Reportedly, the Mets have reached a deal with Jason Bay, formerly of the Boston Red Sox and the Pittsburgh Pirates.Bay has been a perennial offensive force in the National (and more recently) and American leagues. His fielding and baserunning are both subpar, but for the Mets, a team sorely lacking in the power department, Bay seems to be a part of the solution.
* * *
Here's the thing: The Mets shouldn't (nor, I think, do they) think that this is it. The starting rotation last year was weak, when healthy. Importing a pitcher seems to be a necessity if the Mets expect to contend. I thought the pitcher who made the most sense was Jason Marquis. Apparently, either the Mets disagree, or they don't find acquiring another starter necessary.
On that side of the debate stand the facts that:
1. While only winning 70 games, the Mets' pitching overall was not horrendous. They gave up the 9th most runs in the league. Nothing to write home about, but not horrible. 2. Santana is expected to be healthy all year. That should save some runs. 3. Mike Pelfrey, after showing that he has true major league capabilities in 2008 can hardly be as bad (or, really nearly as bad) as he was last year. Also, his strikeouts per nine innings were up (a bit) and his batting average allowed on balls in play were up (a tick), which would both seem to indicate optimisim for 2010. 4. Oliver Perez is not likely to be worth the $12 million that he'll be paid in 2010. He's also not likely to have an ERA over 6.80. (Yes. He was that bad.) There's no question that the amount of walks that Perez dispenses is alarming. However, in 2008 he had a 4.22 ERA. In 2007, he had a 3.56 ERA. I'm not willing to write off this man yet. 5. Jon Niese, who is recovering from that awful hamstring tear, could turn out to be a real stud. Supposedly, he will be ready for Spring Training, and he will, presumably be competing for a spot in the rotation. His numbers in the high minors were quite good. 6. Don't write off John Maine, either. His durability is a question mark - and that may have to be addressed - but not a definite no.
Okay, a lot of things have to go right. Maybe they will. I'm not going to say that I think all the optimism will convert itself into reality - I'm saying it's possible. And, remember, it's not like the Mets can expect to be so bad, even aside from the injuries. Honestly, Mike Pelfrey and Oliver Perez almost have to be much better pitchers this year.
Nevertheless, shoring up the back end of the rotation should be a priority. Chien-Ming Wang, at the right price, is exactly what this club needs. He certainly has the track record of being a much-better-than-effective major league starter. I don't know what was wrong with him last year. Mechanics? Mindset? Whatever. This guy seems to me to be the perfect kind of risk to take.
Also, don't kid yourself - the Phillies have question marks, too. How much does 37 year old Raul Ibanez have left in the tank? Can Cole Hamels turn his game around? What's left in Jaime Moyer's left arm?
You know, there's a really good reason for them to actually play these games!
Editor's Note: Now that John Lackey has been signed, this is partially dated. Partially. There is plenty of good sense in here.
The Mets have problems. Let's not beat around the bush. When the only team you finish ahead of is Washington, you know you have problems. When even Washington has two guys who put up numbers that are pretty clearly better than your best players, you know you have problems*. When your fans are getting excited by Angel Pagan, you have problems. When there are people calling in to radio stations about the Mets, and the biggest compliment they can give the 2009 team is "Luis Castillo really had a good year. He was healthy all year," it might be time to throw in the towel.
*Adam Dunn did not hit exactly 40 home runs this year for the first time since 2004.
Here's the problem with giving up on 2010: This team is too good. I know about the lack of power. I know about the inconsistent pitching. I know about the bizarre defense and the quirky injuries. But about those injuries: Did you know that in 2008 the Mets had 3 players with over 700 plate appearances. The 2009 team's leader was David Wright with 618. The entire team was injured. Even the aforementioned Luis Castillo missed a couple of games when he tripped down the dugout steps.
Jose Reyes, however, is one of the best shortstops in baseball. He played in 36 games. Carlos Beltran is probably the best center-fielder in baseball. He played in 81 games, half a year. Out of the Mets top 5 in plate appearances, two players - Fernando Tatis and Angel Pagan - were supposed to benchmen.
There is a lot of Met-brass-bashing right now on the Mets' failure to sign RHP John Lackey. The sentiment seems to be that, sure the Mets could use Jason Bay and some hitting. But what they need, what they truly require is John Lackey to shore up the tattered pitching rotation.
Which sounds like a reasonable position. Except that it doesn't make any sense.
There are various statistics with which one could measure effectiveness - both pitching-wise and hitting-wise. The one that combines simplicity and accuracy is runs. In 2009, the Mets were 12th (of 16) in the National League in runs scored, 47 runs less than league average. On the other hand, Mets pitchers were 9th in the league in runs allowed, still well below league average (by 30 runs), but closer to the pack. The Mets had weak (or at least far from great) pitching. But that hitting was even worse.
To tell you the truth, I'm not sure why nobody sees this. Maybe it was masked by the excellent batting average (the Mets led the league with a .270 average), but the Mets were a dreadful, horrible hitting team this year. They were last in home runs (by a healthy margin - 37 bombs), and 13th in walks* and slugging percentage.
* Welcome to Queens, Jeff Francoeur.
Oh, well Citi Field is a terrible hitter's ballpark! That's not clear either. The Mets hit more home runs, scored more runs, and hit for a better batting average at Citi Field than on the road. Could that have been a fluke? Certainly. But there's definitely no proof that Citi Field favors the pitchers.
The pitching was so bad last year that it's hard for me to believe that it wouldn't rebound. The hitting, meanwhile, was, in some cases, better than could have been expected. Angel Pagan, Omir Santos, and Jeff Francoeur were all probably better than could have been expected.
So, it seems as though what the club really needs is hitting - even more than it needs pitching. There's another reason that Bay would probably be a better pickup than Lackey: Bay just might be the better player.
The desire to acquire Lackey was simple: We have one really reliable starter (Santana) and even he is coming off an injury. We need another good pitcher. Lackey is the best free agent pitcher out there. Let's get him.
The push that was out there to get Lackey reminds me a little bit of the push a few years ago to get Barry Zito. Barry Zito was considered the best pitcher on the market and everyone said that the Mets should get him. Boras? Who cares about overpaying - WE NEED A PITCHER. The problem with this is that giving someone a reasonable salary will often mean overpaying him (if production should drop). If you overpay in the first place, that'll just make the problem bigger.
Lackey is a very good pitcher. He had one excellent season, 2007, when he placed third in the AL Cy Young balloting, and in every other year since 2005 he has been well above average.
Bay is a really, really good hitter. Perhaps the best way to compare these two is: Bay is a three-time All Star. Lackey is a one-time All Star. Granted, Bay was a Pirate. So, his All-Star appearances don't prove anything. But I think that in this specific instance the comparison works. Bay's career OPS+ is 131. Lackey's career ERA+ is 117.
Additionally, Lackey's excellence seems to be a thing of the past. Oh, he was certainly effective - much more than that - over the past two years. But his best numbers were accumulated from 2005-2007. On the other hand, Bay does not seem to be losing any (or practically any) of his quality. His numbers may have dipped slightly, but they're almost as good as ever.
Over the past two years Lackey has been in the top 10 in the league in a few categories - mostly peripheral (winning percentage), negative (hit by pitch) or practically irrelevant (his 1 shutout this year was good for seventh in the league), though he was 8th this year in Homers per 9 innings.
Bay, in 2009, was 10th in the AL in slugging, 9th in OPS, 6th in runs scored, 2nd in RBIs, third in homers, as well as seventh in offensive winning percentage. In 2008, he split leagues, but his cumulative totals (if accumulated in just the AL) were quite good. 10th in slugging, 8th in OPS, 3rd in runs, 10th in walks, and sixth in offensive winning percentage.
Bay's numbers are probably somewhat inflated by Fenway Park. But you should know that 21 of his 36 home runs this year came away from Fenway Park.
Anyway you cut it, the guy's a darn good hitter. And I think he's the better choice for the Mets (well, at this point, between him and Lackey he's the only choice).
Note: For the life of me, I can't figure out why the Mets didn't go for Jason Marquis. Maybe more on this at some future juncture.
- I understand that the Yankees got Curtis Granderson in part (possibly) to have leverage in contract negotiations with Johnny Damon. I understand that they probably think that Granderson will bounce back in a similar way to Nick Swisher last year. I won't be surprised if he does. I don't understand why they are willing (if they are) to let Melky Cabrera play every day. He's not much of a hitter. He's not that great in the field, at least according to UZR. And the whole team is getting older. They honestly can't expect similar production from all or most of Posada, Jeter, Rivera. Age usually shows. I know Mariano has not broken (or come close), but seriously, do you think he can do it forever.
If they really have limitations on their payroll, I understand the move and the thought that they can live without Damon. But I have trouble believing that. To me, their too complacent. And that may just hurt them in 2009
- I don't know if Daniel Murphy can be a good everyday first baseman in the big leagues. But I don't know why other people think they do. The man, my friends, will turn 25 in April. His best years should be ahead of him. His batting line of.266/.313/.427, while far from spectacular was not far from league average. And that was in his first big league season.
As a frame of reference, I'd like to bring up a different first-year player's batting line. .266/.324/.396, with an OPS+ of 91. Pretty similar. Now this chap was 21, so a straight comparison is certainly not reasonable. But this chap is Carl Yastrzemski, so if Murph can emulate him at all, that's cool.
- I don't really get Wikipedia's sales pitch. They want people to donate money to keep them going. Or do they want money to keep themselves ad-free. I'm all for ad-free. For example, I liked baseball-reference.com better without the ads. But I don't think it's worth any significant (or, perhaps, insignificant,) money to me.
