April 8th - Mets 4 Braves 0 - The Good, The Bad & The Ugly

After taking two out of three from The Reds, the Mets traveled to the den of horror that is Turner Field, a place the Mets usually do not fare well in. The Braves have gotten off to a good start, despite some serious blows to their starting rotation in spiring training. The Mets sent Bartolo Colon up against Arron Harang.

THE GOOD
BARTOLO COLON: An excellent start where he was borderline dominating, Colon kept the Mets' streak of quality starting pitching going. He threw 7 innings of shutout, no walk/5 strikeout ball and looked good doing it, keeping the Braves lineup off balance the whole night.

TRAVIS D'ARNAUD: FINALLY. d'Arnaud broke his hitless streak to start the season with TWO hits (including a double). He did look better overall at the plate, but I wouldn't say he's turned the corner just yet.

THE BULLPEN: Farnsworth to Valverde. Two innings, no runs. Valverde made it a little too interesting in the end by throwing a potential game ending double play ball into centerfield, but with the basesloaded and only one out, he got the job done and preserved the shutout.

RUBIN TEJADA: Two hits, two runs, two RBI (and even a walk). He played a part in all four runs tonight and looked very good at the plate. I have no real faith this is a trend that will continue though. I still want Stephen Drew. ah well.

THE BAD
THE BATS: Looking at the batting average of some of the regulars (Young Jr: .174, Murphy: .250, Wright: .192, Granderson: .154, Duda: .167, d'Arnaud: .105) it's very evident the Mets are not hitting well. Wright and Murphy will both come around, but some of the other need to step things up.

THE UGLY
Since I already put the Bats in the "Bad" column, I think for one night, there's really no true "ugly". Hey, a shutout win of the Braves IN Turner Field? Hard to find something ugly with that.

GAME FIVE: Mets 6 - Reds 3 - The Good, The Bad and The Ugly

Looking to see if they could string together two wins in a row, The Mets sent Dillion Gee up against The Reds in the second game of this weekend series.

THE GOOD
DILLON GEE: Except for one (admittedly big) mistake on Opening Day, Gee pitched quite well. Today he had a similar outing with pretty much the same type of mistake, but overall it was a good job, keeping the Mets one bright spot in 2014 so far to be it's starting pitching. He's not Harvey, and in the long run I think Wheeler and Syndergaard will both be better, but Gee is a very bright spot for what should prove to be a very strong rotation.

CURTIS GRANDERSON: Despite the rough first couple of games at the plate, I haven't wavered in my thought that I'm quite glad Granderson is here. I don't expect 40+ home runs (heck, I don't expect much more than 28-30 overall), but he will provide protection in the lineup for Wright and will be a presence in the lineup that opposing pitchers will respect. His two-run shot in the 6th was a nice start.

THE BULLPEN: Two pitchers, (Rice and Torres), 1.2 innings, 3 Ks and NO RUNS. It's a Christmas Miracle.

IKE DAVIS: Two days after he lost the first base job to Lucas Duda, Davis makes himself relevant again with his ninth-inning walkoff grand slam. I'm a Davis supporter, so I hope he can fight his way back into everyday play. We shall see.

THE BAD
THE BATS: The final score is a little misleading because six runs makes it look like a healthy offensive day, but the first half of the game the Mets bats were as anemic as a Karen Carpenter luncheon. For the second day in a row, all scoring came via the long ball. The Mets are going to have to improve their situational hitting.

LUCAS DUDA: One day after his two-homer/four RBI day, Duda went 0-4 with three strike-outs. I told you yesterday that you shouldn't count on many days like Friday night for him.

THE CATCHING POSITION: Anthony Recker didn't hit any better than d'Arnaud has, and The Mets' catchers haven't had a hit all season.

THE UGLY
ERIC YOUNG JR.: Finally got a hit, but the Mets leadoff man is hitting a disturbing .063 for the season. That's not setting the table... that's not even in the kitchen

Daniel Murphy and the Paternity Problem

There's been a decent amount of talk on the whole Daniel Murphy paternity leave situation where he missed the first two games of the season due to the birth of his first son, who was born to a c-section. WFAN's Mike Francesa and Boomer Esiason both had rather hard feelings on the matter. Francesa remarked "You’re a Major League Baseball player, you can hire a nurse to take care of the baby if your wife needs help." Esiason was a little less pointed but still said "Quite frankly, I would have said C-section before the season starts. I need to be at opening day, I’m sorry."

Listen, both talk show hosts have a right to their opinion, but in the end, it really seems like they are chastising Murphy for not making The Mets and the first two games of the season a priority... which, frankly, is quite twisted.
Murphy is an important part of this team, and without his bat there is no doubt the lineup suffers. However, I find it hard to accept that grown men, both whom which have children, could really feel a baseball game, even a professional one, is more important than family. I highly doubt that either would have a problem with a garbage man, a cook, an auto mechanic or a business executive missing three days of work for the birth or their first born. Because Murphy's job is on a national stage he's expect to not want to be there for his family? C'mon. I'm curious to know if Francesa missed work when his kids were born.

The Mets need all the help they can get, and there is defintely a chance that Murphy's bat could have helped the Mets squeak out a win in one of those two losses to start the season, but I'm in support of his decision to be at home with his family for the days his union collectively barganed for. In a world where I constantly question people's priorities, I can honestly say Daniel Murphy's seem firmly in the right place.

