Meet the Mets (For Mets Fans Only!)

NY Post mentioned the following 5: Showalter, Melvin, Bochy, John Farrell, John Gibbons. I would like Melvin from that group. Sandy passed over him to hire Collins. He also chose not to give Bochy a new contract when they were both in San Diego. There has to be somebody else out there over those guys. 

Analytics are going to continue to drive the game.  But the problem isn't the data, it's how it is used or sifted.  Some teams are better than others at actually reading the tea leaves.  The shift, for example, is pretty easy to figure out and it works.  I hate it, but it works.  Guys are always hitting into the shift.  But why?  Because they have been taught that home runs are all that counts and that's where the money is, so when they take their big swings and fail to kill the ball it goes right into the shift.  

Now, what i think they are missing is what the data is showing about how to beat power pitching, and the changes brought about by the new ball.  No middle infielder who hit 25 home runs three years ago is going to do that now.  15 of them will be fly balls short of the warning track.  And pitchers who try to blow everyone away don't go deep into games.  So the smart analyst might suggest bat control again.  Take a walk, or a 10 pitch at bat.  Shorten your swing.  I think that's going to be the new approach some smart team takes.  Those players will be bargains and will win games.

That is why McNeil used to be my favorite player. I enjoy watching guys trying to make contact and hit it into the open field. For the most part all year he tried pulling the ball and would ground out to 2nd. 

I hear they might retain Hafner. 

I was talking to Yankee fans at work this morning and they all want Boone gone. I don't think he's great, but there's not much you can do if your ace can't make it through the 3rd inning.

DanDietrich said:

Analytics are going to continue to drive the game.  But the problem isn't the data, it's how it is used or sifted.  Some teams are better than others at actually reading the tea leaves.  The shift, for example, is pretty easy to figure out and it works.  I hate it, but it works.  Guys are always hitting into the shift.  But why?  Because they have been taught that home runs are all that counts and that's where the money is, so when they take their big swings and fail to kill the ball it goes right into the shift.  

Now, what i think they are missing is what the data is showing about how to beat power pitching, and the changes brought about by the new ball.  No middle infielder who hit 25 home runs three years ago is going to do that now.  15 of them will be fly balls short of the warning track.  And pitchers who try to blow everyone away don't go deep into games.  So the smart analyst might suggest bat control again.  Take a walk, or a 10 pitch at bat.  Shorten your swing.  I think that's going to be the new approach some smart team takes.  Those players will be bargains and will win games.

 This is why I don't have a problem with the shift. Eventually teams and hitters will adapt and develop guys who aren't predictable enough to shift against. 

ml1 said:

DanDietrich said:

Analytics are going to continue to drive the game.  But the problem isn't the data, it's how it is used or sifted.  Some teams are better than others at actually reading the tea leaves.  The shift, for example, is pretty easy to figure out and it works.  I hate it, but it works.  Guys are always hitting into the shift.  But why?  Because they have been taught that home runs are all that counts and that's where the money is, so when they take their big swings and fail to kill the ball it goes right into the shift.  

Now, what i think they are missing is what the data is showing about how to beat power pitching, and the changes brought about by the new ball.  No middle infielder who hit 25 home runs three years ago is going to do that now.  15 of them will be fly balls short of the warning track.  And pitchers who try to blow everyone away don't go deep into games.  So the smart analyst might suggest bat control again.  Take a walk, or a 10 pitch at bat.  Shorten your swing.  I think that's going to be the new approach some smart team takes.  Those players will be bargains and will win games.

 This is why I don't have a problem with the shift. Eventually teams and hitters will adapt and develop guys who aren't predictable enough to shift against. 

 "Hit 'em where they ain't".

ml1 said:

 This is why I don't have a problem with the shift. Eventually teams and hitters will adapt and develop guys who aren't predictable enough to shift against. 

 But to do that they will need to accept the fact that three singles are as valuable as a home run when it's contract time 

DanDietrich said:

ml1 said:

 This is why I don't have a problem with the shift. Eventually teams and hitters will adapt and develop guys who aren't predictable enough to shift against. 