Q: How many times has Carlos Beltran been caught stealing in the major leagues (answer later)?
Power-Speed Number* could be (badly) redefined as Belting-Running Number, or Belt-Run for short. And Carlos Beltran is, in fact, one of the greats in recording that stat. Since he began playing regularly in Kansas City in 1999, Carlos has been in the top 7 in the league in P-S # every single year (except his injury-riddled 2000, 2005 and 2009 seasons). In three of those years, he was in the top 3 in the league. He's never led a league, however, in P-S #.
Or has he? In 2004, Beltran put up the 10th-best (at the time, now it's 11th) P-S # single-season mark ever. Do you see the problem? He was traded halfway through that year, and played the 2nd half in the NL with the Astros. Since P-S # is an accumulating (as opposed to rate) stat, it is nearly impossible for a player who gets traded in mid-season to lead a league in it. Beltran actually came in fourth in the National League – that's how phenomenal he was. But his total number was significantly higher than NL Leader Bobby Abreu and AL Leader Alex Rodriguez.**
* Power-Speed Number is a metric that measures a player's ability at stealing bases and hitting home runs. What you might be thinking is "just add them together," but what that gives you will be often be an utterly dominant player in of the categories who has no real skill in the other (see Wills, Maury). Power-Speed Number takes both into equal account but also gives value to having proficiency in both areas as opposed to just one of the two (i.e. 40 home runs 40 steals nets a Power-Speed Number of 40; 60 home runs and 20 steals nets a P-S # of 30).
** How's that for a little Yankee-bashing. And speaking of the Yankees, I don't really get this rationale about forgetting about Damon and putting Granderson in left. The economy is bad. Long-term contracts are not available to 35 year old outfielders even if they're coming of their best season. So I don't think Damon is going to require more than, say, 2 years. Does anybody really think that 2 years of Cabrera is really preferable to 2 years of Damon.
Melky just finished his fourth relatively full-time year in the majors. He just had what was probably his best offensive year yet. And to be honest, it (in all of its .274/.336/.416 glamour) was not all that good. I know he should be coming into his peak offensive years, but does anyone get the feeling that he's just not that good?***
*** Parenthetically, Melky Cabrera's Baseball-Reference's sponsor for Melky Cabrera says (in part):
"Mike Cameron? Dude, has a career .340 OBP and he's 37. Melky, maybe now that you have a ring people will back off and remember you're 24 (with a career .331 OBP). There's plenty of time for the power to come."
That is so wrong on so many accounts. First of all, Cameron's 36. Second of all, Melky's 25. Thirdly, though he seems to acknowledge it, his bashing of Mike Cameron is dumb because Melky's OBP is worse. And fourthly (though he doesn't deal with this directly), Cameron is much better. In the last 11 seasons Cameron's lowest OPS+ has been 104. Melky has never cracked 100.
What I'm trying to say, is that the guy is a really good (and really consistent) all-around player. And here's the thing: It's not just those two stats. Beltran plays Gold-Glove defense, can take a walk and…
Answer: 38
…the man never, NEVER, gets caught stealing. Beltran has played 1562 games in his career. That's essentially the equivalent of 10 seasons in which he played nearly every game. Per season, that would mean, he gets thrown out less than 4 times a season on average. His steal number per season 28.6. He has done the equivalent of 10 seasons of 28.6 steals and 3.8 caught stealings. That's phenomenal.
His success rate is over 88%. That's the highest in baseball history (min. 200 steals, I think).
I guess I'm trying to say that this guy is a phenomenal ballplayer.
One of the interesting aspects in the game of baseball is the intentional base on balls. It is generally given to a fearsome slugger, illustrating the long-held baseball idea that "it's better to
give four balls for one base than four bases for one ball." Just as an example, Barry Bonds was intentionally walked 120 times in 2004.
Some people feel that it is a cowardly play – there are people out there who favor banning the intentional walk – but I don't really have much of a problem with it. I don't really see how it is a less legitimate part of baseball strategy than the bunt, for example. True, the pitcher is giving up on this hitter – but it's for the greater good. The bunter, similarly, is giving himself up for what he thinks will benefit his team.*
*I'm not calling into question whether or not the sacrifice bunt or the intentional walk is a good play. I'm just saying that they don't offend me with their submission of the battle in attempting to win the war.
The weird thing about the intentional walk, however, is that it is not always given to the most feared hitters out there. It's true that the league leader will usually be the best (or one of the best) hitters in the league.* But it seems that just as often (or perhaps almost as often) intentional walks are granted to the player immediately preceding a really bad one. A lot of the time, what causes an intentional walk is not so much the batter in the box as the one in the on-deck circle.
Case in point: In 2008, David Wright drew 5 intentional walks in 735 plate appearances. Brian Schneider drew 9 intentional walks in 384 plate appearances. Wright, by the way, finished seventh in the MVP voting and won the Silver Slugger. Schneider was lynched by a mob.** Did the opposing teams fear Schneider more than Wright? No. They feared Carlos Beltran and Carlos Delgado more than the Met pitchers.
* The league leaders in intentional walks (going back to 2000): Bonds (5 times), Vladimir Guerrero (5 times) Albert Pujols (3 times), Ichiro (3 times), Manny Ramirez (twice) Sammy Sosa, Justin Morneau and Nomar Garciaparra.
** Not really.
Eventually, after being bad for long enough, a ballplayer can accumulate a nice chunk of intentional walks. I'm still referring to Brian Schneider, of course. Schneider, in case you didn't know, is 39th in intentional walks among active players! 39th. As in tied with Pudge Rodriguez and Miguel Tejada. He's ahead of (among many others, obviously) Nomar, Alfonso Soriano, Pat Burrell. These aren't young players who haven't accumulated them yet. They're legitimate offensive stars who've been intentionally walked less than Brian Schneider. Others he's ahead of include Jermaine Dye, Johnny Damon, Jimmy Rollins, Jason Bay.
Two others: Derek Jeter, David Wright. Tell me you can't win a bet with that one.
There are some baseball deals that are no-brainers. You know:
Acquire: Babe Ruth
Give up: $100,000
Then you have those baseball deals that make you think that the people doing them have no brains. Like:
Acquire: $100,000
Give up: Babe Ruth
Now, in truth, the Babe was somewhat of a trouble child. And he was reneging on his contract with the Red Sox. But that was some sort of dumb trade.
Not the point at all. The point is that these (or this) kinds of trades are outliers. Nobody argues about Milt Pappas for Frank Robinson. Nobody (especially out of Met fandom) is even discussing Scott Kazmir for Victor Zambrano*. And the truth is that because they don't inspire any discussion, they're really kind of boring. Not entirely boring. Rob Neyer wrote a book (Rob Neyer's Big Guide Book of Baseball Blunders) which heavily consists of really bad trades. Like Nolan Ryan for Jim Fregosi. But in general, they're kind of boring. You can make some real arguments about whether trading Aaron Heilman was smart. Not so much with Nolan Ryan.
* Not that anybody's discussing him either, but included in that trade was Joselo Diaz, who, as I recall, was at one time a relatively highly touted Met prospect. In the 5+ years since the Mets traded him he has reached the Major Leagues. For 7.2 innings. And an ERA of 9.39. (He's got a 14.77 minor league WHIP, so I wouldn't really expect to see much of him, henceforth.)
Not that this has to do with anything, but the Albuquerque Isotopes, the Dodgers AAA team, had a nice collection of former Met talent. Doug Mientkiewicz, Shawn Estes**, Scott Strickland, and Claudio Vargas all played for them this year. Mientkiewicz played alright for them, and actually spent part of the year on the Dodgers' bench.
Shawn Estes also pitched well, 3.07 ERA in 73.1 innings. Then something happened. My understanding (and I certainly could be wrong here) is that he thought that he merited promotion to the Dodgers, the Dodgers didn't, and he said goodbye. According to his Wikipedia page, "Estes claimed that he has not retired, but that he is simply unwilling to play AAA baseball."
I think the Mets should get him. I'm not kidding here. That's actually the point I'm too busy to get to because I'm doing a footnote.
Oh yeah, Vargas pitched well in 13 innings and Scott Strickland, who, by the way, has not pitched in the majors since 2005, recorded 32 saves, with a 2.98 ERA in 48 innings.
Now, what's weird about Strickland, who has not had much opportunity at the Major League level (he broke in 11 seasons ago and has 240 innings), is that for the most part he's been quite effective. In every season in which he pitched more than 18 innings, he's had an ERA+ of at least 116. For his career, he's got a 131 ERA+.
But it gets weirder. They can't think that he's just been luck y at the big league level, because without much exception, he's been quite good in the minors, too. He has a minor league ERA of 3.32. Last year, as I said, he had a 2.98 ERA. The year before that (also in AAA, this time with the Yankees Scranton team) he pitched 66.1 innings with an ERA of 3.53. Those ballclubs, especially the 2008 Yankees could have used a good, extra relief pitcher. But for some reason, Scott Strickland didn't get the call.
I don't want to belabor the point, but there's one glaring ballplayer who's getting in my way. LaTroy Hawkins gave the Yankees 41 innings at an ERA of 5.71. He got paid 3.75 million. Meanwhile, Scott Strickland has a 3.53 ERA in AAA. And remember, he's got a bit of a track record, too. His 131 ERA+ is much better than Hawkins' 104. I just don't get it.
Oh yeah, former Mets did pretty well.