GAME FOUR - Mets 4 Reds 3 - The Good, The Bad and The Ugly

Well, they finally won one. After a opening series sweep by the likely NL East Champs, The Washington Nationals, the Mets managed to win the first of a three game series with the Cincinnati Reds. Let's take a quick look at the good, the bad and the ugly from the Mets first win of 2014.

THE GOOD
Jenrry Mejia: Six fairly solid innings of 4 hit, 1 run, 8 Strikeout ball. The five walks are a bit of a blemish, as like Zach Wheeler is prone to do, Mejia put himself in some trouble, but overall he seemed in command of the Reds' lineup.

Lucas Duda: One day after being handed the first base job (a move I think is a mistake), Duda launches two homeruns and drives in all four runs. We'll see how well his accention to everyday player goes, but I fear we won't be seeing a hell of a lot of days like this.

Kyle Farnsworth: After three games of terrible bullpen, (four if you count John Lannan's poor outing tonight) it was nice to see a solid effort from someone... which leads to...

Jose Valverde: He had to walk someone, because it's written in the contract of every Mets closer that saves must come with some agita, but Valverde closed out the win and is 1 for 1 in save situations and I think is the only member of the bullpen to not give up a run yet this season.

THE BAD
Daniel Murphy's Defense: I love Murph, and I think his bat and grit are intricate to this team, but he's looked bad in the field in the two games he's played. If this team continues to fail to make double-plays, there are going to be a lot of hard luck losses in the future.

Rubin Tejada: Not really hitting and defense not looking that good either. Making no real contributions to this team. I just cannot see him lasting much longer.

John Lannan: Has pitched twice, hasn't gotten through a whole inning either time, and has given up 2 runs in each appearance. He has an ERA of 36.00. Nuff said.

THE UGLY
Travis d'Arnaud's bat: I hate to say it, and I'm not giving up on the kid, but at some point he needs to use his bat for something other than to lean on.

Saying Goodbye to The Kid

It's been almost 24 hours since I found out Gary Carter passed away from complications from Brain Cancer. I found out while driving home from work at about 6 PM. I was shocked... not so much because I didn't know he was sick (I had been half expecting it since it was revealed he had brain cancer last year)... but more so because it hit home in a way that very few celeberties deaths have ever hit me.

Gary wasn't my favorite baseball player... hell he wasn't even my favorite Mets' catcher (Hi Mike Piazza) ... but Gary held a special place in my heart due to the fact he was the first real SUPERSTAR to go to the Mets in their rise from basement dwellers of the late 70s and early 80s. I know that is strange to hear from me, since my favorite baseball player of all time is Keith Hernandez who was traded from the Cardinals to the Mets in 1983, but Keith's star was a little dimmed at the time and he didn't have the "SUPERSTAR!!!!" tag on him like Gary did in 1984.

I still remember getting the paper the day after the trade. I was fourteen years old and was a rabid Mets fan. Back in '84 there was no 24 HR sports radio or internet and I was not the type to watch the news at night, so I didn't even know about the trade until Newsday came the next day. I was totally taken aback. I had watched Carter win the 1984 All-Star Game MVP award with his home run and it never occured to me he could be a Met. I liked Hubie Brooks (who went to the Expos along with Mike Fitzgerald, Herm Winning ham and Floyd Youmans) a lot and thought he was going to be a great player, but to get Carter... wow.

I remember certain moments from Carter's career like they were yesterday. Of course two of the largest were his first game as a Met (the 19th inning homerun off of Cardinals closer Neil Allen) and his rally-starting at-bat with two outs in the 10th inning of Game Six of the '86 World Series (which overshadowed the almost equally as important Game Four Carter performace when he hit 2 home runs over the Green Monster).

There isn't much more I can say about Gary Carter than what has been said in the last 24 hours. He was a great baseball player, as well as a great role model. He was a great big boyscout on a team that partied hard in the '86 Mets. He was a family man who played the game right and led life right. I remember hearing how Carter was a guy the other teams hated, but once he was on YOUR team, everyone though he was great.

As a Mets fan, I obviously don't have a lot of great winning memories to pull out of the hat... so of course 1986 is highest on the charts. Carter was a huge... HUGE part of that. I remember sitting on the edge of my couch, watching the 10th inning of Game Six an dafter Hernandez made out, I was totally deflated. I kicked the tv off and stormed out of the room. But only seconds later I stormed back in and turned the TV back on. I didn't want to see them lose, but I couldn't stay away. I paced back and forth, in an aggressive stride as Carter battled and get on base with a solid hit. I paced back and forth for the rest of the inning and when it was over I exploded in a way I have rarely been able to explode. The joy I felt was incredible... and it wouldn't have been there is not for Gary's great at-bat and hit to start it all.

Gary's passing is something else to me. It's the death of a small part of my childhood. That sounds dramatic... maybe in an Emo way... but Gary, along with Mex, Doc, Straw, Nails, Mookie, El Sid, Darling and the rest was a huge part of my childhood. Especially in 1985 and 1986. I averaged watching about 145 games a year. Missed very few. Went to a few games a year but mostly watched on Sportschannel (HBO) and on Channel Nine. It was a great part of it... watching those games and learning so much about baseball... about life. The ups and downs of the game are like the ups and downs of real life... in were you have to learn to handle them both correctly and get balance between the two. Never be too up... never get too down.

Gary was a huge part of that. I'm miss him for a lot of reasons.

Rest in Peace Kid.

Why are the Marlins better?

You know what I get a kick out of? I get a kick out of the notion that every time I hear about how terrible the Mets are, they point to the last two seasons performance and say how the team isn't any better, so it cannot perform better. Then I hear about how other teams who had problems they year before or so will be able to rise above those issues.

