New York Mets Organization Discussion
by John Sickels on Jan 5, 2010 8:00 AM EST
Email
PrintI am now working on the Texas Rangers. The next team on the list is the New York Mets, followed by the Cleveland Indians.
Use this thread to discuss the Mets system. This is one of the teams that tends to have a lot of propaganda and groupthink surrounding the farm system. What do you guys think of it? It is hard to get a read on some of their prospects sometimes, especially the Latin American guys that they promote very aggressively.
105 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
This farm is constantly overrated by Mets fans
but constantly underrated by the main stream media, especially New York publications. I mean, using the win-loss record of a minor league system to judge the quaility of prospects is just lazy.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
Espescially considering the Mets have 7 minor league affiliates (one of only 7 franchises with that many) along with sumer league teams in both Venezuela and the Dominican.
Their taleant is spread alot thinner than most franchises.
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Stephen Schmidt on Jan 5, 2010 10:26 AM EST up reply actions
People are majorly sleeping on F-Mart
He was heavily overrated coming into the 2009 season, had an awful MLB debut (at an incredibly young age!!!!!), and now apparantly is crap.
I think he needs a consolidation season in AAA with all the injuries and all, but he’s still really really young for the league and still has solid upside.
"I generally avoid temptation unless I can't resist it" ~ Mae West
I think he should pretty much remain where he was last year.
For the first time really, since he was Low A Hagerstown, he showed his potential with the bat in AAA. He was without a doubt the best player in the International League under the age of 25 until his call up on May 26th. The reason why I wouldn’t go any higher is of course his injuries. He’s still young enough to overcome them, but I think that’s pretty much his only downside as a prospect. Had he played an entire triple A season with a .877 OPS, .382 wOBA and .250 ISO, at age 20 (not that he would have, two months is still a small sample size) he’d pretty much be an A prospect. To me, he’s still a B+ prospect with tremendous upside, he just has to stay on the field. You can’t put much, if any stock in his MLB time, he was 20 and had been rushed every step of his career.
Also, can we nip this “F-Mart” nickname in the bud. It’s just awful and one hell of a lazy nickname. The first initial, coupled with the first three or four letters of a last name is not a clever or witty nickname, it’s just plain stupid.
The Mets lobby Omar for a plan, and his plan, he likes his plan. The problem is that he didn't write his plan down 'cause that makes it paperwork, and that’s false hustle... Know what I’m sayin’?
It works for Brandons
No dash though…
bwell…add an “n” and thats what I’m doing
"Hey Fat Kid...the monster is right behind you! RUNNNN!!" -The Host
by bwellnjonesco on Jan 5, 2010 4:17 PM EST up reply actions
Walk rate is the only other concern
But with his power finally apparently blossoming, I suspect the walks will eventually come too. Its either that or he just gets himself out too much by swinging at bad pitches. The more he flashes his power, the less hittable strikes he’ll see. That’s the only big adjustment he has left in his offensive game. If he can adjust to that and stay healthy, he could be an impact player at the big league level in pretty short order. He and Ike Davis should be a nightmare for Triple-A RHP this year, and Fernando could definitely stand to benefit from learning a bit from Davis’s approach to hitting. Davis got off to a rough start in the first couple weeks in 2009, but then started taking walks, then he started hitting lots of doubles, and by the end of the year his power had really come around. If Davis can help impart some of that to Fernando by hitting behind him in the lineup, they could make for a pair of excellent left handed power bats to add to the 2011 roster.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Jan 5, 2010 4:27 PM EST up reply actions
Better just hope
hope he doesn’t end up with the nickname K-Mart.
I gotta say that the whole idea about the Met system being overblown as a consequence of it being a big market team has always puzzled me. If anything the discussion of prospects is almost an ‘anti-big market’ situation as none of the biggest voices in this discussion (J.S., BA, BP, etc) are NYC-based, and it’s not like the national media, or north-east based ESPN cover the minor leagues, the draft or amateur ball even a little bit. And even the local NYC sports media has always seemed to operate under the assumption that this is a big league town and they’re above having to know what’s playing in Peoria. Only recently have some of them started to pay attention to the NYM & NYY systems and even then it’s mostly a superficial knowledge. Sports radio might be loud in NYC but, on this topic (insert joke here) it’s clueless.
That said, I understand that the FANS is the NYC-Boston corridor are more numerous and tend to be louder and a bit provincial at times, but unless the folks doing the ratings are allowing themselves to be swayed by either those voices or by having sweet-somethings whispered in their ear by the orgs themselves I don’t see where the bias part comes in.
NYC media knows nothing about the farm system
The only player Francesa knows about is Mejia, and he can’t even pronounce his name correctly. You’d be hard pressed to find the media say anything nice about the Mets over the last three years.
The Mets lobby Omar for a plan, and his plan, he likes his plan. The problem is that he didn't write his plan down 'cause that makes it paperwork, and that’s false hustle... Know what I’m sayin’?
understandably so (having nothing nice to say)
they’ve had a pretty terrible three years on all levels. Bad MLB Performance, and Bad drafts IMO
They finished a game off the wild card two of the last three years.
That may not have been what they wanted to achieve, but it’s by no means terrible.
"We're just as bad as the old Mets, but this time nobody's laughing"
-Dallas Green
by Stephen Schmidt on Jan 5, 2010 10:28 AM EST up reply actions
The placement isn't terrible
but the way they ended up in that spot can be construed as terrible.
As Schmidt said
we were one game out of the playoffs in 07 and 08, we have three superstars who get no credit in the NY media, and a farm system that has been improving, albeit slowly, over the last few years. The way this franchised gets discussed about by a lot of people in the New York, and even some national media, it’s as if they need to trade off Wright and Reyes to get prospects so they can compete in five or six years.
The Mets lobby Omar for a plan, and his plan, he likes his plan. The problem is that he didn't write his plan down 'cause that makes it paperwork, and that’s false hustle... Know what I’m sayin’?
I guess we disagree
I think theyve built a flawed, injury prone team. With all of the money they spend (often not with the most wise investments), they should be competing at a much higher level. They’ve ignored their SP woes and tried to patch it together. Theyve ignored their aging lineup. Reyes are Wright are generally great – but wright was pretty off last year and Reyes was injured. Beltran? Played well through an injury. Delgado – injured. Combine that with injured and poor pitching, you have a poorly made team.
I feel the problem is the ownership, who seem to balk at making the big move the team needs as well as truly investing in real minor league talent. They place little to no emphasis on the draft (see billy wagner trade). They also need a new GM. Omar is not getting it done and I think they need someone with some fresh ideas.
when everything you say includes the word "injured"
it’s hardly a poorly constructed team. I would actually think it IS poorly constructed in many ways, in terms of being top heavy, but it’s definitely above average in talent.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
Well it's above average in talent because of Wright, Reyes, Beltran and Santana
you have those 4, then 21 guys struggling to reach league average. I’d say when you have a 150 million dollar payroll, and you’re paying peanuts to Wright and Reyes, that’s pretty poorly constructed
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
That's not really the point though
The point is the size of the dropoff from the 4th best to 5th best player is ridiculously huge. And the fact that two of those four players were relatively inexpensive, even compared to the rest of the team, makes it look even worse.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Jan 5, 2010 6:09 PM EST up reply actions
I didn't disagree with that point
but I think that phrasing it the way that Gina did weakened her argument. The Mets are overpaying for what is largely a replacement level roster, but try removing Utley, Rollins, Halliday, and Howard from the Phillies, and see whether they can approach a .500 team.
