in team history, even in the team’s elimination game.

And if history is any judge, that series stands up to any played by anyone.

So much of the Twitterverse, Blogosphere, and I can only assume, the Talk Radio Caller Archipelago of Shattered Dreams are up in arms about Joel Sherman’s column today. The piece suggested that, after talking with several sources within the organization, that Jose Reyes isn’t likely to return.
Surely this can’t be surprising to anyone paying attention.
Let me put it this way: every possible indicator- from the large ones, like how precarious the financial position of the team is, to the repeated efforts to move the goalposts on exactly what the offer is that is too ridiculous for the Mets to match- once Carl Crawford money (seven years, $142 million), now possibly $100 million or less, to even things like moving the season ticket renewal date up from December 15 (after the Winter Meetings) to November 7 (before free agency begins in earnest)- all suggest an organization moving forward with a plan to present the PR case that they tried, rather than an organization actually trying to bring Reyes back.
It’s the difference between the pursuits of Vladimir Guerrero and Carlos Beltran. If you watched those, you know the difference.
I still hope I am wrong, and as long as Reyes hasn’t signed a contract to play elsewhere, a change of heart could theoretically occur. But it looks silly to me to believe this is really a 50-50 shot. It will require a fundamental change in the trajectory of this story for Jose Reyes to remain a Met.

The always-industrious Matthew Eddy posted some minor league transactions over at Baseball America. There are some names that could potentially help the Mets, and I’ve broken down a few of my favorites here.

Just to get ahead of the reaction from some quarters every time I bring up minor moves like this- no, none of these players are likely to turn the franchise around by themselves. But that’s not how turning a franchise around works. Even if the Mets were operating under normal financial conditions, the way to win is by squeezing talent out of every avenue it is available. Minor league free agents are one such avenue, particularly for a franchise lacking in depth at the upper minor league levels.

So, with that in mind, let’s get to a few of my favorites on Eddy’s newest list:

Matt Liuzza, C: Just released by the Toronto Blue Jays, Liuzza had a down year, posting a .224/.325/.373 line at mostly Double-A. He only posted 154 plate appearances, thanks to a back injury that kept him out from May until August. But he returned near the end of the season, and is just a year removed from posting a .251/.389/.456 line in High-A ball. He’s 27, so time is running short for him, but with catchers often developing later offensively, and the Mets with a real depth problem at the position organization-wide, I’d love to see Liuzza picked up and given the chance to catch regularly in Binghamton or Buffalo. His position and control of the strike zone make him worth a shot.

Brandon Boggs, OF: A minor league free agent most recently with Milwaukee, Boggs is a wise pickup for the Mets for similar reasons to Liuzza. He’s got terrific control of the strike zone, and he plays center field, a position of need for New York. Boggs put up a .241/.381/.419 line for Triple-A Nashville in 2011, and is a year removed from hitting .290/.406/.470 in Triple-A Oklahoma City. Yes, offensive stats in the Pacific Coast League should be taken skeptically (though Jeff Sackmann/Dan Szymborski had the team’s home park playing as a slight pitcher-friendly environment), but Boggs, who will be 29, seems to possess skills that Jason Pridie clearly doesn’t.

Anthony Slama, P: Most recently with Minnesota, I can’t begin to understand why Slama, who has a career minor league ERA of 2.08 and 12.2 strikeouts per nine innings, didn’t get a chance to pitch with the Twins. He’ll be 28 next year, and for a team in need of bullpen help, this is how you do it- grabbing a bunch of Slama-types, and see what sticks. Hope he is in camp most of all.

As Mets fans push through October by remembering the 1986 playoffs, Dwight Gooden will share his memories of both the on-field and off-field experiences on ESPN’s tremendous program E60 tonight at 8 PM. The interview is by Jeremy Schaap, so you know it will be good.

Sadly, the stories he has to tell are, as most of you know, battles with addiction as completely has they are battles against the Cardinals, Astros and Red Sox. For one thing, Gooden apparently missed the 1986 World Series parade due to a night pursuing crack.

You simply couldn’t have convinced me back in the 1980s that this would be Dwight Gooden’s legacy. Among pitchers in the 1980s with at least 1,000 innings pitched, he was second in ERA+ to Roger Clemens with a mark of 132. He was fifth in K/9 at 8.14. His 100 wins placed him 27th- but he didn’t even get started until 1984. From 1984-1989, he only trailed Frank Viola. And as the 1990s dawned, he was just turning 25.