I'll be more specific for one in particular. Mainly... why are the Marlins considered a team that can contend in 2012?

I mean, I know why people will say. But I don't understand WHY.

Last year the Marlins finished behind the Mets. The last two years the Mets were not able to contend in the second half of the season. The last two years the Mets HAD Jose Reyes.

So, why are the Marlins suddenly a possible powerhouse because they added Jose Reyes?

Yeah, I know they added Heath Bell and Mark Buehrle... But while those are good players, how much better do they really make the Marlins?

2011 Closer Leo Nunez had 33 saves this past season (and 89 total since 2009). He wasn't flashy and he wasn't great, but he wasn't bad either. There has been rumblings about Bell not fairing as well pitching outside of San Diego. Bell experienced a drop in performance in 2011, and that drop, while certainly not encouraging, may not be a real cause for concern going forward for the Marlins... but even if he takes only a slight step downwards, he's still not a ton better. He's likely more consistant and dependable, but it's not like they had garbage there before. The upswing isn't dramatic.

Buehrle is basically going to replace Javy Vazquez, who may have been terrible in his first seven to eight starts of the season, but was fairly lights out the rest of the way with a 2.70 ERA in 153.1 innings. Is Buehrle really going to be much better than that? As with Bell, he's a very good player but he's not a big improvement over what they had before. He's averaged about 13 wins and an ERA about 4.05 the last few years. Yes, he should fare better in the NL than he did in the AL... but again... by much much better is he going to be than what they had in Vazquez for most of 2011?

The big thing with The Marlins is going to be the return of Josh Johnson, and the expectation (which is a fair expectation to have) that Hanley Rameriez will return to his normal self after a disasterous 2011 Season.

To me, the Marlins 2012 success relies heavily upon Johnson. If he comes back and is the same, the Marlins have an arm that can match up with the best in the MLB. Johnson is lights out and is on par with names like Halliday, Lee, Lincecum, Sabathia and Lester. If he's not the samee... say he's at like 75% of what he was, he'll still likely be better than a large chunk of other pitchers, which would still improve the Marlins from 2011. If he cannot pitch to anything close to his regular form or if he's unable to return at all or only makes like 10-12 starts for the season, it's going to hurt them. A lot.

Which brings us back to Reyes.

In 2010 the Marlins finished 80-82. At the time they had a great season from John Johnson and Hanley Rameriz and still had all-star second baseman Dan Uggla who hit .287 with 33 HRs and 105 RBI.

I know Reyes is a different player than Uggla... but the Marlins couldn't even finish at .500 that year.

In both 2010 AND 2011, the Mets were picked as a team who would not really be in contention. Yet, both years they had Reyes... and David Wright... and Jason Bay... and Johan Santana... and Carlos Beltran... and K-Rod...

See where I'm going here?

So.. I put the question again... why just by adding the three players they did, suddenly make a team that has finished below .500 the last two years suddenly a team that is expected to contend?

Cause I don't see it. In fact, I'll go one further...

The Marlins... with their question marks... and the brittle Reyes as their centerpiece (fair is fair... I had to listen ever year how the Mets couldn't fully expect Reyes to go the whole season without a DL trip or two) are NOT a team you can say is fully better than the Mets.

(And no, I have NOT forgotten about Carlos Zambrano. I don't think that was a good move for them and do not expect a lot from him.)

Mets rotation might be a little better than people think

Looking at the (expected) starting rotation for the Mets might bring a wince or sad head-shake. The concensis is that the Mets have the worst rotation in the NL East. I'm not here to try and convince you otherwise. However I do want to try and show how the rotation isn't exactly a disaster, like I'm constantly reading this offseason, either.

At first glance, here is your likely starting five:
1. Johan Santana
2. R. A. Dickey
3. Jon Niese
4. Mike Pelfry
5. Dillon Gee

Considering Santana missed the entire 2011 Season and is not expected to be the pitcher he was before his shoulder surgery then this rotation won't make anyone sweat too much. You have no-one that would be considered a "stopper", but the idea that the Mets rotation is BAD is incorrect.

You don't know what you will get from Santana, but you might be looking at the type of pitcher David Cone became after he was unable to blow fastballs past hitters in the latter part of his career. Many have said that 70% of Johan Santana is still going to be be better than a large chunk of other pitchers.

R. A. Dickey has had two straight solid seasons. His breakout 2010 was followed up with a nice 2011 where he had career bests in starts, ininngs and strike outs. His 3.28 ERA was 12th best in the NL. He keeps the Mets in games he pitches and his ERA over the last two seasons is 3.08.

Jonathan Niese has been solid the last two years when healthy and has a lot of upside that could see him in this rotation for a long time, even when the young promising arms of Harvey and Wheeler get to town. He's a craft lefty who throws in the 90s, strikes out hitters and doesn't walk many, while getting a nice amount of groundballs. With a good defense behind him it's not out of the question for Niese to have a breakout 2012.

Mike Pelfry is an enigma. His last four seasons he has teetered back and forth between strong and infurating. In 2008 he went 13-11 with a 3.72 ERA. He had a great second half that year and 2009 looked promising, however he stumbled with a 10-12 record and a rough 5.03 ERA. Then in 2010 he bounced right back and had a great season in which he went 15-9 with a 3.66 ERA and at one point in June and July was without doubt the Mets best pitcher. Then in 2011 he dropped back again going 7-13 with a 4.74 ERA. At times he's dominating and other times he's maddening. This really is the "now or never" year for him I think. Which Pelfrey will the Mets get? If it's the 2008 or 2010 model He's a potenial #2. If it's the 2009 or 2011 model he's at best a #4 and likely more a #5.