** It's pretty cool to go to some great ballplayer who utterly dominated the game (Wagner, Ruth, Gehrig, Cobb, Pujols)'s Baseball-Reference.com page and see how freaking good they were. I don't even mean intense analysis (in the 7 years from 1910-1916, Walter Johnson had a 1.56 ERA), I'm referring to just glancing at how many of their numbers are in bold (signifying being a leader in that particular category).
Well, you can do the same thing with some less than awesome players. Shawn Estes had led the league in earned runs, walks and wild pitches.
The lesser players are usually cheaper. And worse. Which makes a lot of sense. But when they're a lot cheaper than proven commodities, they just might be worth it.
Take the 2009 Mets. They signed Gary Sheffield, a proven, if aged, slugger, for the minimum major league salary and he led the team in home runs (or tied, anyway). They got some serious bang for their buck. Now I know he was injured a heck of a lot of the time, but he was worth well more than the (relative) pittance that they gave him.
So I can't, for the life of me, figure out why people are against picking up veterans. I'm not referring to the Moises Alou's of the world, who are going to cost a pretty penny (and that's besides the doctor bills). I'm referring to the Gary Sheffields of the world. I don't even remember where it was that I heard this, but it seemed as though there was a big consensus that the Mets needed to forget about the aged. Which I just don't get.
Shelling out money is entirely different. You don't want to give Gary Sheffield (or Julio Franco, or perhaps Alex Cora) a big-money multi-year deal in the twilight stage of his career. But these cheap pickups of proven veterans have got to be good – both for the clubhouse and the diamond.
If the Mets are going to lose, I'd also rather it be with Daniel Murphy than with some aged non-Met. But extending spring training invitations to Edgardo Alfonzo, Shawn Estes and other mere possibilities might just net the Mets the 2010 version of Gary Sheffield.
Mark McGwire has been on the Hall of Fame ballot for three years. He has not been elected. He has not reached 25% in the voting, which is precisely 1/3 of what it takes to be elected. Mark McGwire was a great player. So why would he not not be elected to the Hall of Fame?
There are essentially three reasons that could explain why people would not vote for him:*
1. He was not great enough to merit Hall of Fame election.
2. He was not great for long enough to merit Hall of Fame election.
3. He was a freaking cheater, and as such does not merit Hall of Fame election.
Reason 1, I believe, is patently inaccurate. Or impossible. Either way. Just to run down what this guy did: He won a Rookie of the Year award, finished as high as second in MVP voting (he figured in the balloting ten times), was a 12 time All-Star, broke a 37-year old record twice (well, technically only once, but you know what I mean), won a Gold Glove (who knew?) and three Silver Sluggers.** He led the league: in RBIs once, in homers four times, in walks twice, in OBP twice, in SLG twice, in OPS twice, OPS+ four times, and in intentional walks once. Career-wise, he's tied for 12th in OPS+, ninth in slugging, in essence ninth in home runs (he's technically tied for 8th, but it's with A-Rod, so that's kind of irrelevant), and he's in the top 40 in walks and offensive winning percentage. He leads everyone ever in at bats per homer. Nice resume.
*Actually, four, everyone could just love the other candidates more, but that's just complicating matters.
** This, to tell you the truth, stuns me. McGwire won four home run crowns, but only three Silver Sluggers? I know shortstop is not the same as first base, but do you realize that Derek Jeter has more Silver Sluggers than Mark McGwire.
*** Interestingly enough, even though his 61 home run year, 1961, came in a lower scoring era than McGwire's 70 season, Maris's OPS+ is lower, markedly lower, than Mark's. McGwire, in '98, drew 68 more walks than Maris in '61. That probably has something to do with the fact that Mickey Mantle was protecting Maris while Ray Lankford and Brian Jordan were protecting Mac. Just saying.
In terms of McGwire's not being great for long enough, well, there's a question there. Roger Maris, whose record McGwire broke in 1998, is, surprisingly to some casual baseball fans, not in the Hall of Fame. Quite simply, he had some Hall of Fame worthy seasons, but his career numbers don't reach the mark.*** The truth is that this doesn't really seem to be true. Did he have a very long career? No. He had over 2,000 fewer plate appearances than Ted Williams who lost significant time fighting in Europe and Korea. But what's important to remember with McGwire is that he does not only have great seasonal stats (70 HR) and rate stats (10.6 AB/HR, 162 OPS+), but he also accumulated some pretty serious stats (583 HR). Was McGwire essentially a one-dimensional player? Yes. Was he awesome for a rather short period of time? Yes. But when you consider that the man is 9th in career home runs (or 8th), I think it's pretty hard to trash on his longevity.
So, it seems that if you don't think he's a Hall of Famer, you believe that because "He was a freaking cheater, and as such does not merit Hall of Fame election." Personally, I think that's pretty darned logical. Rob Neyer doesn't. Neyer says:
There have been, for many years, rules prohibiting corked bats and doctored baseballs, but we know there are players in the Hall of Fame who happily violated those rules. We also know that many, and perhaps most of the great players of the 1970s routinely and illegally ingested stimulants with the express purpose of enhancing their performance.
For me, this is the heart of the matter. Like steroids, stimulants in the 1970s (and afterward) were used as performance enhancers. Like steroids, stimulants were generally against the law, but willfully ignored by the Lords of Baseball. I would absolutely love for someone to explain to me the difference between what Mark McGwire (allegedly) did, and what the superstars of the 1960s and '70s were doing.
I think there are basically two things that are up for discussion here:
1. Pre-Canseco drugs 2. corked bats and doctored balls
I'm not going to even touch upon the amphetamines of the 60s and 70s. My opinion on steroids is simple: You cheated. Period. Why should the fact that others were doing it have relevance? If the players of the 60s and 70s were doing the same type of thing, then they, too, should not be voted for.
Neyer's first argument is "corked bats and doctored baseballs," which are of course expressly against the law. I have three thoughts about this. First, simply, three of the criteria for Hall of Fame election are integrity, sportsmanship and character.* I think a clear argument could be made that known cheaters - of any type - should not be admitted to the Hall, henceforth. But Gaylord Perry is in? So what - that was someone else's mistake. Remember, Freddie Lindstrom's in the Hall, too.
Secondly, and this applies to scuffing but not corking, I think there is an intrinsic difference between scuffing a ball (or corking a bat) and juicing. Scuffing the ball is done on the field, and I think that there is a general perception that anything that is done on the field of play, under the umpire's watchful eye, is legitimate. It's kind of like the phantom double play.
Thirdly, scuffing the ball is a situational thing. So is, to a lesser extent. Sammy Sosa** corked a bat. (Assuming that you believe he used it on purpose,) Sammy Sosa is a cheater. But what did he cheat? Well, he cheated in that at bat. And he probably cheated in a bunch of other at bats. But it's a one-time, or two-time or a twenty-time transgression. He's probably playing legitimately most of the time. When a ballplayer juices, he's changing his body. You lose the whole "Man vs. Man" struggle, because that's not what it is anymore - it's man vs. HGH-man. It's essentially man vs. robot man. More, ethically, you're done. You have illegally and unethically changed your body and there is no going back. Assume with me for a moment that Sammy Sosa used a corked bat just that once and used legal materials the rest of the time. Can that be compared with a fellow who changes his chemical makeup turning him into a Superman?
I think not.
*Please. Do me a favor. Don't take those criteria to tell you that Ty Cobb doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame. If you're trying to make a conclusion about a bordrline candidate, those traits should certainly be taken into account. Cobb's statistics are so staggering that I don't think there's any relevance as to the fact that he was of bad character.
That argument is akin to claiming, if the Hall of Fame were to be started right now, that there's no way you could vote Ty Cobb in because he hit fewer home runs than Ben Grieve. There's too much stuff overflowing in the other categories (batting average, a triple crown) to make an argument against his Hall of Fame legitimacy.
** I am obviously using Sammy Sosa because I consider him a good example of someone who corked his bat. Not because I consider him a good example of someone who obviously did not take steroids.
Apparently, the Mets have re-signed infielder Alex Cora and signed utility-catcher Chris Coste. Cora's job should be similar to what it was last year, backing up the middle infielders. Coste's is somewhat less clear.
Coste, who rookied with the Phillies at age 33 in 2006, will turn 37 before the start of the 2010 season. Defensively, he can catch and play first base. Though he hasn't thus far in his major league career, in his time in the minors Coste did spend significant time at third base. (He also played some games in the outfield, but that's probably irrelevant as he's a full eight years removed from his most recent outfield appearance.
In terms of his hitting, after a very fine rookie showing in 2006, Coste's offensive game has gone downhill. Never one to take a walk, Coste has shown a declining batting average and power as he moves into his later thirties. Which can hardly be a surprise.
Though he has shown proficiency against lefties and Omir Santos has against right-handers, it would be very surprising if the Mets make these two their catching tandem. His versatility does allow the possibility of him making the roster as a utility catcher - with the ability to backup the first and third basemen - but his decline in hitting over the last few years does not make that seem very likely.
More likely, Coste is being brought in with the expectation of landing a job in AAA, where he would be just a phone call (and a flight) away if a major league catcher went down.
On the other hand, he may be in the fray with Omir Santos for the backup catcher job. I'm not really sure how the Mets brass feels about Santos.
Either way, I think the pick-up is a good one. Coste is a versatile player, and to be quite frank, the numbers he put up after being traded to Houston last year, .204/.259/.252, while horrendous, are far enough from his standard that I think he could bounce back.