 But to do that they will need to accept the fact that three singles are as valuable as a home run when it's contract time 

guys don't necessarily need to give up extra base hits if they spread the ball around.  and they can still pull the ball.  The goal would be to just hit enough ground balls the other way to keep them from stacking the pull side.

The Arizona Fall League has put in a rule where all infielders have to be on the dirt and two on each side of 2nd base. I would be amazed if that gets approved for next season. That would have a huge impact on the analytics for all teams. 

They also are testing out a pitch timer. 

I'm happy the runner on 2nd in extra innings rule and 7 inning doubleheaders are both gone. 

jfinnegan said:

The Arizona Fall League has put in a rule where all infielders have to be on the dirt and two on each side of 2nd base. I would be amazed if that gets approved for next season. That would have a huge impact on the analytics for all teams. 

They also are testing out a pitch timer. 

I'm happy the runner on 2nd in extra innings rule and 7 inning doubleheaders are both gone. 

 I'm not in favor of a rule outlawing the shift.  If hitters don't like it, put down a bunt once in a while.  Or slap a single the other way.

I think Brandon Belt tried to put down a bunt a couple of weeks ago and broke his hand. Until they pay .300 hitters with 15 HRs the same as .240 hitters with 35 HRs I don't see guys willing to learn how to lay down a bunt or hit it to the opposite field. 

jfinnegan said:

I think Brandon Belt tried to put down a bunt a couple of weeks ago and broke his hand. Until they pay .300 hitters with 15 HRs the same as .240 hitters with 35 HRs I don't see guys willing to learn how to lay down a bunt or hit it to the opposite field.

they will pay guys with good OBP too.  The whole moneyball idea was that outs are precious, and you should stack your team with guys who make outs less frequently.  Back then, the guys who walked a lot were inexpensive.  But in an era where guys struggle to get on base due to the shift and high K rates, the high OBP guys will become valuable.

in the end, it's all about which players combine to make a winning team.  I'm convinced the next wave in MLB player scouting and development is going to be high OBP guys, even if they don't hit a ton of HRs.  I may be wrong, but it does seem like the small market teams that are successful do it by zigging against the rich teams zagging.

I would be happy with 5 guys that have Nimmo's approach and a couple of power hitters. I can't stand the guys that don't bother to adjust their approach even when they have two strikes on them. Especially with how poor some teams play defense is these days if you put it in play you have a pretty good chance at getting on base. 

Kinda weird.  Most of us actually agree about this.

ml1 said:

jfinnegan said:

The Arizona Fall League has put in a rule where all infielders have to be on the dirt and two on each side of 2nd base. I would be amazed if that gets approved for next season. That would have a huge impact on the analytics for all teams. 

They also are testing out a pitch timer. 

I'm happy the runner on 2nd in extra innings rule and 7 inning doubleheaders are both gone. 

 I'm not in favor of a rule outlawing the shift.  If hitters don't like it, put down a bunt once in a while.  Or slap a single the other way.

 Did anyone chart they showed on last night's NL Wild Card game showing where Trey Turner's hit went during his 19 game hitting streak? He hit the ball EVERYWHERE!

I don't know how the Nats could give him up. A top 5 player in the game. They got a couple of good prospects, but he and Soto are guys you build teams around. 

Such a pleasure to watch the Astros’ offense.

Theo Epstein had zero interest in the gig. 

The job will be challenging.  Even on these boards, we forget that Cohen last year said that he was hoping for a championship within 5 years. We know the Wilpons left the minor leagues almost empty and the staff a mess.  The entire organization needs to be rebuilt, while trying to win at the major league level.  That's not going to be easy.  The fans here won't tolerate a rebuild.  If you could trade DeGrom tomorrow for four top 50 minor leaguers would you?  Would you be willing to take that heat?

DanDietrich said:

The job will be challenging.  Even on these boards, we forget that Cohen last year said that he was hoping for a championship within 5 years. We know the Wilpons left the minor leagues almost empty and the staff a mess.  The entire organization needs to be rebuilt, while trying to win at the major league level.  That's not going to be easy.  The fans here won't tolerate a rebuild.  If you could trade DeGrom tomorrow for four top 50 minor leaguers would you?  Would you be willing to take that heat?

 no. 