Dillon Gee had a solid start to his rookie season, but faded in the last third of the season. He went 13-6 with a 4.43 ERA but at the end of June was 8-1 with a 3.32 ERA and at the end of July was 10-3 with a 3.69 ERA. He had a rough Sept but showed a lot of promise and poise. He had 114 strike-outs in 160.2 innings but did walk 71. If he can cut those walks down his upside can be high.

The entire NL East has a lot of quality pitching in it. The Mets may not be at the top, but this notion their rotation is terrible makes no sense.

Summing up the last three days

So each time I thought i knew what I was going to write about here, something else popped up. It's been quite a whirlwind last few days and instead of trying to overload about one particular thing or the other, let's just tackle it all head on... shall we?

ON THE REYES DEAL: Ok, plain and simple? This is a rough blow to the Mets and their fans. Looking at what the Marlins got him for (6 years, $106 million with a 7th option year that would be worth $22 million riding with a $5 million buyout which makes it a guarentee of $111 million) it's kind of hard to imagine the Mets allowed him to go when they were fairly close in a five year $85 million range. Frankly, the fact the Mets were unable (not unwilling, which they will say they were also) to match that offer or come fairly close enough to matter to Reyes is frightening. They are a New York team with a huge fanbase in a still mostly new stadium in a tremendous market. The fact this franchise is unable to give an extra year and $20 million to their BEST player to keep him is unacceptable. Yes, I agree he is a health risk, but the fact is this: over his career, when Reyes has been healthy and scored runs, the Mets winning percentage was HIGH. And to allow him to go to a HATED division rival? Unreal. Reyes saying the Mets never made an offer is kind of untrue, since his agents knew exactly what the Mets parameters were, but yeah, they could have showed him a little love and at least tried to dine him a little to let him know how important he was to the franchise. The freakin Marlins called Reyes EVERYDAY. The Mets had little contact. You have to know your own players and anyone who didn;t realize this would be a factor to Reyes dropped the ball. From what Sandy Aldersen has sadi, the mets and Reyes' sgents actually had a good conversation ojn Friday night and was positive enough to spur the Marlins to add a year and another $22 million to their offerand after that the Mets didn't even get the chance to counter since the Marlin's gave a take-it-or-leave-it to the Reyes camp. Well, they took it. Nice job there Sandy.

ON THE RAUCH SIGNING: It's not terrible, but it's not great either. Yes Jon Rauch is a very servicible arm and maybe last year was more of a blip than the way he's heading, but he has an ERA of over 5.00 last year. It's a one year deal for $3.5 million so it's not bad, and odds are he's better than most of what they already had, but this is more of an "OK, let's wait and see" deal then a "WOW!" deal.

ON THE FRANCISCO SIGNING: I can honestly say that the only closer i wanted to see LESS than this was Cordero. Listen, I know this guy has a great arm and packs serious heat. But he lost his closers job TWICE in the last two seasons. The Blue Jays has 25 blown saves last year (which is where Francisco and Rauch both are coming from) and as good of an arm as he has, Francisco is also prone to erratic periods. If this was a one year, $4 or $5 million deal I would be more impressed and happy. It being a 2-yr, $12 million deal? Too much, in my opinion. As with Rauch, yes he improves the bullpen, but I'm going to have to wait and see how this turns out. My prediction? He starts the year as the closer and is NOT the closer when the season ends.

ON THE PAGAN FOR TORRES/RAMIREZ TRADE: I'm torn on this one. I was a big Angel Pagan fan. I know he had a rough 2011 and that there was a ton of reports his work ethic and baseball IQ was nil. I know there was a lot of unhappiness about the "dehydration" issues that took him out of a lot of games. I still liked him and thought he was a solid player. Torres and Pagan are very simular type of players. I know Torres has a much better rep as a hard worker and excellent clubhouse presence and he has much more pop. I also know Pagan is a few years younger and a much better overall hitter. Both have about 20 SB a year speed. The big cog here was getting Ramon Ramirez. Now HE is who I'm impressed with getting. In my opinion, he will be the Mets closer by mid-season and will be very solid in that role. He improves the bullpen a lot on his own, and with Rauch and francisco, yeah... the bullpen in twice as good, if not more, than last year, where the mets were pretty terrible for the most part.

ON THE POSSIBILITY OF TRADING WRIGHT: Listen, right now, the Mets have VERY little star power. They have Wright. They have Johan Santana. The have a budding possible star in Ike Davis. Aaaaaaaaaaand that's really it. The loss of Reyes changes things dramatically in people's eyes. I mean, Bay's star is so fallen I cannot see it ever rising even close to where it was five years ago. Daniel Murphy is a solid bat with a suspect glove that will be beloved by smart Mets' fans and mostly dismissed by anyone else. Lucas Duda is still no one and Dillion Gee and Jon Niese have a far way to go. So take Wright from this team, and exactly why are people going to come watch them? The attendance is bad. VERY bad. It will not get better if Wright goes. IT WILL GET WORSE.

ON REBUILDING: Yeah, at this point you have to say that is what the Mets are pretty much doing. Listen, unless they shock everyone and dive head first into the free agent market next year, the mets are likely to have a young team looking to be in contention around 2014. They have some serious arms in the minors that are likely at least a year and a half to two years away. They have some other very soild position players who could be ready in that time period as well. The problem is, the Mets have NOT said to their fanbase "We are in rebuilding mode" and without a real "direction" the fans have no idea what is going on. If the mets had kept Reyes, I do not think a rebuild tag would be placed on the team, but without him, you have to consider that the fact.