I was talking to someone and he made some possibly accurate but totally ridiculous comparison. I forget what it was, but I told him that what he was saying was akin to explaining Rey Ordonez's inability to hit with the fact that he didn't hit as well as George--er--Babe Ruth.
That kind of comparison is like winning the battle but getting nowhere in the war. Ordonez didn't hit as well as Babe Ruth - not many people have - but that is not what proves that he was a terrible hitter. If you were to point out that he couldn't hit as well as Desi Relaford, well, that might be a bit more informative.
As you probably know, Albert Pujols was voted MVP of the National League. More importantly, I suppose, Pujols was MVP of the National League. It was his 3rd MVP. That means that Pujols now has more MVPs than all but 9 baseball players. Bonds, Berra, Campy, Dimag, Foxx, Mantle, Musial, A-Rod, Mike Schmidt. That's pretty good company, and I'm sure that Albert is happy to be mentioned in the same sentence as those great ballplayers.
Here's what Barry Bonds had to say about a young Albert in 2003 "[Albert Pujols] reminds me of Bobby Bonilla, but better."
Tim Lincecum was voted the National League's Cy Young Award winner last week (actually, that's when the results came out, but whatever). Lincecum had, by all accounts, a really good season, leading the NL in strikeouts, complete games, and shutouts and placing second in categories like ERA and hits/9 innings. He was fourth in WHIP.
As you may be aware, there was some considerable hoopla surrounding the voting process, as various people believed that either Chris Carpenter or Adam Wainwright, both of St. Louis, should have won the award.
On Monday, Joe Mauer was announced as the AL MVP. The vote was unanimous, excepting one voter who listed Miguel Cabrera first on his ballot.*
The hoopla around that award's voting, and there was some of it, was that Mauer should have been unanimous.
*Mauer did come as close to unanimous as possible. He was listed second on that one ballot.
The pro-Carpenter people expressed disdain at the fact that people are relying on new-fangled stats, like FIP, to rate players. And that may well have been done.
But here's what I don't get. The people who didn't vote for Carpenter were not relying on some new-alphabet-soup kind of statistic. I mean, they might have been, but the reason you don't vote for Carpenter is simple. It's called Innings Pitched. He may have been somewhat more effective than Lincecum, but he pitched 32.2 fewer innings. That's pretty significant. And it's a rather good reason not to vote for the man.
I would have been less surprised if traditional baseball writers been annoyed with Mauer's inclusion than Carpenter's exclusion. Mark Teixeira led the AL in home runs, RBI and total bases. If the push would have been for him to win it would have been understandable, if wrong.
But blasting people for not voting for a man with less than 200 IP against pretty comparable competition is not really something that I get.
Did you ever notice how certain numbers always seem to be creeping up on you all the time? Maybe you were reading Harry Potter and there were too many sevens. Maybe you noticed that 50% of the words you uttered were precisely two syllables. Maybe not.
Now that the award voting is in for the 2009 baseball season, I'd like to identify three significant 3s in baseball today. And more than significant, they're rather mind-boggling.
1. Ichiro Suzuki just concluded his ninth year in the major leagues. In only 3 of his seasons did he not lead the Major Leagues (or tie for the lead) in hits. In those three seasons he had (or had a tie for) second place in hits in the Major Leagues.
2. Albert Pujols has just concluded his ninth year in the major leagues. In only 3 of his seasons did he not come in first or second place in the MVP voting.*
3. In the history of the American League, a catcher has only won the batting title 3 times. Joe Mauer, Joe Mauer and Joe Mauer. (2006, 2008, 2009)
* Ichiro and Albert Pujols were both rookies in 2001. They won Rookie of the Year Awards in their respective leagues in 2001.** 2001 may well go down as the best ROY Class of all time. Ichiro and Albert Pujols, not bad. They do have some competition.
In 1947, Jackie Robinson was Rookie of the Year. They only gave out one award for both leagues back then, so it would be pretty hard to count that. In 1951, World Series foes Willie Mays and Gil McDougald won the two awards. Only one Hall of Famer there, but McDougald was a really good infielder, and between the two of them you've got 25 years of All-Star Game appearances.
1956 was the first time that two future Hall-of-Famers would win the award. Frank Robinson and his 38 home runs won the National League ROY, while Luis Aparicio and his league-leading 21 steals won the Junior Circuit's rookie crown.
In 1967, Tom Seaver and Rod Carew, both future first-ballot Hall-of-Famers, won their league's award.
10 year later, in 1977, Montreal's Andre Dawson and Baltimore's Eddie Murray were Rookies of the Year. Dawson is, as of right now, not a Hall-of-Famer (and he may never be), but I think (and I'm not sure here) that these two have more career home runs than any other ROYs.
WIth apologies to Jose Canseco (1986), the steroid class of ROYs was 1987, with Mark McGwire and Benito Santiago.
It's not really fair to try and rate the 2006 (Hanley Ramirez, Justin Verlander) and 2007 (Ryan Braun, Dustin Pedroia) as of yet.
I think that the winning class is....1967. Rod Carew and Tom Seaver are ahead of Pujols and Ichiro. And quite frankly, I don't know if they'll catch them. Ichiro is already 36. We don't know how much he has left (though it'd be hard to say that he's showing his age).
For the more complete answer, check back in ten years.
Parenthetically, that was some serious class of rookies in '01. Besides the winners, Ichiro and Pujols, there were Sabathia, Alfonso Soriano, David Eckstein, Roy Oswalt, Jimmy Rollins, Adam Dunn. Not too shabby.
** I was discussing the ROY with a friend of mine in 2001. He was, as I recall, trying to point out how good a rookie year Soriano had. Sorry, sir. Most irrelevant. Looking it up now, Soriano didn't just not get a first-place vote - he finished third, behind Ichiro and CC Sabathia.
Joe Girardi finished second in the Manager of the Year Award voting this year. If Joe Girardi did not make the playoffs this year, I think there's a pretty good bet that he'd have been fired. In essence, making the playoffs was part of his job. (I suppose you could quibble on that, but it's what I believe, and I think most people would agree with that.)
If making the playoffs was part of his job, it would seem that he did so well in the balloting because of his postseason managing. Here's the problem: Everybody thought that his managing was bad in the postseason.
Over time, things have a habit of evening out. What I mean by this, I suppose, is that while something really peculiar may occur, you would expect things to eventually revert to normal (whatever that may be).
Sometimes, however, things that occur are so bizarre that they are noteworthy, even though they are just random fluctuations.
An example of this would involve Doc Ellis's having pitched a no-hitter while on LSD. Most of the time that people are on LSD, they don't pitch a game, but if you started a study on people under the influence of LSD on June 12, 1970, you might have assumed that it was a common occurrence.
That's all pretty intuitive and very useless.
My point is that sometimes things happen and they are interesting in their out-of-the-ordinary way. *
My point is that Honus Wagner, the greatest shortstop in baseball history (and it's not close) pitched 8.1 innings in his career and had an ERA of 0.00. **
*I think that this is what I am trying to say. The fact that Babe Ruth led the AL in home runs 12 times in his career is pretty amazing. But if had, say, turned a triple play once, it would have a distinctly different kind of interest to it.
** Which means, in case you were wondering, that he pitched so well that he didn't have an ERA+. And you thought Zack Greinke was good!
How about this for your random and obscure fact of the day? In 1876, the Athletics, Reds, Louisville Grays and New York Mutuals all had more errors than runs scored.
With modern groundskeeping, better playing fields and better equipment, things are very different in today's game of baseball. In 2009, the only team that had more errors than runs scored was the New York Mets.
Oh, my mistake. Even the Mets managed to squeeze past the .500 mark with 674 more runs scored than errors committed.
I don't know if you knew about this, but the spectacular website baseball-reference.com has this really awesome thing called Play Index. Play Index has a few really cool facets, one of which is a tool with which you can search for seasons with statistical criteria, like most home runs in a season by a switch-hitting second baseman (Ray Durham, 26, 2006), or highest batting average by a 29 year old who batted left-handed and threw right-handed (Ty Cobb, .371, 1916) or most hit-by-pitches by a National League right-fielder (Geoff Jenkins, 19, 2005). Basically, it's really, really cool.
Well, not really, but from a baseball perspective, what more is there to say?
What could be worse than the Yankees meeting the Phillies in the World Series? The Yankees beating the Phillies in the World Series.
Such is life as a Mets fan.
Pessimism abounds. You miss victory. As kind of an about-face to most Met fans mentalities, I'm going to try to recap what has gone right over the past five years in Mets-ville.
And the truth is, it's a heck of a lot.
2004 -2005
-- The Mets hire Willie Randolph and sign star free agents Carlos Beltran and Pedro Martinez, bringing respect back to a franchise just over a year removed from a 95-loss season.
-- Cliff Floyd has, perhaps the best season in his career, setting personal records with 34 home runs and having his second to best season in terms of walks, games played and RBIs.
-- Mike Piazza, in his last year with the club, spanks 19 home runs in declining playing time.
-- The Mets have one of the best fielding right fielders in baseball, with former Gold Glove winning Mike Cameron manning the post.
-- David Wright hits 27 home runs in his first full season and seems destined for stardom.
--Mike Jacobs makes mincemeat out of Major League pitching in his first exposure to it, swatting 11 home runs in only 100 at bats.
There was more. Check back for more 2005 highlights, and also coming up will be highlights from the 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 seasons.