I would not give up a generational talent for any number of maybes. We saw this in 1977. It was a disaster. 

ml1 said:

 no. 

I would not give up a generational talent for any number of maybes. We saw this in 1977. It was a disaster. 

 I'm not sure I would, either.  I'm in favor of signing every pitcher in sight, since the average team needs 9 starters or more to make it through a season, but the flip side is the guy missed half a season for an unknown and possibly unresolved injury, and the Mets with him will probably not win next year anyway.  From an organizational viewpoint it is worth considering.  

15 years today. Gary freaking Cohen.

https://twitter.com/SNYtv/status/1450439085655347206?t=wT1nK4zVvG9YyQffLdR4DQ&s=19

Train_of_Thought said:

15 years today. Gary freaking Cohen.

https://twitter.com/SNYtv/status/1450439085655347206?t=wT1nK4zVvG9YyQffLdR4DQ&s=19

 Not certain but the Mets went on to beat the Cards, right?  Oh, right. Soul, I will accept a ban. 

“He went to the apex of his leap.” Vividly and articulately put.

Train_of_Thought said:

15 years today. Gary freaking Cohen.

https://twitter.com/SNYtv/status/1450439085655347206?t=wT1nK4zVvG9YyQffLdR4DQ&s=19

our family was seated in the upper deck behind the RF foul pole. It was the perfect vantage point to see just how far Chavez reached over the wall to make that catch.  It's the loudest and longest ovation I've ever been present for.  It lasted all the way through the break between innings.

DaveSchmidt said:

“He went to the apex of his leap.” Vividly and articulately put.

 Doesn’t one always have to go to the apex of their leap?

jeffl said:

DaveSchmidt said:

“He went to the apex of his leap.” Vividly and articulately put.

Doesn’t one always have to go to the apex of their leap?

I’d reply with an answer, but the contrast between the dispositions of rival fan bases has already been drawn sharply enough.

Also, I don’t consort with banees, even pending ones (unless it’s Train of Thought).

DaveSchmidt said:

jeffl said:

DaveSchmidt said:

“He went to the apex of his leap.” Vividly and articulately put.

Doesn’t one always have to go to the apex of their leap?

I’d reply with an answer, but the contrast between the dispositions of rival fan bases has already been drawn sharply enough.

Also, I don’t consort with banees, even pending ones (unless it’s Train of Thought).

 Fair enough!

I have a question about Conforto.  I wonder what kind of deal he can get, from whatever team.  There aren't a lot of good corner outfielders available, but is the demand there?  If he were in the range of 3 years at $20 mil per year is that high or low?  Do you think the Mets would want him back at that price?  I still don't see who the replacement is, and I'm not a big fan of just pushing guys out of their old positions.  He's not the superstar he was hoped to be, but that may not be relevant.

They need a GM first. I haven't heard any new names recently. I would prefer they go for Starling Marte. Or trade for an outfielder, not that most of their guys have any value.

DanDietrich said:

I have a question about Conforto.  I wonder what kind of deal he can get, from whatever team.  There aren't a lot of good corner outfielders available, but is the demand there?  If he were in the range of 3 years at $20 mil per year is that high or low?  Do you think the Mets would want him back at that price?  I still don't see who the replacement is, and I'm not a big fan of just pushing guys out of their old positions.  He's not the superstar he was hoped to be, but that may not be relevant.

 I think they'd take him back at that price.  It's hard know what the market for him would be.  His injury history is not great the past few years, but that may not deter other teams.  I'm shaking my head every time I see a Mets fan getting excited about Nick Castellanos.  But if I throw these numbers out, can any of us tell which belong to Castellanos and which are Conforto without looking it up?

Lifetime Player 1:  .278/.329/.814   WAR: 12.3

Lifetime Player 2: .255/.356/.824    WAR: 15.7

(from Baseball Reference)

Is there any guarantee if the Mets let Conforto walk, and signed Castellanos that it would be the right decision?  So I'm with you on not letting guys get away unless the replacement is a clear and obvious upgrade.