ON THE RUMORS THAT NIESE AND DAVIS ARE TRADE BAIT: I'm sure the Mets are doing due dilligance, and talking about everyone and everyone just to gauge the market and if someone offered something insane like a top five pitching prospect (a la them getting Zach Wheeler for Beltran this past summer) and a high position prospect for one of them I guess they would have to seriously make the move, but I cannot, just flat out cannot see them doing something like this. It makes no sense. Neither player makes any real money and both have shown some serious talent so far. Many people (myself included) feel Davis is a serious .290, 30/35, 105 RBI guy with a great glove. Many people (myself included) see Niese as a VERY solid, higher end #3 starter... maybe even a lower end #2 down the line. Both have showne they can handle New York. Trading either would only make the fans think the team has flat out lost it. Gain, if they get bowled over, I can justify it. Otherwise, it makes little to no sense.

It's hard to be a Mets fan right now. The immediate future is not very bright and 2014 seems far away. I DO like the Mets brain trust of Alderson and crew and i do thik it's smart to build up the minors to the point you are more like the Rays than the Mets of 2009. But I have a fear that as long as the Wilpons own this team that there are some serious dark days ahead.

The perfect time for Piazza

You know, there is a lot of things I don't get about the ownership of the New York Mets. I don't get why it took them so long to solve the Tony Bernazard issue. I don't get why they seemed to bungle so many public relation situations like the dismissial of Willie Randolph.

But first and foremost, I don't get why Mike Piazza's number has not been retired.

The Mets have very little history to be proud of. There's Tom Terrific and the Mets of '69. There's the juggernaught of 1986. There's the nice (but incomplete) Subway Series season of 2000.

Even when the Mets have what seem will be timeless icons in the making, it manages to go wrong (I'm looking at you Darryl Strawberry and Dwight Gooden!)

So when you have an honest-to-goodness, sure fire, first ballot Hall of Famer with a strong tie to your organization you had damn well better make sure he's so entrenched to your team that no one doubts it.

The Mets HAVE made some nice moves when it's come to Piazza. He got a great celebration when he broke the all-time record for homeruns by a catcher. He got a very nice send off when he left the team and got a nice mini celebration when he returned as a Padre the following season. He was part of the last pitch at Shea (with Tom Seaver) as well as part of the first pitch at Citifield (also with Seaver).

This is all nice. It's not enough.

Let me tell you a story about my friend Tom.

Tom is a big baseball fan (he's a Yankee fan, but let's not hold that against him). He's big into the history of the game and he and I have had endless debates about the Hall of Fame. Tom covers the Yankees (and Mets) for Newsday (first as a photographer and lately as a Videographer for the website) so he's been around both organizations quite a lot.

So for years, he's been trying to get my (and my kids, including his Godson Alex) to make a trip up to Cooperstown.

However I refuse to go. Yet.

We started having the talk about going as long as 13 years ago. I was holding out.

"I'll go," I told him, "the next time a player goes in as a Met."

"So we're never going?" he replied.

The jerk.

My thought was this: Gary Carter was going on the ballot for the Hall of Fame that year (this was 1998). Carter had made it no secret that he wanted to go into the Hall as a Met. At the time, the Hall didn't decide what team's cap the players wore when they went in and generally allowed the players to choose if they had a preference and it wasn't a ridiculous one (like Wade Boggs going in as a Tampa Bay Devil Ray for example). I figured Carter would get in in his first or second year... go in as a Met and we'd make the trip to celebrate.

Ah, the best laid plans...

So first off it takes the voters six years to elect Carter in (which was ridiculous in itself. A year wait yes... two I could see... MAYBE three... but the fact he had to wait six was unreal) so he doesn't go in until 2003.

And second, Dave Winfield and George Stienbrenner changed the whole way the Hall of Fame worked.

2001 saw Dave Winfield go into the Hall of Fame (something he very much deserved). However, he chose to go in as a Padre instead of a Yankee. This, after the Yankees were to give him a 'Dave Winfield Day'. This irked George Stienbrenner to no end and rumors that the Padres paid Winfield a million dollars to choose a Padre cap circulated. Winfield actually had spent more time as a Yankee, it was argued, so why would he choose the Padres? Steinbrenner raised a huge stink about it and the Hall of Fame committe responded by taking the choice away from the players. 2001 would be the last time a plaer could choose the cap that would be on his plaque.

Why is this relevant? Because the Hall of Fame ignored Carter's request to go into the Hall as a Met and placed him in as a Montreal Expo instead.

So of course the trip never happened. Tom brings it up every year.

Back to Mike Piazza.

In 2013 Piazza will be on the ballot for the Hall of Fame. As the greatest hitting catcher of all time (with apologies to Johnny Bench, Yogi Berra and Carlton Fisk), I cannot imagine he will not go into the Hall in his first year of eligbility. Even if he doesn't by some bizarre reason, he'll make it in 2014.

And when the time comes, Piazza woud like to go in as a New York Met. He has been quoted (more than once) as such.

Unlike Carter in his Expo/Met split, Piazza actually played for the Mets longer than he did for the Los Angeles Dodgers.

He played six and a quarter seasons for the Dodgers (of course he only had 69 at bats in 1992 so he was only a Dodger for Five full seasons and a half really).