Here’s hoping for the best for Doc going forward. It hasn’t gone to plan so far.

There are a few details worth noting from the settlement reached yesterday between Dodgers owner Frank McCourt and his wife, Jamie.

Notice that he has until spring to come up with $130 million. Now that a settlement has been reached, he faces a hard deadline of next spring. This tells you all you need to know about the inherent problems the Mets would have settling the suit brought by Irving Picard, trustee for the Madoff victims. If they’d merely settled for $300 million- the fictitious profits sought by Picard, not the settlement- they’d have had to come up with $300 million.

Remember that the $200 million they were set to receive from David Einhorn wasn’t going to Picard- it was going toward paying other, more pressing debt. And why was it more pressing? Because the ongoing litigation, rather than settlement, meant whatever they end up owing Picard wasn’t yet due.

But the other interesting fact worth noting here comes from this statement: “If the court grants the auction but mandates the money be used only for the Dodgers, then Frank could try to sell a minority share in the team or some of the land surrounding Dodger Stadium. However, Commissioner Bud Selig almost certainly would oppose any such sale unless the money went back into the Dodgers.”

The proposed sale to Einhorn would have paid for 2011 team losses, a loan to MLB, and paid down some of the debt against the team. If the above paragraph is correct, however, it suggests that the Mets won’t be able to sell a minority portion of the team to pay for any portion of a Picard judgment.

Then again, it hasn’t been clear so far that Selig expects all his teams to play by the same rules. So anything is still possible. It would just provide us with a specific example of the Dodgers and Mets getting different treatment.

As for that case against the Mets itself, it continues forward. The latest battle is over a jury trial- the Mets are against it, the trustee is for it. Make of that what you will.

Forgive me, but I don’t have a strong reaction to the news that Bob Geren will be the new bench coach for the Mets.

He’ll be, ultimately, a cog in the decisions made by Terry Collins. And a manager’s decisions- not the effort put into the season by the players, but his tactical decisions- are worth a small number of runs either way over an entire year.

So sure, Geren could be worth a fraction of that, positively or negatively.

For Collins, getting that input is key, since his job depends on maximizing that impact. Ultimately, for the rest of us, it is unlikely the entire tenure of Bob Geren, bench coach, will mean very much.

And I think we’re ready to call it. With both Jorge Velandia’s career and Nelson Cruz’s career reporting, LoHud Mets Blog is ready to project the winner of the trade between the Mets and Athletics back on August 30, 2000 for… Billy Beane and the Athletics.

What a surprise.

Let’s take you back, shall we? The Mets in 2000 were contenders. But on May 29, Rey Ordonez suffered a fractured left arm in a game against the Dodgers. (What is it about playing in Los Angeles that hurts Met shortstops?!?) He missed the remainder of the season.

Springing into action, Steve Phillips determined that stopgap shortstop Melvin Mora couldn’t handle the position. So he traded the talented youngster along with three other prospects for Mike Bordick, a player who’d played good defense while providing below-average hitting for years at the position. But Bordick was 34- his defense simply wasn’t what it had been, while his offense didn’t make up for his glove.  The Mets also had Kurt Abbott as a backup plan at the position.

Ah, but why stop there? If two poor solutions to a problem won’t cut it, why not get three? So the Mets traded Cruz, a player with a ton of ability, but so raw he’d yet to play in a minor league game, for Velandia. Jorge Velandia was already 25, with a sub-.700 OPS as a minor leaguer. In the Casey Stengel parlance, in five years he had a good chance to be 30. His die was cast.

The point isn’t that Steve Phillips, or anyone else, should have known Nelson Cruz would become a star. The point is that no one knows. So what you don’t do is trade a Nelson Cruz for a known, mediocre commodity. You collect the Nelson Cruz/Jason Bays of the world (Bay, remember, was traded by the Mets for Steve Reed in 2002), and the ones who pan out become low-cost options for your team, if not stars in your lineup.

So yes, I hold Steve Phillips responsible for trading away Nelson Cruz. If he had done so for some kind of certainty at a position of need, fine. But wasting a prospect for a third, unpalatable alternative at a position? No, that’s not what a good GM does.