What an unpleasant Yankee-Angel game yesterday. Not only did the Yankees score twice as many runs as their playoff opponents, but the umpires mad three (count 'em, three) truly bad calls during the game.*
When the game was over, I just couldn't figure out one thing: Why didn't Girardi pull Gaudin with two outs in the ninth?
*I'd probably rate them from worse to worser as follows: 1. Calling Nick Swisher out in the 4th inning for leaving third base early (on appeal). Which would be great. Except he didn't leave third base early. 2. Calling Nick Swisher safe on that pickoff play (also in the 4th). 3. Calling Robinson Cano safe on what should have been a double play in the top of the fifth inning. That call at third base was the worst that I can remember seeing. Period.
As you probably know, in today's game of baseball, on-base percentage is valued very much (as it should be). Jeff Francoeur, for example, is derided by many due to his inability to take a walk.
There are, however, certain players (like Albert Pujols, Luis Castillo, Derek Jeter and many others) who use walks effectively as an offensive weapon.
And then there's Ichiro. Ichiro is a speedster. He has stolen at least 26 bases every year of his career, while totalling over 40 three times. He's the exact kind of player that you would think would try to take as many pitches as possible, try to walk as much as possible, so that he could get on base and steal bases and use his speed. But he doesn't. Never.
Now, you never really hear Ichiro criticized for this* because his OBP is never low. His high batting averages (.352 this year, good for second in the AL) kind of camouflage the fact that he doesn't take any pitches.
Jeff Francoeur, who never walks, walked 23 times this year, to Ichiro's 32. Here's the thing: Ichiro was intentionally walked 15 times. Francouer was intentionally walked 5 times.** So Jeff Let-me-swing-at-everything Francoeur actually drew more walks of his own volition than Ichiro did.***
Also, with a minimum of 632 plate appearances, the leader in fewest walks drawn is Migue Tejada, with 19. Two were intentional. Ichiro tied the leader in fewest walks in unintentional walks. Just something to chew on.
* I don't know how accurate this really is. Ichiro has such a weird hitting style that he might not be able to be the player he is if he wouldn't be so aggressive at the plate. I really don't know. But I'm assuming not.
** Which is a scary thought, in-and-of itself. Jeff Francoeur was intentionally walked 5 times? Wow!
*** Of course. How many walks did you expect Ichiro to draw of Francoeur's volition?
Not Fresh But Still Funny:
Jordan
There's been a lot of chatter about moving Piazza to 1B. My feeling is that he's of more value as a catcher even with all the stolen bases, especially with offense at such a premium for the Mets. What's your take?
Bill James
(4:44 PM)
I'd move him, and let Mo Vaughn catch. I think he'd throw out about as many runners, and it would be more entertaining to watch.
(http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/id/3503)
* * *
I was speaking with somebody today, and he told me that he hates the Marlins. For crying out loud, who hates the Marlins? They're not a great team, they don't have a great history, and this guy is not even a fan of a National League team!
Albert Pujols is currently leading the National League in home runs. He is third in batting average and third in RBIs. Not bad, huh. Even measured up to his own standard's, he's doing pretty well.
But, alas; what could have been? Though there was some speculation about it earlier in the season, it now seems as though Albert Pujols will not win the Triple Crown.
But you never know. With a little luck, he could just make it. And a lot of hitting.
Poll Results: The voters have voted and the results are in: David Wright is the Mets' MVP this year. Big surprise.
It's official. We have seen way too much Obama-mania in this country over the past 20 months or so.
How so? I was watching Mike Piazza's dramatic home run in the bottom of the eighth inning on September 21, 2001. That was the first (professional) baseball game played in New York City after the 9/11 attacks. With the Mets down by a run with one out and Desi Relaford* on first base, Piazza cranked a home run over the center field fence. This was a huge moment for New York. The TV cameras showed the ebullient fans jumping up and down and cheering like crazy. Then it showed the auxiliary scoreboard down the left-field line which flashed "Home Run!"
*Remember him? Desi Relaford was the backup infielder for the Mets for that lone 2001 season. I was probably his biggest fan. In what was one of the best years of his career, he put up a .302/.364/.472 line. Not bad for a backup infielder. He'd be batting second on the 2009 Mets. He also pitched a perfect inning for the Mets (to give some relief to the relief pitchers) when they were getting shelled by the Padres.
As you may recall, (okay, probably not) Desi was included in the deal with the Giants that netted the Mets Shawn Estes. Though, you probably have not heard much (if anything) about him of late (since the end of the 2005 season, he's started 9 Major League games), Shawn was in the major leagues with the Padres last year, and pitched, quite frankly, a lot better than Livan Hernandez did. Maybe the Mets should have gotten him instead.
He began this year with the Dodgers Triple-A affiliate and pitched quite well, posting 3-4 record, but an ERA of 3.07. He is no longer playing, but is officially "not retired."
The TV flashed to a fan jumping up and down with a sign that read "WE BELIEVE." Then it showed Piazza getting greeted by his teammated near the dugout steps. It flashes to the auxiliary scoreboard down the right-field line, which scrolls "YES." And my mind immediately expects to see "WE CAN."
A lot of people seem to be making a big deal over Pedro Martinez's victory over the Mets on Sunday night. Pedro threw a great game, no doubt, with 8 shutout innings in which he allowed just 6 hits, while striking out 7 and walking just two. He also lowered his ERA to 2.87 and received the victory to improve his record to 5-0. Not bad. In fact, with numbers like those combined with the fact that Johan Santana's on the disabled list, Pedro would probably be the Mets best starter.
But if you ask me, it's pretty darn hard to blame the Mets for not signing him when he became available this summer.
1. He wouldn't be helping the Mets anyway. You know that. Give the Mets five more wins, and they're 15 games out of first place. And that's besides the fact that with the Mets anemic offense and with the actuality that the Mets don't have any pitchers who are 0-5, he's not giving them five wins anyway.
2. He stank last year. Did you forget. After an encouraging five games after he returned from surgery at the end of the 2007 season, Pedro pitched terribly in 2008. How badly? 5-6 with a 5.61 ERA.
How bad is that?
Let's put it this way. When Livan Hernandez was released by the Mets this year, his ERA was 5.47.
Derek Jeter, as you no doubt know, has 2,721 hits. At that, he's tied with Lou Gehrig for 53rd on the all-time hits list. He's also tied with said Lou Gehrig for first on the Yankees hit list.
Now, this is not a particularly big deal. * First of all, it's a team record. Is anybody going to make a big deal in a couple of years if/when David Wright or Jose Reyes breaks Ed Kranepool's franchise record of 1,418 hits? I hope not. It's not that big a deal. Remember, with his next hit, Derek Jeter will get sole possession of 53rd place on the all-time hits list.
*Obviously it's a big deal. Approximately 1 in 5,000,000 people on this planet are in the Major Leagues in any given year. To excel in a talent group of that caliber is amazing. To lead the Rays franchise in hits (as ---------- [guess who - answer at the end] does with 1,274) is an amazing thing. John Maine, who has 1 home run and a .107 batting average is practically an athletic freak of nature. The difference between his accomplishments and those of Derek Jeter's are as huge as the distance to right in Citi Field.
But as baseball "records" go, it's not a big deal.
Well, you might be thinking, maybe people are making a big deal about this because he's about to break Lou Gehrig's record. I mean, we're talking Lou Gehrig - The Iron Horse, the sidekick of the great Babe Ruth, the guy that baseball-reference.com says was nicknamed "Biscuit Pants." That was some special dude - of COURSE they're making a big deal about Derek Jeter. Except for the itsy-bitsy fact that Lou Gehrig's game was not base hits. Lou Gehrig hit more than twice as many home runs as Derek Jeter hit. When Derek hits his 493rd home run, you can start to argue about who was greater. (Fine, 393rd)
I have a good one. Let's make a big deal because Derek Jeter has more stolen bases than Babe Ruth. BABE FREAKING RUTH - the guy who practically invented baseball. The problem with that is that stolen bases were not Babe Ruth. Singles were not Lou Gehrig. Did you know that from 1926-1934, Lou Gehrig had over 80 extra-base hits in every single year. He had over 80 again in 1936 and 1937. Derek Jeter's never done it.
Which is not, once again, to say that Derek Jeter's not a good ballplayer. He's a really good ballplayer. But making a big deal because he is about to break a team stat from a ballplayer whose expertise was in a different field is just ridiculous.
By the way, did you know that Derek Jeter's 52nd on the all-time strikeouts list? Just saying...
Poll Results: Our poll question asked "How Many Games will the Mets Win this Year?" The winning answer was 70-74. That's optimism.
Trivia Answer: Carl Crawford. You should've known that.
New Poll: Our new poll asks you, "Who is the Mets MVP this year?"
Nelson was brilliant yesterday, pitching 7 innings and driving in as many runs (1) as he gave up. What more could you ask from your number seven starter?
Others who contributed to yesterday's miniature offensive outburst were Anderson Hernandez, Jeff Francoeur and Daniel Murphy with RBI hits (Hernandez's a triple).
Fernando Tatis seemed to get a hold of a ball in the top of the fourth inning, and he hit a shot to left, but the wind knocked it down and it didn't even make the warning track.
The wind could have been the story of the day as it (possibly) played a role in around 7 plays, most of which involved Luis Castillo. Castillo was battling like nobody's business, but when he yielded to Jeff Francoeur on a pop-up in the ninth, Francoeur dropped it. Kosuke Fukodome, who was on first, was forced out at second by the alert Castillo, but those two Mets were having a rough time of it.
Russ Hodges immortal words (which can be heard here) almost should have been parodied in Landshark Stadium today.