He played seven and a half seasons for the Mets.

He never won a playoff game as a Dodger, making the postseason only once.

He won a number of postseason series with the Mets, including going to the World Series in 2000.

If you look at his overall best seasons they were 1995-97 with the Dodgers and 1999-2001 with the Mets.

He hit 169 HRs with 563 RBIs for the Dodgers.
He hit 220 HRs with 655 RBIs for the Mets. (and that was with missing half a season in 2003 to injury).

(Yeah. I'm trying reassure myself. Shaddap.)

In any case, there should be no reason Piazza will go into the Hall as a Met... but stranger things have happened. So why take chances?

The Mets need to take total possession of the image of Piazza. Right now, when you look at Tom Seaver, you think "Mets". You don't think "Reds". The same has to be with Piazza. Have a Mike Piazza Day. Retire his number. Offer him a position in the front office or the Broadcast booth (he's actually pretty good) or as a scout or a coach or something. ANYthing.

Make sure that when the HOF committe has to choose that cap, they think "Piazza? Met. All the way."

With all of the issues the owners have... with the doubts about the on-field team most people seem to have... isn't this the perfect time to start garnering some good vibes? Wash away the crap for a while and do something the entire fan base will not only get behind, but will love.

My God. What are you waiting for? Do it already.

Counting on Murphy

With the Mets second base position a wide open competition, so far it doesn't look too much like any one person has a solid leg up. Manager Terry Collins feels that second base is an "offensive position" which would bode well for Daniel Murphy.

I'm a fan of Murphy. I liked him as a rookie in 2009 and was sorry to see him get hurt and miss the 2010 season (although in the end it was the first of s string of things to happen that resulted in Ike Davis' call up in early 2010). Right now he's deep in the mix fpr the Mets second base job and in my opinion, it should be his to lose.

Yes, I know he's not your protypical second baseman. I know his defense is suspect and his experiance is more so. I'm not saying I don't care... but... I don't.

Murphy has a good bat. He's not going to make anyone forget Chase Utley, but Murphy's major league talent is with his stick and his hustling, excellent attitude. He'll struggle a little in the field and he'll not get to balls he should. I admit that. However, he's a full-speed ahead player who will give his all for his team, which is something everyone should like. I think his bat will be solid enough to look past the issues he has with his glove, and in the end he will likely be part of a platoon with someone who has a stronger defensive tag, to even out his rougher pedigree out there.

Yeah, this is a matter of liking the player despite some obvious faults, but looking at how badly some players have played defense at 2nd in the past on winning teams (Alfonzo Soriano or Dan Uggla anyone?) it's not the end of the world. If he's a total mess out there, well yeah... he'll need to come out and the experiment will be a failure, but somehow I think he'll be good enough to get by, and he'll do enough at the plate to let the Met fans excuse that ground ball just out of his reach.

It's full circle for Izzy

Out of baseball for over a year, Jason Isringhausen is attempting a comeback. In doing so, he's returned to the team he started with.

Isringhausen was part of the Mets' Generation K. The trio of starting pitchers (Isringhausen, Bill Pulsephiler and Paul Wilson) that were supposed to be the Mets version of John Smoltz, Greg Maddux and Tom Glavine in the mid 1990s. In the end injuries derailed all three and Isringhausen only really found big time success as a closer for the Oakland A's after being traded in 1999.

He would go on to save 293 games for the A's and Cardinals (he pitched for the Tampa Bay Rays in 2009 but didn't save any games).

Isringhausen asked the Mets for a tryout and they obliged and were pleasently rewarded. His curveball looks good and he seems healthy. If he is, the chances of him making the team is actually fairly good.

It's nice to see him in camp. I like the fact he's there and could be a nice stable arm in the bullpen. I could see him (again, if healthy) being a nice compliment to Bobby Parnell in the setup role. His experiance alone will be helpful to the youngster.

What's the rush?

Oliver Perez is in camp and basically is viewed as a dead man walking. Odds are he'll be out on he butt in about two/three weeks.

This isn't really speculation. It's pretty much expected unless he manages to find a few mils an hour on his fastball and stops walking people.

I have heard the question though... "why is he even in camp?"

Well, basically... why not? The Mets have to pay him anyway. His being in camp could possibly (albiet doubtfully) do two things:

1 - He could actually pitch well enough that he earns a spot. Likely in the bullpen if this was to happen. It's doubtful. VERY doubtful. Chances of happening: about 10%.

2 - Could pitch well enough that the Mets could trade him, while eating about 90% of his contract. Also doubtful, but slightly more possible considering the lack of depth in pitching for many teams. Chances of happening: about 16%.

Listen, I don't want Perez taking up innings that someone who will really benefit will miss out on (say Dillion Gee, Pat Misch or D.J. Carrasco) but for now the Mets don't lose anything in having him in camp. While I doubt it'll do anything much for the Mets, the slim chance it could work out is worth the amount of time. I just hope the Mets know when to draw the line and in reality, I think they do.

Who says the Mets couldn't sign Pujols?

You know, I'm getting a little tired of this.

Everyone and his brother has basically written the Mets off as a franchise at this point. The Madoff Ponzi scheme hit the Mets' principal owners hard. In that there is no doubt. There is a definite chance that it will effect the Mets organization.

A chance.

However, from everything I'm reading and hearing, pretty much the world is expecting the Mets to become the New York version of the Pittsburg Pirates. A team that will spend little and have few reasons to expect a winning future anytime soon.

This is just flat out ridiculous.