Theyd still have
werth, victorino, hamels, polanco. And Happ and Blanton who aren’t impressive but good enough for around league average, which is more than what most of the mets roster can say.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
Yeah but it's still way way better than what you're left with on the mets
If you take away Utley, Rollins, Howard and Halladay and replace them with league average players, there’s a good chance you’re still looking at an 80 win team, if you take away Reyes, Santana, Beltran and Wright and replace them with league average players, there’s no way you get an 80 win team. In fact in the latter those league average players might still make up 4 of the teams top 6. I wouldn’t be surprised if Hamels, Victorino, Polanco and Werth projected to be as valuable as the rest of the mets roster sans Santana, Wright, Reyes and Beltran, although probably not once you include Bay.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
The remaining Phillies? You'd be lucky to get 80 wins out of them
I’m sure you could take last years team, subtract win shares over a replacement player, and have a good idea as to how many games they’d lose. I’d be surprised if they broke 75 wins.
I don't know about win shares
But Werth was worth 4.7 WAR last year, Hamels was worth 3.8 I , Victorino was worth 3.4, Polanco was worth 3.1
If a replacement level team would win 50 games, which I believe it would I’d have to look it up to be sure, then replacing Hallday, Utley, Rollins and Howard with league average players, 2.0 WAR, would bring them up to 58 and adding Werth, Hamels, Victorino’s and Polancos, and Blanton and Happ who were around 2.0 WAR each last year, brings them up to 77 wins.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
Yeah but that's assuming every else is only replacement level
which they’re not. Ruiz was worth 2.2 WAR, so you’re up to 79 wins and I totally forgot about Ibanez who was worth 4.2, so that brings then up to 83ish.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
And expected Winshares for this upcoming season?
Also, was there anyone on the team with a sub-2.0 WAR?
Yeah ben francisco
and a bunch of guys who were 0.0
And most projection systems aren’t up yet, unless you go by the fans which seems to be incredibly generous.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
CHONEs are out
5.3 – Reyes
5.2 – Wright
4.7 – Beltran
4.0 – Bay
-—
19.2
They don’t have pitching projections out yet, but figure about +5 total from the other 4 positions (CA, 1B, RF, 2B), +3.5 from Santana, +7 total from the other 4 SP, and about +5 from the bench and pen combined, and you would have an 88 win team.
That’s with a team built on 5 guys, and otherwise below average talent. Which is what Gina is saying.
I’m not convinced that means it’s poorly constructed. If at least 2 of those 5 go down, it will look ugly sure, in 20/20 hindsight. But if just those 5 stayed healthy, it might look brilliant.
As for the point that too much of this money is invested in guys over 30, it seems to me that that’s all you will ever see available in FA. How often do you see big name players hit FA before 29? And then when they do, aren’t they always getting long term contracts into their 30s?
So if you are going to have a high payroll team, that’s what it will look like. The Mets have actually done a decent job on some of these bigger deals of not signing guys past 33-34.
I do think the Mets have made some key mistakes in the last few years, but they have done quite a bit right as well. Including doing a good job of building the farm to where it will be providing real help soon.
and if you took away those 4 the Mets would have
Bay, Frenchy, Pelfrey (really good 08/Terrible 09), Maine, K-Rod
Yeah Maine who hasn't average 100 innings the last two years
Pelfrey who is probably about as valuable as Happ/Blanton, Frenchy who isn’t good, I don’t understand why people keep bringing him up in this he’s below average offensively and defensively since he decided to bulk up two years ago, a solid closer but a guy who only pitches one inning a year, and Jason Bay who’s about as valuable as Victorino.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
one inning a year should be 60 innings a year
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
Bay's the only player from that group who's anything of a lock to be better than average
And the only other one whose got decent shot at average is Pelfrey. Francoeur has an outside shot at average, with an upside maybe just a tad better, but its hard to project him to be that good, he’s been well below average the last couple years. Also, Pelfrey was pretty much the same pitcher in 2008 and 2009, but the Mets infield defense was not the same infield defense in 2008 and 2009, so his ERA was a lot higher.
Werth, Polanco, Hamels, and Victorino >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bay, Francoeur, Pelfrey, and Maine. And Werth and Bay actually match up pretty well, so even through them into the “core” groups and go Top 5 vs Top 5 and then next 5 vs next 5.
Polanco, Hamels, Victorino, Ibanez, Blanton>>>>>>>>>>>>> Francoeur, Pelfrey, Maine, uh, ummmm, Castillo? Murphy? In fact, Niese might be more valuable than any of these guys next year, but its hard to call that now.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Jan 5, 2010 11:15 PM EST up reply actions
Throw* not through
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Jan 5, 2010 11:15 PM EST up reply actions
Now you're playing games with words
“lock to be better than average” is not the same thing as “better than average.” Can you name 15 closers who will definitely be better than K-Rod?
49.999999…% of players are better than average, but what percentage is a lock to be better than average? Probably less than 1/3 of them, right?
And you're nit picking
All of those Phillies players mentioned have much better chances to be better than average than any of the Mets players aside from Bay. It doesn’t change anything about which group is better than the other or what my point was.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Jan 6, 2010 8:37 AM EST up reply actions
Yes, I'm "nitpicking" your overly-generalized, and therefore inaccurate statements
You’ve been relying on some awfully shaky ground. I don’t abide your shell games, sir.
Plain and simple: “The Mets roster is poorly constructed, especially considering the cost.”
The rest is just sensationalized, inaccurate, or equivocation.
I'm not sure what you're referring to
Or what our disagreement is here. I’m not sliding certain terms in and then covering them up with different terms. What “shaky ground” an I relying on? Jason Bay is a safe bet to be better than average. No other player on the Mets really is, and many on the Phillies are. We seem to agree on this, but you’re still trying to pick apart my arguments as if we disagree.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Jan 6, 2010 11:53 AM EST up reply actions
I understand, I just don't think the point you were responding to was the one she was making
I don’t think she’s saying that as a group the other 21 players would struggle to be average, I think she means that each individually would struggle to be average, while for most teams, there would at least be a handful of players who were still average or better.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Jan 5, 2010 11:05 PM EST up reply actions
That's not my point
My point wasn’t that she was wrong, just that she said something that made her argument weaker. I think that by making broad claims like that (take away 4 players and the team is below average), it takes us one or two steps away from sports radio announcers who make broad claims that would be true of any team, like:
“I just don’t see anyone good coming up through the minors” (when they don’t know the minor league system)
“This team isn’t built to compete” (just a broad generalization that cannot be proven or disproven, even after the season has been played)
“PLAYER A is not a competitor” (I’m sure that’s how he got to the major leagues, by not competing with tens or hundreds of thousands of other people, over the course of over a decade)
Now, i agree that the roster has been poorly constructed. I wouldn’t be as bothered by it if the payroll was about half as much as it is. But to make that broad “4 player” claim just sounds like cheap rhetoric.