"The Mets win a ballgame...The Mets win a ballgame...I don't believe it...The Mets win a ballgame" would have hardly been inappropriate. Why didn't Howie Rose use those words? Because they were up by 7 runs.
But what a display the Mets put on today. Trotting out a lineup that had fewer home runs combined than the Marlins top two sluggers, the Mets promptly made mincemeat of Anibal Sanchez and crew.
Every single member of the Mets starting lineup (1-8) had at least two hits. Anderson Hernandez had three. Daniel Murphy cracked 2 RBI doubles, Jeff Francoeur knocked in a pair, and the New York Mets were on their way to victory.
The only Met who couldn't get anything done in the batter's box more than proved his worth in that of the pitcher. Just 3 runs on 5 hits in 6.2 innings. There's not much more you can ask for from Tim Redding. Now, Johan Santana's a different story. But remember, this is Tim Redding. TIM REDDING. You know, the guy who just managed to get his ERA under 6 with this fine outing. Ya Gotta take that!
Tomorrow is Pat Misch's first start of the year. He'll be taking on the Chicago Cubs and Ted Lilly.
If the Met year had gone differently, if say, Delgado, Beltran, Reyes, Wright, Church, Sheffield, Schneider, Pagan and Fernando Martinez had not been injured - if Johan Santana, Oliver Perez, John Maine, and JJ Putz had not gotten hurt - if all of the above had played as expected and the Mets had only one starting pitcher pitching like a number five starter, I might be making fun of the Cubbies right now.
But that ain't happening.
Poll Results: Our last poll asked you, "Who's your favorite infielder?" The winner was former-and-current Met Anderson Hernandez.
In what looks like a lost year for the New York Mets, I'd like to highlight a (slighlty) bright spot: Perspective.
2009 seems to be the year of the injury. But it's more than that: It is, to some extent, the year of "What Will Be."
Angel Pagan, Daniel Murphy, Fernando Martinez, Bobby Parnell: These men have all been auditioning for jobs with the 2010 New York Mets. And Angel, with his real production, may just have earned one.
And the other thing about this year worth mentioning is the carousel of unqualified shortstops that the Mets have put out there. I have nothing against Anderson Hernandez, Ramon Martinez, Wilson Valdez, Angel Berroa and Argenis Reyes.
But, seriously, are these the New York Mets or the B-Mets?
In 2005, Ichiro hit 15 home runs. Obviously I don't follow him or the Mariners too closely, but that definitely surprised me. I recall reading a quote from his father (I think) saying that if he wanted to, Ichiro could hit 30 home runs in a season.
Okay. But there are two things.
1. The whole point was that he could - but that that's not his game. His game is about speed and offense; and 2. It's his father, so I'm not entirely certain about how much stock we should put in what he said about Ichiro.*
* I am reminded right now of Ty Cobb. Cobb, as you probably know, was arguably the best hitter of all time. (He wasn't, but people argue that he was.) He has the highest batting average of all time, and I believe I once read something along the lines of "Ty Cobb retired having set 106 records, one of which was having set most records." Point is, he was good. And to some extent, he was an Ichiro slap-the-ball-and-run type player. Which I suppose most people were back when he played. He supposedly practiced his bunting by putting down a sweater and trying to get the ball to land on the edge of the sleeve.
Anyway, while he was a quasi-slugger (I mean, he did lead the league in slugging percentage eight times), he wasn't exactly your prototypical knock-the-cover-off-the-ball type of hitter. From 1906 (his first kind of full-time season) to 1920, he topped out at 9 home runs in a year, averaging about 4.5.
That was when the live-ball era arrived. And this aging quasi-slugger, this stolen base man, the fellow who practiced having his bunts land on the cuff of the sweater, this 34-year-old sixteen-year veteran, hit 12 home runs in a season twice.
I'm not going to say that 15 home runs is such a huge total , but it sure ain't bad from a Gold Glove outfielder who will also pound out 200 hits. On the Mets he's be batting third.
2001 was one of the best (if not the best) year for the Rookie of the Year Award. The American League Award went to Ichiro Suzuki, while the National League Award went to Albert Pujols. I just want to point out that if they each keep up their pace for the next month and a half, they will have each played nine full seasons.
In only 3 of them will Ichiro not have led the American League in hits. In only 3 of them will Albert Pujols not have had either won the MVP award or placed runner up.
Trivia Question: What is Ichiro Suzuki's career high in home runs? (answer later)
Another Question: Why is it that the Mets major league team doesn't cover the bases properly? (No answer forthcoming)
What a game! How often do you see a pitcher give up 8 runs in an inning - and remain in the game to pitch the next inning?
A couple of players earned a trip to the moon in frequent flier miles in tonight's game. Here's basically what happened:
Anderson Hernandez started off the game at shortstop. In the bottom of the third inning, Wilson Valdez pinch-hit for Bobby Parnell. That's where all the trouble started. Valdez remained in the game as the shortstop and Anderson Hernandez shifted to second, with Luis Castillo being double-switched out for Nelson Figueroa.
In the bottom of the fifth, Andy Green pinch-hit for Figueroa. Green remained in the game at second base and Anderson Hernandez went back to shortstop, with Wilson Valdez now shifting to left field to replace Gary Sheffield who was double-switched out of the game for Tim Redding.
In the bottom of the eighth, Cory Sullivan pinch-hit for Redding. He remained in the game as the left fielder. Valdez went back to shortstop, with Anderson Hernandez going back to second. Andy Green shifted to third taking over defensively for Fernando Tatis, whose spot in the batting order was taken by Sean Green.
This would all be so much cooler if it happened because the Mets did this in a game in which they were blowing out the enemy instead of vice-versa.
Let's start off with a question: What is the average number of pitchers who have had at least one at-bat for National League teams this year?
I just concluded a bit of research on pitchers hitting and I found out (essentially) nothing (well, kind of). The team with the most pitchers with at least one PA is in last place. The team with the fewest is in first. Not only that, but the NL teams that leads in this category are both in last place. That would seem to tell you that the best teams have fewer pitchers hit. The problem? The Yankees lead all AL teams.
Additionally, the AL teams that are in second place are in the first, third, fourth and fifth places in their respective divisions. Hmm...
The NL teams that are in second place in terms of amount of pitchers with PAs are teams in first and 2nd place.
The reason that I have not given you any numbers is because I wanted them to be a mystery only to be solved at the end of this excruciatingly long blog post. I know that I, for one, was quite surprised by how many pitchers have hit. In fact this all happened when I saw that the Blue Jays had 8 pitchers hit. I thought that was a lot. They only play 9 games a year without the DH. Assuming that there are 5 starters, even assume one starter goes down with an injury, you have 6 starters - there are an additional 2 pitchers that get At-Bats? I guess so.
In fact, they don't even lead their own division. So what do I know.
Answer: 14
Just me, once again, but that seems pretty high, too.
I wrote earlier that I learned essentially nothing from this exercise. That's true. What it does seem like to me, however, is that in the National League you can kind of get a gauge of how good the team is by seeing how many pitchers batted. Which, of course, makes sense. The worse your pitchers are, the more you'll use. The more you use, the higher the number of pitchers who step to the plate.
Here are the numbers. If they're not neat enough, you can write to your Congressperson.
Poll Results: I asked "Which injured Met will return to Major League action first?" It now seems as though the answer is Billy Wagner, who was not even an option in the poll.
I think I was hoping that by the time I reviewed the poll we would know the answer, but alas, that is not the case.
Anyway, the poll ended in a three-way tie between Carlos Delgado, Carlos Beltran and Jose Reyes.
Speaking of injured Mets, this is a great article from the SNY website. Feast your eyes. And remember, his point is so much better now that David Wright is down and out.
How ironic is it that right as the pitch was about to be thrown, the FOX announcer said "That's good old country hardball here."
With the amount of injuries that the Mets have suffered this year, you would think they would make it their business to move their Triple A team somewhere less than, say, 300 miles away. It's just economically prudent.
Well, what if I am bitter about the way the Mets are playing? I can still point out the inaccuracies of other people.
Get a load of this. Nice sliding play by David Eckstein. But did you get a load of the title of that clip: "Eckstein's strong throw?" You've got to be kidding me.
Congratulations to Alex Cora on hitting his first home run of the year. He was the fifteenth Met to hit a home run this year. And Geico wants you to know...Just kidding.
I think the Mets players are like cans of corn - they're dropping like flies.
Yesterday, the Mets got news of a setback to Jose Reyes's recovery. Then Luis Castillo fell down the dugout steps and had to leave the game.
Today, adding injury to injury, Johnathan Niese hurt his hamstring while covering first base on an attempted double play. And then Gary Sheffield pulled up lame at first base after crushing a base hit to left-center field.
Yet they won. Nelson Figueroa and Bobby Parnell spun 7.1 scoreless innings - against an offense that had scored 12 runs the night before and the offense, led by Angel Pagan and and David Wright, scored seven runs.
I still think that with all their players healthy, they are, at the very least, the team to beat in the Wild Card race.
Now if Beltran and Delgado can just come back.
You know what Yogi said: It ain't over 'til it's over.
As you probably know if you're living and breathing, Omar Minaya has been getting a fair amount of blame for the Mets substandard record in 2009. And he should probably expect it.
The Mets have the highest payroll in the National League. To think that they are struggling right now, trying to ease their way up to .500 seems to show some significant mismanagement. It's hard to blame people for getting disturbed.
But, if you ask me, (and I know you didn't, but it's my blog) it's hard to blame Omar Minaya for this team's troubles.