First off, even with the lack of big spending this offseason, the Mets will STILL be in the top part of payroll in the Major Leagues. The Red Sox, Yankees, Phillies, Tigers and Cubs will have higher payrolls. That is pretty much it.

Second, the Mets may not have been SMART with money in the past, but they have not been cheap. They have often been in the mix for high profile players.

With the news that the St. Louis Cardinals and Albert Pujols have not reached an agreement on a contact extention by this past Wednesday's deadline, many people are spectulating exactly what will happen to the best player in baseball.

I, myself, still think there is a better than decent chance he will return to the Cardinals. In my opinion, the second most likely place for him is actually the Chicago Cubs.

But I've heard time and time again how the Red Sox and Yankees, along with the Angels and Rangers are all possible landing spots. This despite both the Sox and Yankees having younger, big time, long term signed 1st basemen already (yes, I think the Adrian Gonzales signing is a for-gone conclusion). The same "experts" mention the Mets and in every case dismiss any possibility that the Mets would pursue, much less be able to sign Pojols. They use the Mets inability to spend, lack of history of spending, or lack of resources as the reasons.

I say bull$*!#.

Give me a break here. Without even much research I could come up with the bare bones of a scenerio where the Mets could look to sign Pujols and still be able to field a very competitive club for years to come.

Ok, follow me here. My number projections could likely be somewhat a little low, but in all honesty are more than in the ballpark.

The Mets have $60 million coming off the books after this season. That much is known and not under debate.

However, part of this goes away when you factor in the fact that Francisco Rodriguez can trigger a fourth year in his existing 3-year deal at $17.5 million if he finishes 55 games in 2011. I have no idea if that will happen or not. Somehow I get the idea that Sandy Alerson doesn't want to lay a closers $17.5 million. I do not know if that option remains if the Mets trade him in 2011. Last year was the first time since becoming a closer that K-Rod didn't finish 55 games. If he hadn't gotten into the altercation with his father-in-law he would have likely finished 55 games though. He pitched in 46 before messing up his thumb on August 14th.

So, ok... K-Rod could still be on the team and making $17.5 million. I will keep that in mind and paint the scenario as if he will be a Met in 2012.

The other notable free agents in 2012 for the Mets are Jose Reyes, Carlos Beltran, Luis Castillo, and Oliver Perez. There are other names coming off too, but I'll stick with the bigger ones for now.

Reyes is going to make $11 million in 2011. Let's say you resign Reyes and he gets a 6 year, $88 million dollar contract with a fairly easily obtainable (if healthy in years 5 and 6) 7th year option that would round out the whole contract at about $103 million. That is an average of roughly $14.7 million a year. Say it's $13.5 million in 2010 then the rest of the contract averages $14.9 a year. Would that be enough? Factoring in his health issues I think that is somewhere in the realm.

By letting Beltran ($18 million), Castillo ($6 million) and Perez ($12 million) go, you automatically have a $36 million set to play with for 2012. Yeah I know you're not looking to spend that all on one player and the Mets are supposedly looking to keep the payroll slightly on the south side of $140 million in 2012. No worry... you still can.

But wait! It's not REALLY $36 million free. Why? Reyes has a $2.5 million dollar raise in 2012. K-Rod gets a $3.5 raise (assuming he is still on the team). That is $31 million from your $60 million coming off the books. That leaves you actualy with $29 million left of that $60 coming off the books.

Still, no problem here.

Ok, we're going to look at this keeping not just 2012 in mind, but also 2013, 2014 and 2015 (if not 2016).

The Mets could offer Pujols a nine year, $247.5 million (averaging at $27.5 million a year).

The Reyes/Pujols/K-Rod contracts in 2012 would combine for $58.5 million. Then they could spin the very talented Ike Davis in a trade with another young pitching prospect (or more likley highly regarded Shortstop prospect Wilmer Flores since you now have another 6 years of Reyes at short anyway) for a front end of the rotation arm.

For 2012 (and going forward) you would look to have rookie Reese Havens as your 2nd baseman, Josh Thole as your catcher, Jon Neise and Dillion Gee in the rotation, Angel Pagan as your centerfielder and Lucas Duca, Fernando Martinez or Cory Vaughn in rightfield. Pagan, Thole, Neise and Gee all will have a few years of Major league experiance meaning your are really only looking at two rookies in the lineup. None of these players will make a lot of money (except possibly Pagan) for at least the first four to five years of Pujols' contract. Gee could actually find himself in the bullpen if Chris Young really works out or if Jenrry Mejia is able to crack the starting rotation.

Yes having two rookies in an everyday line up is a little scary, but look at the lineup:

Reyes
Pagan
Wright
Pujols
Bay
Havens
Duca, Martinez or Vaughn
Thole

You also have a possible Daniel Murphy in that mix with Havens at second.

Add in a healthy Johan Santana, Mike Pelfrey, Niese Gee/Mejia/Young and whom ever you can spin Davis/Flores for (say a Matt Cain, Chad Billingsley type) and you have a pretty good team.

That team would be right about at the $140 million mark. Most likely a somewhat over depending on raises for other players and who leaves and who else comes on. It's viable though... add in the crackshot management team of Alderson, Riccardi and Co. and it's not something you can just dismiss as impossible.

Also if the Mets keep K-Rod's option from vesting or they manage to trade him, then there is more money on the table (with someone like Bobby Parnell as a possible replacement as closer).

And do you think for a second ticket sales wouldn't go through the roof? They would. Even if the Mets raise ticket prices as a result (which they liikely would).