And finally, to address what you said, if that’s the case then I believe that she is wrong. There are players who are above average outside of the top four, but they happen to have other rolls.
But that's not what she said
Its what you’re saying she said. I don’t disagree with your point, but I don’t think Gina does either. She was saying once you get past the four best players on the Mets, there’s a big talent dropoff, which we’ve established you agree with. I’m not sure why you insist on interpreting it this way.
you have those 4, then 21 guys struggling to reach league average. I’d say when you have a 150 million dollar payroll, and you’re paying peanuts to Wright and Reyes, that’s pretty poorly constructed
That means there are 21 guys who are individually struggling to reach league average. If she meant that the rest of the team would be league average, she’d have said it that way. She didn’t say all 21 would be below, she said that comparatively, very few would.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Jan 6, 2010 8:41 AM EST up reply actions
And she used this as an argument
as if it was abnormal. I am saying that using that line of critical reasoning is incredibly flawed.
Lets try this with other stuff…“When you remove 12 hours of sunlight, we practically live in the dark.”
“New York is a terrible city, aside from the museums, shows, central park, the nightlife, the shopping, and ethnic foods. It’s too expensive, polluted, it smells funny, people are rude, and there’s nothing to do.”
The second one is less clear, but the point there was still there. When you remove the best parts of something, most of what remains is bad. The issue is whether this is abnormal in context.
In this case, I believe that the vast majority of baseball teams are composed of stars and a bunch of guys struggling to be average. I also believe that there is a relatively small percentage of guys (20%, maybe?) who are a “lock to be above average” but are not stars. I concede that 20% is totally a made up number; I dont have the time, energy, and know-how to conduct any sort of study.
THIS is an overgeneralized form of the argument though
This isn’t what Gina or I are saying. We’re saying that, in context, when you take away the four best players on the Mets, the remaining 21 players are worse than what you would get from most other teams if you applied the same process. My understanding is that you agree with this claim, so unless I’m understanding your argument incorrectly, I’m not sure where the disagreement is here. You seem to be trying to support a criticism a statement that was never really made.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Jan 6, 2010 11:56 AM EST up reply actions
Pot and kettle
Yes, I’m “nitpicking” your overly-generalized, and therefore inaccurate statements
I am saying that using that line of critical reasoning is incredibly flawed.
Lets try this with other stuff…
When you’re objecting to the use of over-generalization in rhetoric, you should try not to over-generalize.
http://www.chop-n-change.com
by alexwithclass on Jan 6, 2010 4:28 PM EST up reply actions
Jason Bay and K-Rod
and Frenchy was pretty damn good down the stretch and I like his swing for Citi Field in 2010. A lot of doubles.
And a lot ,more outs
he swings at everything. He’s an out machine.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
Injured
Team is built around a lot of aging players. Players who could quite predictably…..get injured. Castillo. Beltran. Delgado. Johan. Maine. Putz. All are also, in essence, past prime. Sure, Beltran had a very, very good season last year and I expect he’ll continue to be good for a bit. The point is, this team has been built on past prime talent – and as the core (aside from Reyes and Wright
I don't think its fair to call Johan
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Jan 5, 2010 11:16 PM EST up reply actions
Damnit
I don’t think its fair to call Johan’s injury predictable.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Jan 5, 2010 11:16 PM EST up reply actions
Predictable, no
is he on the wrong side of 30 and past peak? yes.
He doesn't even cross the line until March
and I know technically 31 “is on the wrong side of 30” but gimme a break, he has only been on the DL twice in his career. I’d hardly call him an Injury risk.
The Mets lobby Omar for a plan, and his plan, he likes his plan. The problem is that he didn't write his plan down 'cause that makes it paperwork, and that’s false hustle... Know what I’m sayin’?
Peak for a pitcher is usually in the 30-32 range of age (27-29 for hitters). Johan is pretty much right there.
He's there age wise
but projection wise he’s definitely well into his downturn.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
A workhorse pitcher who hasn't been injured yet is more likely to be injured soon
And this isn’t just the gambler’s fallacy. Throwing a baseball is an act that the human body simply wasn’t built to do. The more you do it, the more likely your body will wear down. The fact that Johan had thrown a ton of innings in the years before the Mets extended him meant that he was at risk for injury. Pitcher injuries are just below death and taxes on the list of inevitable things.
http://www.chop-n-change.com
by alexwithclass on Jan 6, 2010 4:31 PM EST up reply actions
As a Phillies fan
I have no problem with the idea that the Mets ace may be well into his downturn. It just strikes me as hyperbole that Johan Santana is past his peak. I can’t say I gave it much thought though, it just struck me that way.
Well it's mostly because his peak was so insanely good
He’s definitely still good enough to be an ace on most teams. He’s just no where near as good as he was in his best years with the Twins.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
Yeah, I thought of that
and can’t argue with that point.
I agree with the above
But isn’t this true of every team?
The average fan doesn’t care enough to know about players not on the major-league roster, with the exception of players like Strasburg, etc.
Though maybe I would assert that it’s more apparent in NYC, where the Yankees have the payroll flexibility to not have to worry about developing their own talent, and the Mets are constantly trying to compete in the same market.
Perhaps the greatest use of their farm system is to trade prospects for established stars, like the Santana and Putz trades.
by El Duq of Hurl on Jan 5, 2010 11:46 AM EST up reply actions
But isn’t this true of every team?
“But isn’t this true of every team?”
Probably to some extent. I’m not saying the NYC-based fans (particularly in the internet age and at sites like this one) are less knowledgeable than elsewhere, but there are a couple of differences in NYC
1) I suspect (but know know for sure) that the sports media in other towns don’t have the same (or as much) ‘big city attitude’ where they feel that until something/someone makes it here then it’s not worth paying attention to. Particularly in areas where the AAA or AA teams are close by: KC-Omaha; Seattle-Tacoma; Houston-Austin; etc., I think that news from the farm is much more likely to flow to the fans in the ML city. Even Boston fans in were always much more likely to be kept up to date on goings on in Pawtucket while the NYC media barely acknowledged the existence of Norfolk & Columbus (now Buffalo & Scranton).
2) Despite all that I still often – constantly even – hear about how the Met system is intentionally over-blown (John used the term “propaganda”) and I honestly don’t know where that stems from. It’s certainly not via the newspapers who are now only slowly starting to have minor league coverage seep into their pages; it’s not the NYC-based national media who wouldn’t know what month the MLB draft is in if you gave them 11 guesses; and it’s certainly not local talk radio who is probably more ignorant on this topic than the above two.
And if excess hype is the result of those within organizations who are chatting up the systems more than is warranted then that’s a problem that’s more the fault of those who repeat it as if gospel.