Last year, the Mets won 89 games and finished 3 games out of first place.
They basically played with this team:
C Brian Schneider/Ramon Castro/Raul Casanova/Robinson Cancel (C+) 1B Carlos Delgado (A-) 2B Luis Castillo/Damion Easley/Argenis Reyes (C) 3B David Wright (A+) SS Jose Reyes (A) LF Fernando Tatis/Daniel Murphy/Nick Evans/Angel Pagan/Marlon Anderson/Moises Alou (B-) CF Carlos Beltran (A+) RF Ryan Church/Endy Chavez/Trot Nixon (B)
Those letters in parentheses are the grades that I gave to the positions. They are approximate. That's a pretty good team.
Here is what I assume Jerry Manuel figured: 1. Brian Schneider/Ramon Castro would continue their decent catching duties. 2. Carlos Delgado, who hit torridly the last 3 months of last year, as well as in the World Baseball Classic, would put up similar numbers to those of last year. 3. Luis Castillo would improve on last year's injury-hampered numbers. 4&5. David Wright and Jose Reyes would at least duplicate their numbers from last year, while possibly showing some improvement considering that they are both under 27. 6. Daniel Murphy would be able to play left field and hit rather nicely. 7. Carlos Beltran would be Carlos Beltran. 8. Ryan Church would, after full recovery from last year's injury debacle, play quite well.
Here is where Omar's luck went bad: Of his 8 rather reasonable assumptions, only 3 (1, 3, 5) came to fruition. Injuries bad ballplaying hampered 5 of the 8 everyday positions.
But there's more. It's not like the Mets had no decent backups. They had Fernando Tatis, who was great last year as a semi-regular ready to back up the corner infield and outfield positions. They had Alex Cora, a fine backup infielder. They had Gary Sheffield and Nick Evans, both of whom can seemingly hit a bit, and play a little (very little) defense. And Jeremy Reed, who is this year's Endy Chavez, was availabe to back up the three outfield spots.
In a nutshell, here is what happened. Jose Reyes, Carlos Delgado, Carlos Beltran, got hurt. Ryan Church, Daniel Murphy and Fernando Tatis (and David Wright, to a lesser extent) clearly underperformed. CLEARLY. Throw in an injury to JJ Putz, and you've got yourself a lost season.
Unless...they come back. And perform. And win.
* * *
I was holding a relative's (relatively) new-born baby today. It burped and spit up. The baby's mother asked "Oh, did it burp or spit up?" to which someone else responded something like "both."
I said, "I like that it burped and spit up. That's my kind of person."
Okay. The results of our poll are in. The poll asked about your reaction to the Ryan Church for Jeff Francoeur trade. And let's put it bluntly: The trade was not up to scratch - at least for our voter(s).
The new poll is up. The question is "Which injured Met will return to MLB playing action soonest?" The choices are Carlos Beltran, Carlos Delgado, JJ Putz and Jose Reyes.
With the trading deadline creeping up - and with it the decision of whether to become buyers or sellers - the Mets have gone on a winning spree. Before falling to the Rockies in the second game of their twinbill on Thursday, the New York Mets - with all their injuries - were winners of five straight.
How did this injury ravaged lineup win five straight. Well, it's kind of simple. When you give up nine runs in five games and score at least four per, you're giving yourself a good shot. Every starter pitched well - even Oliver Perez was OK - and the offense was doing the job, too.
The Mets stand six games back of the Giants in the wildcard hunt.
Notes: I'd like to note Fernando Tatis's two home runs against the Rockies. Number six on the year, Thursday, put him into a tie for third on the Mets this year, with Omir Santos and David Wright. They're behind Gary Sheffield and Carlos Beltran. (Seriously, how much money could I have made by betting that David Wright, 375 at-bats into the season, would have 6 home runs.
Also, nice heads-up play by Angel Berroa in the top of the seventh yesterday. Troy Tulowitzki hit a high fly to left. Tatis tracked it to the wall and leaped, but missed the play. Anyway, the ball bounced hard off the padding and was making its way back to the infield, when Berroa, the shortstop, picked it up and threw it in.
Fernando Nieve, who tore his right quadriceps while running out an infield grounder yesterday, has been placed on the disabled list, and outfielder Cory Sullivan has been called up from Triple-A to take his spot on the roster.
"The team called up Sullivan rather than 22-year-old prospect Nick Evans (who played 15 games for the Mets prior to the All-Star break) because of Sullivan's versatility.
"In our situation now, in Cory's defense, he has a little bit more versatility than Nick," manager Jerry Manuel said. "He can play center field, he can play right field. Nick is a first baseman/left fielder basically, and he's still growing and learning those positions.""
Now, maybe I'm crazy (it's been argued), but to me, that doesn't really make any sense. Two days ago it seemed as though the Mets outfield consisted of Jeff Francoeur in right, Angel Pagan in center, and Gary Sheffield in left, with Fernando Tatis and Jeremy Reed as the backups. Okay, now Sheffield hurts himself.
If I'm the GM, I probably want to call up Nick Evans and play him in left field, but apparently they want Jeremy Reed to play left.
Here's the problem though. The man who went down was not needed to play center or right. Why should his replacement need to? Tatis can play right, and Reed can play all three spots, so a versatile outfielder is irrelevant. Basically, you can have one outfielder who can only play left.
I may have the answer. According to this, the Jerry Manuel is toying with the idea of having Livan Hernandez play some first base. Aha! Should that happen, Daniel Murphy might try to reinvent himself as an outfielder - one who can only play left.
If Jerry is really going to try this, the decision to leave Evans in Buffalo makes some sense. If he isn't - which certainly would seem more likely - it's a mystery.
Everybody thinks that the Mets stink. And can you blame them? They're nine games out of first place.
Well, if you're feeling blue about this team, orange you happy to read these optimistic notes.
Johan Santana, who is darn good whenever, is markedly better after the All-Star break. Just for one example, last year his ERA, WHIP, and SO/BB ratio were all much better after the All-Star break. And he went 8-0.
David Wright is a power hitter. He will likely hit some home runs in the second half.
Daniel Murphy is seemingly getting comfortable at first. Maybe he'll start hitting.
The bullpen is pretty good.
If Carlos Delgado comes back in, like two weeks, and gets hot, he could carry this team.
Fernando Tatis is probably a bit better than he's playing.
I know, I know, it's a weak list. But the fifth point (while containing a big "if") can be huge.
Baseball Note: According to this, the fourth-most similar pitcher to Tim Lincecum through age 24 (I know you were wondering) is Jim Bouton (who, in case you don't know, was arguably the most influential baseball player ever).
Ironically enough, considering his terrible start on Friday, our readership (or whoever voted) chose Mike Pelfrey as the second-best starting pitcher on the staff.
Our new poll asks about what your reaction to the Ryan Church for Jeff Francoeur was.
Okay, we're one game past the traditional halfway mark in the baseball schedule, and things are not looking good if you root for the Mets. The Mets, picked by Sports Illustrated to win it all this year, are in fourth place.
With an overflowing portion of injuries to the likes of Jose Reyes, Carlos Delgado and Carlos Beltran and the under-performance of players like Daniel Murphy and Fernando Tatis, the Mets are in hot water.
Then Omar Minaya trades Ryan Church for Jeff Francoeur. Ryan Church was one of the Mets only healthy players with any real upside. Sheffield's old, Castillo has no power, Schneider can't really hit. Church was really good last year (especially until the concussion) and has shown flashes of that this year. In fact, with Beltran and Fernando Martinez out, he became our center fielder.
So, let me understand: You trade one of your best uninjured players for a slow outfielder who doesn't hit for average, strikes out a ton, and treats walks as if they're the bubonic plague. Oh, and let me clarify - I'm not talking about and Adam-Dunn-without-the-walks type of player. This is a man with five home runs. Let me repeat that: Five home runs.
I understand that three years ago Jeff Francoeur was a summer sensation. He made Sports Illustrated, got all the hoopla, and for all I know, it didn't even get to his head. But the fact is that right now the guy stinks. And he's seemingly going on a downward trend. Could this trade work out well for the Mets? Sure.
The Mets, to put it mildly, are suffering mightily. After dropping 3 games in Philadelphia (in which they scored only three runs - three runs), the Mets are now three games under .500 and 4.5 games behind the first-place Phillies.
What's more, the Los Angeles Dodgers (of Los Angeles), possessors of the best record in the major leagues as well as Manny Ramirez, are coming to Flushing. Get ready for a long week.
Or should you?
Here's why the Mets might beat the Dodgers...
Game 1: Mike Pelfrey vs. Clayton Kershaw These two youngsters have a lot of potential between them, so don't look for too many runs on the scoreboard tomorrow night. If Pelfrey is as good as he was last time out, the Mets might just eke out a win.
Game 2: Oliver Perez vs. Hiroki Kuroda Oliver Perez. The enigma to end all mysteries. He's been devastating so often in his career - and downright terrible just as often. Hopefully he'll be on the top of his game and the Mets can score a few runs. Because otherwise, they're toast.
Game 3: Randy Wolf vs. Livan Hernandez Probably the game that the Mets have the least chance of winning, as Livan always seems to implode when playing good teams - but what watch out for the fellow. He's got a lot of tricks up his sleeve.
As I analyze these forthcoming games, I realize that the only reason I give the Mets any chance against the Dodgers is because Tim Redding is not pitching.