As I expressed last night on Twitter, it seems fairly evident to me that Theo Epstein’s move to become the next General Manager of the Chicago Cubs is a net negative for the Mets.
From a competitive standpoint, one of the industry’s best GMs will now be constructing teams that will stand between the Mets and a World Series. But that is only a part of it.
I believe that the advantage the American League has held over the National League in recent years has a lot to do with the performance of the largest markets in each league. Simply put: New York, Chicago, Los Angeles have been irregular contenders at best in the past few years. Only Philly has had sustained success. Meanwhile, New York, Boston, Los Angeles have all been sustained winners in the AL. Chicago has outperformed its NL counterpart. And Tampa Bay has been better than any equivalent small-market NL team.
So shifting that NL landscape isn’t a net positive for the Mets. Moreover, Theo’s right-hand man remains in Boston. So it is reasonable to expect the Red Sox will continue to perform at near-efficiency. Now, so will the Cubs.
Someday, when ownership of the Mets can afford to treat the Mets like a large-market team again, having another large-market team in the bidding for both the best players, and prepared to pay a premium for players a smart GM recognizes as having upside, will produce a negative effect on the Mets overall.
End of the day, this is small potatoes compared to the need to resolve the ownership situation. But baseball, and procurement of talent, is a zero-sum game. So it has an effect.

It would be fair to say my first vivid memory of the New York Mets, as a fan, happened 25 years ago today. On a Saturday afternoon, as a six-year-old, I watched Lenny Dykstra’s game-winning home run next to my father. As I recounted in my book, Taking the Field, my father proceeded to dance in celebration, singing “The Mexican Hat Dance” as he did so. We then took a trip to the Camden County Library’s book sale, where I loaded up on baseball books, with a pile that reached nearly to my eyes. I’d guess that’s how my link between baseball and writing about baseball formed.

This morning, I started re-watching the game with my 18-month-old daughter, Mirabelle. She’s certainly picked up the game earlier than I did. Recently, at a frozen yogurt shop, while holding my daughter, I had the following exchange with the woman behind the counter:

WOMAN: Can she say Mommy and Daddy?

ME: You know the New York Mets?

WOMAN (uncertainly): Yes.

ME: Mirabelle, who’s the Mets catcher. Josh…

MIRABELLE: Thole!

She can actually do this for the entire makeshift starting lineup from September (Justin… Turner!), and starts to sing “Jose, Jose Jose Jose” when I say the word “shortstop”. No one can quite figure out if this is adorable, or signs that I’m successfully brainwashing my daughter in an unholy way.

To which I respond: can’t it be both?

But all I’m really doing here is laying the groundwork. No, we won’t be watching any postseason games this year involving the Mets. But by the time we do, I’m hoping she’ll manage to experience the same level of excitement about them that I did when I was six years old, and truth be told, that I’d feel today at age 31. We’ll certainly be watching with my father when that happens. I’m going to assume, when it does, that he will dance again, and this time, so will she.

Hope you are enjoying the holiday. As most of you know, it was on this date back in 1492 that Christopher Columbus built three ships and sailed all the way from Italy to America using a map of the West Indies. Just a spectacular accomplishment in 24 hours.

Here are a few links to get you through the day:

Our brother Chad Jennings, over at the LoHud Yankees Blog, mentions the possibility that the Yankees could decline Nick Swisher’s 2012 option and sign Carlos Beltran to play right. I agree with Chad- a three-year, $42 million commitment to Beltran carries enough risk that bringing Swisher back for less money and a one year commitment is the smarter play. I do think a team in need of a right fielder will be very happy with Carlos Beltran in 2012, however.

Greg Prince over at Faith and Fear in Flushing has rewritten YMCA in honor of the Phillies losing. Greg is as much fun in person as he is on the page, and since he doesn’t plug his book enough, here’s a link to where you can buy it. It will help get you through the winter, I promise.

Chris Jaffe has written a tremendous piece about the 1962 expansion draft. I happen to love the game Baseball Mogul, which allows you to take control of any team from 1901 to the present, and run it for as long as life lets you. Needless to say, I’ve taken over the 1962 Mets, and done things very differently in the expansion draft.

And Mark Simon over at ESPN has some further discussion of the 1986 NLCS as a whole.

I love that Mark Simon of ESPN has this much to say about the least-exciting game in the 1986 NLCS. I’ve been going back to these games via DVD to get my Mets playoff fix; have all of you?

Game 3’s anniversary is coming up, and I’ll share a little about what feels like my initiation as a New York Mets fan on Tuesday.

What do you remember about watching this series?

This look at NYSEG Stadium in Binghamton makes me miss baseball.