Part of it may be how over-represented the team is on the net
That’s where most serious prospect discussion gets done, and the Mets have as large a following as anyone on the interwebz. And it really is a mix of some of the brighter fans prone to cogent analysis, and some the ones more prone to groupthink and propoganda. Its a much more "fair’ mix in terms of the former than something like talk radio, but both “types” are still there.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Jan 5, 2010 1:53 PM EST up reply actions
I agree that's part of it
“Part of it may be how over-represented the team is on the net”
I agree that that’s part of it. Read any place that tackles the prospect issue and they’ll say they get the most feedback – good, bad, angry, whatever – from Met fans, Yanks fans & Sox fans. Not only are those groups numerous and passionate but often in competition with each other for bragging rights on so many levels.
But there’s still an almost universal disclaimer I read with discussions of Met farm systems warning about having to wade through the hype which almost invariably get linked to the NY media leading me to wonder how often that gets written as just a knee-jerk reaction without even considering whether the dots between the two are connected.
I think this overhyping thing comes from
players like Milledge and Gomez who had great tools, and were highly but never really put it together. Also, pitchers like Humber and Pelfrey were supposed to be stars, and Pelfrey being an average pitcher is a disappointment to many, and Humber is a bust. Then fans get this idea that none of our prospects are any good and any time Omar or someone says they’re good prospects, it’s instantly seen has hyping a prospect up. There are a number of fans who are already calling Fernando a bust because of his time with the Mets last season and his label as top prospect in the system the last few seasons. It’s mostly fan stupidity fueled by the likes of WFAN hosts who are either anti Mets (Francesa) or are just too stupid comprehend that these players have to grow (Beningo, Carton, etc). The “writers” at the tabloids (the Daily News and the New York Post) contribute a lot to the mentality of needing immediate results from prospects as well.
The Mets lobby Omar for a plan, and his plan, he likes his plan. The problem is that he didn't write his plan down 'cause that makes it paperwork, and that’s false hustle... Know what I’m sayin’?
I think the point is..
..that since such local media is so unwilling to devote resources for the sole purpose of covering the minor leagues, then even usually reliable and balanced news outlets overly rely on internal franchise sources. The better reportage of the minors have been in and around the better systems in baseball (e.g. MINN, CA teams, MD, ATL, etc…) because the reporting tends to be done by veterans of the field with several decades of experience and long ties with coaches and scouts that pre-empt any reliance on the covered ballclub to act as oversight.
The Mets local media has a unique competitive climate that creates this kind situation, which is not to excuse them, but it explains some things. The Mets’ systems have not been AS BAD as it has been fashionable to say so. They have developed their share of quality players in the last decade; Then again, they’re also one of those teams who shows little patience and trades them away as soon as they are able. It seems like they find a prospect who they actually plan on keeping long-term (i.e. Wright, Reyes) which happens once every 2-3 seasons, and the rest they pump up and audition as much as possible, to be used as an trade bait (i.e. Kazmir, Gomez, Humber, Guerra, Kunz, Mulvey, etc..), which in practice tends to be most of their prospects. In the end it’s just a difference of vision of the minor leagues, as a means to make trades. If you’re a C prospect in the Mets system, you’re pretty likely to get traded away at some point.
..I think the point is...
..that since such local media is so unwilling to devote resources for the sole purpose of covering the minor leagues, then even usually reliable and balanced news outlets overly rely on internal franchise sources. The better reportage of the minors have been in and around the better systems in baseball (e.g. MINN, CA teams, MD, ATL, etc…) because the reporting tends to be done by veterans of the field with several decades of experience and long ties with coaches and scouts that pre-empt any reliance on the covered ballclub to act as oversight.
The Mets local media has a unique competitive climate that creates this kind situation, which is not to excuse them, but it explains some things. The Mets’ systems have not been AS BAD as it has been fashionable to say so. They have developed their share of quality players in the last decade; Then again, they’re also one of those teams who shows little patience and trades them away as soon as they are able. It seems like they find a prospect who they actually plan on keeping long-term (i.e. Wright, Reyes) which happens once every 2-3 seasons, and the rest they pump up and audition as much as possible, to be used as an trade bait (i.e. Kazmir, Gomez, Humber, Guerra, Kunz, Mulvey, etc..), which in practice tends to be most of their prospects. In the end it’s just a difference of vision of the minor leagues, as a means to make trades. If you’re a C prospect in the Mets system, you’re pretty likely to get traded away at some point.
I think overall
The Mets system has taken a pretty big leap from bottom system to one that may even be a top 15 system, which by of course I mean 15. It’s tough to gauge because the top prospects are still considered high ceiling players who aren’t very close. Fernando is still more projection than results, Mejia is still mostly projection, though he was successful last year, Wilmer Flores is all projection, and Brad Holt still has a lot to prove. Even Ike Davis, who is coming off a fantastic year, still has to show he can continue to hit the upper level pitching, cut down on the strikeouts, and hit left handers. The only player to really have proven himself in the minor leagues in Jon Niese whose peak is probably that of a number 3 pitcher.
Outside of the previously mentioned prospects, who probably make up the Mets top 6, the Mets have some players who could really have great years next season. Reese Havens was one of the best hitters in the FSL despite a low average, kept down by a low BABIP. Nieuwenhuis probably was the best hitter in the FSL and supposedly plays a solid center field, though, like Davis, he needs to keeps the strikeouts down and learn how to hit lefties. Thole has proven he can hit for average at every stop, and takes more walks than strikeouts, but has little to no power and has defensive questions. One guy who I think has been criminally underrated is Ruben Tejada. At 19 years old, he hit .289/.351/.381/.732 in double A. He didn’t walk that much, but he didn’t strikeout much either, and though he has a lack of power, 5 home runs, .092 ISO, he does have some speed, 19 SB to 3 CS and plays a very good shortstop. It seems like he has nowhere to go but up.
On the pitching side, the only two players of note are Jeurys Familia and Kyle Allen. Both played last season in Low A Savannah at 19 and both have good numbers across the board. Familia I believe throws near the mid 90s and Allen in the low 90s. The didn’t strikeout a ton, both had ~7.00 K/9, but that can still improve next season when they make the jump to FSL.
Once you get past those 12 guys, the system really thins out in my opinion. Zach Lutz had a really good year with the stick in the FSL and was second behind Nieuwenhuis in wOBA. Jefry Marte was a major disappointment batting, and even more so fielding. Lucas Duda can hit and has a good eye, but not nearly enough power for a first baseman. Fransisco Pena has been a bust. They have some athletic, high upside guys like Puello, but he hasn’t really done anything. Their next best pitchers are probably Carson, who keeps the ball on the ground but doesn’t strike anyone out, Matz who hasn’t played yet, Urbina who hasn’t played yet, Rustich who could be a very good reliever, but has injury problems, Niesen, a lefty, who has a lot of movement, but not the best control. Big, tall, Scott Moviel just doesn’t strike that many people out. I’ll stop there.
I think this is a solid system with some pretty high upside players. The top 12 guys I put look really good, but the system quickly thins out.