In a somewhat controversial blog post, Harold Reynolds basically bashes power hitters like Adam Dunn and Adrian Gonzalez because they walk and "clog the bases." He also writes that he doesn't like OPS because a pitcher's fear leads him to walk power hitters and drive up their on-base percentage.
Well, that's a darn good reason for a stat to go up. Walks are extremely valuable. I did some research on the subject and concluded that on occasions that Adam Dunn walked this year, he had 2 RBIs and scored 7 runs.* There were also occasions in which he extended the inning and one of the following batters drove in other base-runners.
All-in-all, walks are not remotely worthless. Batters who draw a lot of them (for any reason) should be rewarded in the statistical record. If they have value, it should show.
*I'm not entirely certain, because I checked these numbers a while back, but I believe that there was also one instance in which he was pinch-run for and the pinch-runner scored.
Carlos Beltran is now hurt. He joins the ever-growing list of wounded Mets that includes such ballplayers as Carlos Delgado, Jose Reyes, J.J. Putz, Oliver Perez and John Maine. Oh, and don't forget Gary Sheffield. Yet, believe it or not, the Mets are closing in on first place.
Under almost any circumstances, winning three games in a four-game series is impressive. With all those All-Stars on the shelf, it's nearly unfathomable.
So how did the New York Mets, in their current crippled state achieve the unachievable? How did they face off against a first-place (and darn good) St. Louis Cardinals team for a threee-game set and emerge victorious?
A lot of it had to do with starting pitching. Over the four games, Mets starters pitched 27 innings, in which they allowed nine runs (only seven earned) on only 23 hits. Their strikeout to walk ration was a pedestrian 1.36, but the walks didn't hurt all too much and the defense did pretty good work. Was there a luck aspect involved? Probably, but what do you want - this is baseball.
But it was more than that. In the nine innings that the bullpen worked they gave up nothing. 3 hits and no runs. And remember, J.J. Putz, the setup man, is disabled, and Bobby Parnell, his replacement, has been so overworked that they vowed to rest him for the first few games. No runs in four games! It's an impressive achievement, to say the least.
But there's some more credit to pass around. David Wright had 6 hits and 4 runs, Fernando Tatis, who is hopefully out of his seemingly interminable batting slump, had 5 RBIs over the four games. Ryan Church contributed runs and RBIs at the rate of 3 apiece, and the middle of the order, while it may not have scared the Cardinals too much, certainly hurt them.
Tomorrow the Mets take on the Yankees at Citi Field with Mike Pelfrey taking on Yankee ace C.C. Sabathia.
Poll Update: In our last poll, we asked you "Who should play right and left field for the Mets?" with the choices being Gary Sheffield, Ryan Church, Fernando Tatis, and Fernando Martinez. Coming in first was Ryan Church, with Gary Sheffield and Fernando Tatis tied for second.
After a really tough loss to the Yankees at their new "wiffle ball stadium" on Friday night (capped by a Luis Castillo error), the Mets rebounded last night by beating the Yankees 6-2. Gary Sheffield likes going back to being a designated hitter - he's 4 for 10 with two home runs and a double in the last two games.
David Wright, if you didn't know, is leading the major leagues in batting average. Carlos Beltran is not far behind. Fernando Nieve pitched solidly in place of the injured John Maine. The Mets had 17 hits today. They are not dead. Trust me.
Interesting Note: It might just be me, but it seems as though there is an inordinate number of former Mets second basemen floating around the Major Leagues.
Melvin Mora, BAL - played 8 games at second base with the Mets in 1999-2000 before being traded (with others) to the Orioles for Mike Bordick.
Ty Wigginton, BAL - played 37 games at second base with the Mets in 2002 and 2004 before being traded to the Pirates in 2004 in the Kris Benson deal.
Marco Scutaro, TOR - played in 51 games at second base for the Mets in 2002-2003 before being waived in 2003.
Anderson Hernandez, WAS - played in 18 games at second base for the Mets in 2005-2006 before being sent to the Nationals in 2008 to complete the Luis Ayala deal.
Kazuo Matsui, HOU - played in 105 games at second base with the Mets in 2004-2006 before being traded in 2006 for Eli Marrero.
Jeff Keppinger, HOU - played in 32 games with the Mets at second base in 2004 before being traded in 2006 to the Royals for Ruben Gotay.
Ruben Gotay (who played 37 games at second in 2007) does not make the list. He might soon, considering he is a AAA infielder for the Arizona Diamondbacks and his on-base percentage is currently more than 50 points higher than what the Diamondbacks are getting from their second basemen.
It sure is good that we posted this post when we did. Today's lineup has Beltran and Wright batting third and fourth, followed by Ryan Church, and then in the 6-hole the slumping, aged Gary Sheffield.
Could it be a coincidence that Jerry takes our advice to heart? Nah.
Note: Luis Castillo is batting ninth in this game. Alex Cora is occupying the lead-off spot. It'll probably stay that way for the remainder of the series.
As put forth so nicely here, David Wright is leading the National League in batting average and on-base percentage, which brings forth the question of why he is batting 5th in the batting order. Now, it been scientifically proven that the order of the batters makes a very slight difference, but still - the Mets lost two games in extra innings over the last 48 hours. Just one extra Met run by the ninth inning in either game would have them 2 games out of first right now instead 4.
While I haven't written about it, this has been an issue that has been on my mind for a while - essentially since Wright's batting average escalated and Carlos Delgado went on the Disabled List. I also think that it's quite a waste for the Mets to have two of the top three (the other is Carlos Beltran) batting averages (and two of the top five on-base percentages) in the National League, and not take advantage by batting those players back-to-back.
I asked somebody about this a few days ago, and he said, essentially, that Gary Sheffield's value goes up because he's being protected by Wright (as opposed to, say Fernando Tatis or Daniel Murphy). Now, I can hear that. But I still can't stomach Jerry Manuel's separating his two best hitters - by what has turned out to be an out machine in Gary Sheffield, no less.
The solution, perhaps, is to have Sheffield bat third. Then, Wright and Beltran could protect him in the fourth and fifth slots.
I just don't see how it can hurt to have your best hitters batting back-to-back.
The Mets just lost two out of three games to the division-leading Philadelphia Phillies, which places them 4 games out of first place. Well, what did you expect? The Phillies are a good team - they currently have the second-best record in the major leagues (behind the Dodgers). Their pitching, while not great, is good enought that when combined with their amazing offense, good defense (they have the best Fielding % in the National League) and fine baserunning makes for a pretty darn good team. (By the way, they're also defending World Champions.)
So the Mets can live with losing this series. Especially the way they did. Missing key performers Jose Reyes and Carlos Delgado, it certainly wouldn't've been inconceivable for the Mets to have been embarrassed by the Phillies in the 3-game set. They absolutely were not. The Phillies only outscored the Mets by three runs over the whole series, and both of the Mets losses were in extra innings.
As such, this series lose was excusable. But they can't start duplicating it with regularity. Especially facing a tough stretch of division-leading and other good teams, the Mets cannot let down their guard and just wait to start winning when the big boys come back. They're not playing the Washington Nationals this weekend - their opponent is the revamped version of the New York Yankees, and anything less than a stellar effort by the Mets will likely result in their figuratively being torn to shreds.
But, with their good starting pitching, better base-running, and just a bit of clutch-hitting by the big bats, they should withstand their obstacles.
Our poll of "Until Carlos Delgado's return, who should man first base?" ended in a tie between Fernando Tatis and Jeremy Reed. The Mets, in a move that has a lot fo merit, turned erstwhile outfielder Daniel Murphy into a first baseman, essentially nullifying our poll. Considering it leaves leftfield to Gary Sheffield, who has become the team's cleanup hitter, the position change makes a lot of sense.
Meanwhile, the Mets stand 3 games behind the division-leading Phillies after splitting the first two games of their weekend series with the Nats. With a injury-plagued team, the Mets are struggling to put out a major-league caliber lineup every night, which probably has a lot to do with their being swept by the Pittsburgh Pirates this week.
But help is on the way. Ryan Church, who had been out with a strained right hamstring, should be coming off of the disabled list on Sunday, and should provide a defensive upgrade, at the very least.
Here's the key for the Mets: With key offensive contributors like Messrs. Delgado and Reyes sidelined by injury, the way to victory for the Mets essentially lies with the starting pitching. The offense is weak, but with quality pitching by Santana, Pelfrey and Co., the offense should perform well enough to win most of the time.
New Poll: Our new poll asks you to select the two outfielders who you believe should be flanking Carlos Beltran in the outfield. The options are Gary Sheffield, Ryan Church, Fernando Tatis and Fernando Martinez. Please only pick two.
Baseball is fickle, every fan of the game knows that. The 1962 Mets, considered by many to be the worst team of all time won 1/4 of their games.
A .250 winning percentage is obscenely low, and a .700 winning percentage is exceedingly high. As such, when two ballclubs play a game, even if one has significantly more talent than the other, you can never predict the outcome with real certainty.
That being said, the Mets' sweep of the Washington Nationals was hardly unpredictable (see this). Even though they were missing a few key players, the Mets outclassed the Nats. Gary Sheffield was bashing the ball, Messrs. Maine, Hernandez, and Santana pitched quite well, and the team as a whole played like they meant it.
The Mets even did well in regard to video review, with Sheffield and Murphy's blasts being ruled home runs.
Additionally, your "Met Fan" blogger made his way to Citi Field for the first time on Memorial Day, and was sitting in exactly the wrong spot to have a live opinion on Gary Sheffield's home run.
But you can't mess with a sweep that knocks the Mets into first place.