The Mets lobby Omar for a plan, and his plan, he likes his plan. The problem is that he didn't write his plan down 'cause that makes it paperwork, and that’s false hustle... Know what I’m sayin’?
good analysis
Their top 3 and their top 40 would probably rank low and their top15 or so would probably rank high, if that makes sense. In other words, no future superstars, quite a few solid contributors followed by alot of organizational filler.
by El Duq of Hurl on Jan 5, 2010 11:54 AM EST up reply actions
Their 40 would be low
But I think both Fernando Martinez and Jenrry Mejia have superstar upside. And Ike Davis could be a very good player as well.
The Mets lobby Omar for a plan, and his plan, he likes his plan. The problem is that he didn't write his plan down 'cause that makes it paperwork, and that’s false hustle... Know what I’m sayin’?
nice write-ups
I like Niesen as a sleeper. FIP around 3.60 or so at A and AA. He had control issues at Binghamton, but a better than 2/1 k/bb ratio with a 9+ k/ip. Plus his control improved somehwat as season progressed. His last 74 innings the rate was 9.49/4.14 k/bb, last 42 innings 9.72/3.23. He may have been a little flyball/hr lucky, as he doesn’t have a hgh groundball rate.
He dominated lefties. Downside seems to be loogy. He could surprise. Someone at amazinavenue (could be you Evan?) said Lilly-esque upside, I think.
Their system has gotten somehwat deeper, and unfortunately it was about a year too young to help fill in the blanks when starters went down last year. Tejada and havens, for example, just weren’t ready to sub for Reyes (and havens may be 2b destined, maybe tejada too since he is blocked), so Cora and Wilson Valdez got the time.
This might sound like group think.....
But I pretty much agree with all that. :)
I agree on the top 12, after which I like Urbina, Niesen, Matz, Moviel, Puello, Rustich, Carson, and Dillon Gee. Beyond that 20 though, really Marte and Guzman are the most interesting guys for me as far as upside, at least from the full season leagues. Tobi Stoner is in the top 30 somewhere, as a guy near ready, but likely with a really low ceiling. Sean Ratliff, Francisco Pena, Aderlin Rodiguez, and Robbie Shields are all guys who might be something, but with an awful lot to prove yet. Zach Lutz, Shawn Bowman, and Lucas Duda can all hit some, but I don’t see any of them ever being anything special. Likewise Eddie Kunz, Mike Antonini, and Jim Fuller on the pitching side might be big leaguers of some sort, but nothing too exciting. Beyond that, if you want more upside, you are looking at far off lower level guys like Armando Rodruguez or Alonzo Harris.
Generally agreed
I love Havens, but the more I think about it, the more I wonder if his BABIP wasn’t so much unlucky as held back by his injuries. It was really just held down by one bad month, May, which was right before he hit the DL. That’s not really to say anything negative though, he just needs to stay healthy and I really think he could be a monster, and possibly even the best pick from that draft.
I also think Lutz may be the big sleeper in the system for next year. He’s a pretty decent defender at either corner and his power got way undersold in the first half by a lack of XBH in play, not because his HR rates were low. He hit just three doubles through the end of May and then went crazy with 16 over the next three months. He could stand to find a bit more raw power, but even if he doesn’t, he’s got a good approach, solid walk rate, and some power. His bat would play pretty well at third, below average at first in that case, so he might never make it as a Met, but he’s still a strong prospect.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Jan 5, 2010 2:51 PM EST up reply actions
My keepers
My keepers:
Kyle Allen
Michael Antonini
Eric Beulac
Shawn Bowman
Rob Carson
Darrell Ceciliani
Ike Davis
Zach Dotson
Jeurys Familia
Wilmer Flores
James Fuller
Dillon Gee
Carlos Guzman
Alonzo Harris
Reese Havens
Brad Holt
Eddie Kunz
Richard Lucas
Zach Lutz
Jefry Marte
Fernando Martinez
Stephen Matz
Jenrry Mejia
Scott Moviel
Jon Niese
Eric Niesen
Kirk Nieuwenhuis
Francisco Pena
Cesar Puello
Sean Ratliff
Aderlin Rodriguez
Brant Rustich
Robbie Shields
Tobi Stoner
Ruben Tejada
Josh Thole
Juan Urbina
Toughest cuts:
Ryan Coultas – I’d really like to see him included, as I love the arm and the fact he made good progress this year on the secondary stuff with little previous experience. On the downside, he is 28 years old next year, and on top of that, you now have a labrum injury that ended his season.
Nick Carr – I really liked his potential as a power bullpen arm, but learing recently that he underwent TJ surgery in June lowers his stock for me. Carr really had two endearing traits, a mid 90s FB and a pretty good slider. If his stuff suffers at all due to TJ surgery, there’s not a heck of a lot of pitchability there to make up for it. Worth monitoring in 2010, but not likely to make a splash next year in his first year back.
Lucas Duda – Duda had a solid year in AA, showing outstanding plate discipline, but still has shown little in game HR power. He’s 24 next year, and looks to be not more than a bench bat. Could play some corner OF. But the bat hasn’t really stood out quite enough for 1B/OF.
Armando Rodriguez – the Mets latest hard throwing Latin had a solid year between the APPY league and the SAL at age 21. Could be one to watch for a breakout. He maybe should be on the list, I really don’t know enough to say. should be a candidate though.
Jeff Kaplan – I seem to like him better than others, but I think the sinker and slider combo will play at higher levels. Ultimately though, his ceiling is probably middle relief.
Scott Shaw – I like him less than some others. He has good size, and a full repertoire, but none of it really looks like big league stuff to me. FB was 88-89, breaking stuff just OK, change pretty weak.
Rafael Fernandez – good defense, speed. Question is whether he’ll hit enough to be 5th OF type.
Hector Pellot – really not bad across the board, solid defense at 2B, some hitting ability, some tools, some upside. Still looks like he’ll top as an organization guy though unless the bat breaks through more.
Brandon Moore – solid year in Brooklyn, but limited upside
Stefan Welch – intriguing year for 20 year old in A+ ball, but I’m not convinced the power will be there. On the other hand, he’s the same age as Richard Lucas; I’m not sure the more polished Welch should rank higher.
Nicholas Santomauro – intriguing 2009 10th rounder, not quite top 40 material yet.
Josh Stinson – could be a decent bullpen arm, but not high upside.
Jeffrey Chase Greene – great speed but very raw.
Jordany Valdespin – showing some hitting skills, but same age as Pellot, 2 years older than Harris, and doubts about defense, tools and upside, and makeup keep him off.
Eduardo Aldamo – another good Latin, but less pure stuff. Likely more a back end arm.
And John probably won’t include the DSL guys, but Gilbert Gomez, Alex sanchez, and Marcos Camerena seem to be the most interesting names there.
I'd probably put Duda on over Ratliff
It seems like a relatively similar situation, except Duda is at least somewhat advanced and shown some kind of upper level talent, and also showed some signs of improvement in the second half. I’ve never been impressed with Ratliff.
I’d also consider swapping some or all of Valdespin, Welch, Shaw, and Carr for something like Dotson, Harris, Lucas, and maybe Ceciliani or Fuller.
I still have Shaw somewhere around 20. I agree that his stuff doesn’t really look like big league stuff, but his other pluses carry him at least as far as a lot of the other arms you have on your list. I still like him better than the two lefties from Brooklyn, but they’re closing in.
I also think Valdespin has done too much between 2009 and winter ball to be left off. There’s still some reason for doubt with him, especially considering his age, but he’s not unathletic and makeup seems a bigger question than tools. He didn’t have a position in Savannah because Wilmer was there, not because he wasn’t a better shortstop. My doubts with him are less than a lot of the other 25-40 ranked types here.
I’m pretty torn on Ceciliani. I’m intrigued by his tools and speed-based profile, but if he gets moved off center, he’s got tweener written all over him.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Jan 5, 2010 2:15 PM EST up reply actions
I can see most of that
Well, Valdespin in winter ball has 6 hits in 20 AB for a .750 OPS. Not enough to read much into. He’s also a year older than Lucas, two years older than Harris, and two and a half years older than Ceciliani, with less big league tools than any of them. Harris and Ceciliani both have plus speed. Harris even if moved to the OF would be a potential 4th OF. I just don’t see the upside projection there for Valdespin.
And all he really did in 2009 was have a hot April:
http://minorleaguesplits.com/cgi-bin/pl.cgi
I already mentioned down below that Lucas, Ceciliani, and Fuller were sort of on the bubble for me. I’m already thinking I should have included Welch over one of them, and I could see Carr or Duda easily enough.
On Ratliff, I haven’t seen him yet, or any of these guys who have yet to reach St. Lucie, but going by draft reports he was supposed to have pretty good upside if they can correct his swing. Hasn’t shown much in the numbers yet though, and another 4th rounder like Ceciliani and Lucas, so I guess I’m not expecting too much.
Dotson I think absolutely has to be included, as he’s the best guy the Mets drafted after Matz. His $500k bonus was about $200k higher than Shields. He’s a lefty already sitting 90-92 with excellent late movement. It’s almost another Kyle Allen situation, he was the top pitcher committed to the University of Georgia. As seldom as the Mets go over slot, he’s probably worth it. Arguably not that far behind Matz.
Sold on Dotson, he was one I wasn't entirely sure about
Why did I think Valdespin played more winter ball? Weird, I didn’t check, but I thought I remembered him playing most of the year for some reason. He was handled so strangely this year. Hot start, suspended, bumped around different levels. I’m not entirely sure what to make of him, but he’s interesting at least.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Jan 5, 2010 3:55 PM EST up reply actions
Another guy I might have in that 38-40 range
Is Roy Merritt. Zero upside and already 25 since September, but he’s a sidearmer and has put up pretty strong component numbers against lefties through his career. He didn’t have a very good year, but he still had a 31/9 K/BB vs. LHP this year against 122 batters. I have a feeling his unique delivery and ability to retire lefties will eventually earn him a LOOGY gig.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Jan 5, 2010 2:33 PM EST up reply actions
good list
I only count 37, so is there room for more? If so, I think Duda should be included.
Yes, I think John wants it cut to 38
My last three inclusions were Fuller, Ceciliani, and Lucas. So you can add one without dropping any, and then those are the first three guys I’d consider dropping.
Fuller actually made the NYP league top 20, at 20. But his upside seems limited. He is a three pitch lefty, but only the FB apparently is at least MLB average.
Ceciliani was the Mets 2009 4th rounder, with some nice tools, speed and defense, but only had a .623 OPS in the APPY league as a 19 year old. The Mets apparently believe there is potential in the bat though, and I suspect some will want to see the best of the latest draft picks included (even if it was a weak draft). But, 4th round in itself doesn’t impress me much.
Lucas is another 4th rounder, from 2007, with some pop, and had a good year in the APPY, but there may be flaws that could be exploited at higher levels.
I suspect Armando Rodriguez should be added, as a guy with break out potential. You could consider maybe adding him and Duda and dropping Lucas.
Stefan Welch?
Anyone think 2010 might be a breakout year for him and he starts showing up on prospect lists? He has had pretty solid numbers, obviously hes blocked in the system, but hes still young and has produced.
Yes
You know I can’t seem to ever do one of these lists without second guessing myself before writing it up. I was second guessing while writing up welch whether his upside is really much worse than Lucas, seeing as he’s more accomplished right now. The doubts about Welch I think are whether he’ll have the power to play 1B. But he’s a good athlete and could maybe even handle 3B. And he’s a big enough kid that maybe the power could still come.
He’s sort of an Ike Davis light; good hitting approach, good defense, good athleticism, but less pop. but still young for his level of polish. He won’t surpass Ike, but he may be worth inclusion over Richard Lucas or Lucas Duda.
Reminds me a bit of Murphy
Though he’s a bit more advanced for his age than Murphy was at any level.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Jan 5, 2010 2:20 PM EST up reply actions
Lack of graduations has created some depth
The fact that neither Jon Niese nor Fernando Martinez accumulated enough service time to disqualify them from prospect ranking has, in my opinion, contributed to the best Mets top 10 in a decade (not saying much). And the Mets have talented players even beyond the top 10, seemingly more than they’ve had in recent memory.
Top heavy
The top 12 – 15 players in the Mets system seem about as good as in any system, but there is a huge drop off after that group.
I semi agree
except I wouldn’t say the top 3-5 is as good as any top 3-5 in any system. I think they have a lot of “depth” in their top 12-15 as in not a lot of real stand outs but a lot of solid B-/C+ guys who seem to have high floors, though not necessarily ceilings above possible bench/cheap utility guys/bullpen guys/organizational depth guys, and then after that a lot of question marks, due to general lack of investment in development.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
Agreed, the big strength is going to be guys in the B- through B+ range
You could make a case that the list of guys who get at least B-‘s goes nearly 10-deep, though I suspect it’ll be more like 6-9, and there almost certainly won’t be any A’s or A-‘s. Mejia, Fernando, Davis, Niese, Havens, Flores, Holt, Thole, Tejada, Nieuwenhuis. Except for Flores and Havens, all those guys made it to at least Double-A last year, and Nieuwenhuis is the only one among the rest who didn’t spend substantial time in the upper levels. And the only ones who are really on the bubble for B-/C+ are Thole, Tejada, and Nieuwenhuis, at least to me. Oddly enough, that may be where Flores belongs too, but I doubt John bumps him all the way down from the B+ he got last year. Some might want to make a case that Havens also deserves a C+, but I’d strongly disagree.
I’m also curious as to what kind of grade we’re expecting for Allen and Familia. My gut says C+, good ARL’s, solid performances but not dominant in LowA. Am I underrating their ceilings and weighing their level too heavily?
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Jan 5, 2010 4:46 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah I don't have a full understanding of Sickels system
Which is why I said B-/C+ rather than B-/B+, He seems to give out A’s pretty rarely so I wasn’t sure how highly touted a guy would have to be to get a B+. For me I’d see a C+ as far as a prospect a pretty decent grade. And I may overrated Tejada but I feel like he’s a solid B- guy, just because I feel like he has a pretty high floor being that he seems like he’ll be able to provide above average defense at a pretty difficult/hard to fill position.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
Really now.... How good is SS Ruben Tejada.?...?
could he replace Jose Jose Jose Reyes
sometime in 2011 or early 2012…
Reyes would certainly be nice trade bait for the Mets (pitching, catching help?) – who have another guy Named Wilmer Flores in their future…. down the line.
I'd rather have Nick Punto playing 3B and Felipe Lopez playing 2B
than Punto playing 2B and Kouzy, Crede, DeRosa or Glaus playing 3B.
by SteveHoffmanSlowey on Jan 5, 2010 6:08 PM EST reply actions
The knock on Tejada is he offers very little in terms of projection for such a young player
He’s small and not especially toolsy for a young Latin premium position player. His fundamentals are solid though, especially on defense and considering his age. He certainly won’t be able to replace Reyes one for one, but he could be a solid shortstop. In terms of an offensive comp for his ceiling I once saw someone put Orlando Hudson, which seemed to make sense, which combined with above average SS defense would make a very good player, but not quite Jose Reyes.
Reyes contract also expires after this year, though he does have an $11 mil option, so if he were traded with the idea of sticking Tejada in, it would be a partial season rental of an eight figure contract. More likely, I could see the Mets choosing to focus funds on someone other than Reyes, rather than paying the superstar contract he’ll get on the open market after 2011. I doubt Reyes gets traded though. Tejada might be a better in house replacement for Reyes than anyone would be for Beltran, who is also a free agent after 2011, so it might make more sense to focus the money on CF rather than SS when and if Tejada would be perfectly acceptable. That’s another thing about this system, its realllllllly thin on outfielders. Its basically Fernando Martinez, Kirk Nieuwenhuis, and Carlos Guzman and then a huge dropoff to some short season players. And none of those three project as long term CFs.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Jan 5, 2010 6:22 PM EST up reply actions
Really I don't think there's any way they'd let Reyes walk
It seems like it would be PR suicide to let Reyes or Wright walk in their primes.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
I'm not so sure
There’s a pretty large contingent that could live without Reyes. If moving on from Reyes meant bringing in a different superstar, I don’t think it’d be PR suicide. But it would have to be a CF, and there just aren’t too many great young CFs who are due to reach FA by then. Sizemore and Upton are the closest, but they’re under team control for one more year. One or the other might be available in trade though. Its going to be tough to keep both Reyes and Beltran around, and while it probably makes more sense to let Beltran walk, it might make even more sense to let them both walk, pick up a younger star CF and let Tejada take over SS if he’s ready. What’s a better lineup for 2012 (the other pieces are just hypothetical, I’m sure it won’t shake out exactly this way):
Davis, 1B
Havens, 2B (in this scenario, you have Tejada as a backup here if Havens busts)
Reyes, SS
Wright, 3B
Bay, LF
Nieuwenhuis, CF
Martinez, RF
or
Davis, 1B
Havens, 2B
Tejada, SS
Wright, 3B
Bay, LF
Sizemore, CF
Martinez, RF (in this scenario, you have Nieuwenhuis as a backup here if Fernando busts)
I’m not necessarily saying one way or the other, but its an interesting question. In the latter case, you’d also have to give up some extra talent, but you’d have Sizemore for a year at well below market, so you’d have some short-term payroll flexibility, whereas with Reyes, you’d have to spend more money immediately, but you wouldn’t have to trade away any talent to keep him around.
"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet
What a fool I was to defy him"
-HST
by Mark Himmelstein on Jan 5, 2010 11:02 PM EST up reply actions
PR suicide
PR suicide is something good GMs do fairly often. Trading Nomar in Boston at one time was thought to be PR suicide. If the Mets for some reason were a disappointment in the first half of 2010, it might even be a smart move for them to shop both Beltran and Reyes, assuming they could get back some high ceiling talent.
I agree it's something good gms do
but we’re talking about omar and the wilpons.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
Also unless Reyes becomes incredibly injury prone
or otherwise falls off a cliff production wise I’m not sure how much he could demand for it to be a bad move to resign him with the mets resources, considering he’ll be what 27?, when he hits FA. Plus you don’t usually see teams like Boston shopping incredibly valuable young players, it’s usually overrated old guys, i.e Nomar. Big market teams don’t really need to trade high production players for high ceiling talent, they should be able to pay for it in the draft, which obviously the mets don’t do but lets ignore that, or pay for the few players that hit the open market in their primes.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
Trading Reyes at this point is stupid
You won’t get top value with him coming off injury, and 5 WAR shortstops are almost impossible to come by. Since he’s only 26 going on 27, he could continue that production for 3, 4 or 5 more years. If he keeps that up, you don’t trade him for any group of prospects, and the only real chance you have of getting value in a trade is if he plays a little worse than he from 06-08, and trade him to a team who thinks he’ll return to his former glory.
The Mets lobby Omar for a plan, and his plan, he likes his plan. The problem is that he didn't write his plan down 'cause that makes it paperwork, and that’s false hustle... Know what I’m sayin’?
I was assuming he'd be healthy in 2010
and I would agree it would be far better to sign him for a 3 or 4 year extension.
But I would have no idea how negotiations would go there. If you were to get into one of those situations where an agent is demanding 7 years and crazy dollars, and thinks he’s going to get it because you are afraid of bad PR, it’s not the worst idea to have a plan B there.
And it would be smart to try to get that extension now. If there’s just no way he’s doing an extension without testing free agency, well you can go after him then in free agency whether you’ve traded him or not.
The thing is I don't think a 7 year 100 million+ dollar contract
is unreasonable for a 27/28 year old reyes, and there’s no reason they shouldn’t be able to resign reyes and wright to contracts like that and still put together quality teams, other than incompetence which unfortunately is something omar is awesome at.
"We have a plan, and our plan, I like our plan'
it's Omar's world, we're just livin in it.
thanks for that
yeah there is no way Ruben Tejada is going to be the player Jose Reyes is
but if Reyes eventually leaves FA/Trade or whatever ….I think Tejada would be a viable replacement even if its only for a year or two.
I think Tejada may be more of a future #5 or 6 infielder.
I'd rather have Nick Punto playing 3B and Felipe Lopez playing 2B
than Punto playing 2B and Kouzy, Crede, DeRosa or Glaus playing 3B.
by SteveHoffmanSlowey on Jan 6, 2010 4:33 PM EST up reply actions
Maybe
Flores is absolutely not a SS, he’ll end up at 3B or 1B. But they apparently think the bat will be there even for 1B. I’m skeptical with how high some are ranking him, especially when they put him over Davis who looks like he’s a lot closer to being an MLB 1B, but he supposedly has good hands, little speed/range, and it’s mostly all about the potential in the bat.
Tejada’s ceiling might be something like Asdrubal Cabrerra, but probably a bit less. I was very impressed with his skills last year in St. Lucie, I think it’s a safe bet he can play SS, and he can maybe even be an above average MLB defender there. He also handles the bat well and will have outstanding contact ability, and it looks like he might have an ability to draw walks and get on base. The doubts are how high the ceiling really is. He’s not a real burner, just above average speed, but quick in the field.
But, if he can play defense near as well as Reyes, and get on base about as well as Reyes, yeah you could consider it and maybe make up the power elsewhere. I don’t think it’s likely, it’s more likely they move him to 2B to compete with Havens. But, if negotiations for an extension for Reyes get difficult, yes that’s a pretty good option, as you’d save some coin and maybe get a pretty good return dealing him. Plus, speed peaks at age 24, it might not be the worst idea if you need to do it to avoid locking Reyes up past about 32.
Depending on what you think of Familia and Allen, though, Tejada could really be the 11th best prospect here, and Thole maybe the 12th. Havens and Nieuwenhuis have much more power and higher ceilings.
Negative hype
Ever since the collapse of the totally overhyped “Generation K” trio Wilson – Pulsipher – Isringhausen, the national media has caught on to consistently call any Mets prospect “overhyped”. To a point where one can generally consider this system to be underrated. The Mets have never been able to convince the “consensus” of prospect mavens or national Baseball analysts that they have a good system ever since the mid 90s – whether this was true or not.
The New York media repeatedly quoted “anonymous” scouts last summer that stated that the Mets´ system was totally barren and the “worst in Baseball”. Also, the general feeling is that the Mets have been “perennial losers” for the last few years, dating back to their 2006 NL East title.
While winning 88 games and missing the playoffs by 1 game in both 2007 and 2008 isn´t all too successful, it hardly qualifies as “perennial losing”. Likewise, before the injuries to pretty much the entire middle of the lineup struck from late May on, the Mets were well above .500 in 2009 as well. In the 2nd half, the team totally collapsed, sometimes using lineups that featured Fernando Tatis starting at 2b, Angel Berroa at SS and several other replacement level talents spread all over the field besides David Wright. In the rotation, every pitcher but Mike Pelfrey went down with an injury. Even the two best replacements, LH Jon Niese and RH Fernando Nieve went down with injuries.
As for the system, it wasn´t even considered as one of the top systems in Baseball in 2003 when it featured talents such as Jose Reyes, David Wright and Scott Kazmir, plus future useful complementary pieces like Aaron Heilman, Jason Phillips, Heath Bell, Angel Pagan, Ty Wigginton, Jae Seo or Mike Jacobs. Baseball America rated this as the 13th best system in Baseball back then and I don´t remember anyone else being particulary high on these prospects beyond the top 3 or 4 prospects. In retrospect, this has easily become one of the top 5 most productive systems from that era.
In late 2004 when Minaya took over, the system was indeed depleted thanks to graduations, trades and poor drafts. Milledge – Humber – Petit – Gaby Hernandez – Ambiorix Concepcion was the “cream of the crop” in that group. Brian Bannister and Carlos Gomez were the “diamonds” in the rough in the lower ranks of the system. Baseball America ranked it as the 19th best system. In retrospect probably a tad too generous based on the assumption that Milledge would turn out to be a future star.
Minaya made the right call and eventually traded pretty much everyone in this group.
While it is true that the AAA Buffalo team was almost devoid of talent beyond Fernando Martinez and Jonathon Niese (who both missed time with leg injuries in 2009) and thus weren´t able to help out the major league team when injuries struck in 2009, the overall depth and quality have been built up again over the last few years with several high ceiling prospects signed from the International market and pretty solid success in the draft, especially 2008. While the system lacks a true consensus top 20 overall prospect, it does have at least 4 prospects in F.Martinez, I.Davis, J.Mejia and W.Flores who will be on any serious top 100 overall list. And one can make a good case for several others like J.Niese, B.Holt, J.Famila, K.Nieuwenhuis or R.Tejada to be in a hypothetical top 200 list. And for the first time in quite a while, the Mets top 10 list doesn´t have to be filled out with potential future setup relievers but instead, the – mediocre – Baseball America list didn´t even feature Famila and Nieuwenhuis who were both well regarded by several observers in the FSL or SAL.
Overall, this system is definitely on the upswing and among the top half systems overall – though it´s obviously more in the 11-15 range than anywhere better due to the lack of major league ready high-profile prospects. The Mets will have a very high 1st round pick for the first time since 2005 in 2010, so that should also help.
Unless the “negative hype” bias persists, this is a system that could suddenly jump into the top 5 overall with a couple of breakout seasons, plus the high profile 1st round pick and by avoiding prospects for major leaguer trades.
by Doob on Jan 6, 2010 1:09 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
The negative hype lately has been odd
Very strange lately especially has been the bias from BA.
The most recent was a list of best prospects for the decade for each team. It seemed to be a 20/20 hindsight list, based on how good players became after the fact. But they seemed to have different rules for different teams as for who was included. The Braves list somehow included Jair Jurrjens, who was developed by the Tigers, and debuted with the Tigers, but had his first qualifying rookie season with the Braves. But, if that’s the criteria, then they missed John Maine, Melvin Mora, and Marco Scutaro on the Mets list.
On the other hand, they also included Adam Wainwright as a Brave, when he never played a game for them and instead made his debuted with the Cardinals, though he clearly developed in the Braves system. But if that’s the criteria, then they missed Angel Pagan and Jesus Flores.
And then on top of shortchanging the Mets on both ends there, they also managed to leave out, for no discernable reason at all, both Heath Bell and Ty Wigginton, including instead the inferior Mike Jacobs and Matt Lindstrom.
How hard is it to just pick a criteria for a list like that and apply it?
The Mets talent pipeline was pretty weak under Phillips/Duquette, but it’s still not hard to come up with a list of 10 players produced by the Mets in the last decade without including crap like Mike Jacobs.
Rubin
Keep in mind that NY Daily News beat writer Adam Rubin covers the Mets for Baseball America and at least compiled their top 10 list too. While it gets edited by the BA staff, Rubin still is the main author.
And considering that Rubin led the “Mets farm system is worst in Baseball” campaign last summer – whether he was “lobbying” for a job or not – there certainly has to be some bias. At least somewhat understandable now after the legendary Minaya press conference last summer.
Still, Rubin very much is using the “glass half empty” or more method when he reports about the system.
Not sure about the other BA staffers. I believe Jim Callis generally dislikes a lot of top Mets prospects whereas John Manuel tends to have a more favorable opinion on them, from what they´ve stated in various chats.
ESPN´s Keith Law mentioned in one of his 2nd half chats that at least he believes that the system isn´t all that bad and the reports are totally overblown.
To summarize, this is certainly one of the more difficult systems to evaluate. Not only because some of the prospects have been pushed very aggresively and have thus faced tougher competition than normally expected, but also due to a general mainstream trend to be rather critical of this system regardless of whether this is warranted or not.
Guess that what happens when the major league team has a history of laughable lows.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