Citifield would become a rockin place with buzz they haven't had since the Mets traded for Mike Piazza back in 1998.

Is it likely? I didn't say that. Are my numbers off? Most likely, but I would wager they aren't TOO far off.

But could it happen?

Yeah, it could. Never say never.

Would Michael Young make sense for the Mets?

The Texas Rangers are looking to trade long time infielder (and bascially long time face of the franchise) Michael Young after signing Adrian Beltre during the offseason.

Young has played shortstop, second base and third base for the Rnagers in his ten years with the club. He's been basically a selfless guy, moving his position more than once despite being a six-time all-star. He hit .284, with 21 hrs and 91 rbi last year. He would go a LONG way towards solving the Mets 2nd base issues.

Of course there is the simple fact that the Mets are not on Young's list of teams he can be traded to, but that doesn't mean it's not possible (or that it is or is not a good idea).

Young is due to make another $48 million over the next three years which is a lot of money. However what if the Mets tried the following?

Offer to send Ollie Perez (and his $12 million contract) to the Rangers, along with a younger mid-level player. They then ask the Rangers to pick up $11 million of Young's contact.

The Rangers save $25 million. They get a lefty pitcher in Perez who might just need to get the heck out of New York and how actually has a history of pitching very well against the Yankees. They get a mid-level prospect for it also.

The Mets in the end really only wind up spending $25 million for three years of Young. That is about $8.15 million a year. They get a veteran in the clubhouse who is respected and suddenly have one of the best hitting 2nd basemen in the league.

The line up would look like this:
Reyes
Pagan
Wright
Beltran
Young
Bay
Davis
Thole

And DAMN if that isn't an exciting thought.

Yeah it's unlikely on both ends and I make it sound MUCH more simple than it could really ever be.... but the idea has some merit. Doesn't it?

This just keeps getting better and better...

So now it's out that Sterling, Inc was involved in ANOTHER ponzi scheme a number of years back and wound up paying someone off in a settlement on profits they made on that one.

So, it becomes harder for Fred WIlpon and Saul Katz to look totally in good faith that they didn't have the slighest inkling about Bernie Madoff's ponzi scheme. If NOTHING else, they should have seen SOME similarities in the returns I would suspect. I mean, I know nothing about this sort of thing... but having been burned once, don't you think they would have at least been a little wary of ANY investment's that seemed a little too godd to be true?

Again, I know that Madoff and Wilpon were like BIG time, long time friends and that the friendship likely brought along a large amount of "benefit of the doubt" with it, but c'mon...

Remember what I said about being a Mets' fan and waiting each day for that kick in the groin? Sheesh.

Ugh

Ok, this is just getting to be very tedious.

If you are reading this I'm sure you know all about the craziness with the Wilpon/Katz/Ponzi/Lawsuit debacle. I don't need to rehash it.

A few thoughts on the subject:

1 - I just find it hard to believe that Wilpon and Katz knew that this was a scam. They got WAY too many people involved in it who lost a boatload of money. Odds are there WERE some red flags that should have tipped them off that SOMETHING was amiss, but seeing how close Madoff and Wilpon were, it's not hard to think at all that Madoff was just given the benefit of the doubt. I mean, the Government watchdogs didn't know anything was wrong for the longest time... so making it out like the Wilpons did is a tad unfair.

2 - At what point do the Wilpons stop looking like a pair of clown shoes? It seems there has been almost nothing but bad press after bad press for years now. I think the only real positive thing was the hiring of Sandy Alderson and his brain trust. Fred, Saul and Jeff REALLY need to stay out of the news.

3 - Will anyone REALLY want to pay $250 million or so to be a part owner in franchise with potential for further financial issues and not even have any real say in day to day operations or how the team is run? I don't know... but it seems very few people in the media seem to theink the Mets can sell a minority share without at least adding in some of SNY.

4 - While the Mets themselves technically haven't been affected here, the Wilpons and Katz have, which means they will likely look to not spend the same amount of cash on the team they would if these losses and lawsuits didn't exist. To pretend the Mets won't likely be affected is foolish and native.

This whole things stinks. Some days being a Mets' fan is like walking through your day, each day, knowing that at some point, someone is going to kick you in the groin.

An Early (or late) Christmas Present?

Do you know how often I have hoped to hear those wonderful words?

You know... the ones that go: "The Wilpons are selling the Mets!"

Then of course my hopes and dreams are smashed by hearing they plan to only sell a minority share, and would still be the majority shareholders, thus still in a strong position of power with the team.

Dammit.

Ok... maybe I'm being unfair. I HAVE wished many, MANY times, that the Mets would be sold. I just have had too many bad tastes in my mouth with the constant feelings of the Wilpons' Keystone Cops-type management style. However they have shown the ability to finally allow the reins to be passed onto actual baseball people to have mostly full control over baseball decisions with the hiring of Sandy Alderson... so at least we have the chance to see the team move ahead without the total bumbling that seems to stick with the Mets front office.

In any case, with this nuggest of news hitting the media yesterday, I've heard a large amount of snickering from a number of Yankee fans... who likely don't realize their own team majority owners (the Stienbrenners) don't even own a full 40% of the Yankees.

That's right Bleacher Creatures. Hank and Hal (and daddy George Warbucks before them) only own about 39.6% of the Yankees. However it is the majority. The Mets could sell off a full 45% of the Mets and still have majority control and own more of their team than their crosstown rivals.

Not that it's really a big deal in the end. Most major league teams have multiple partners. The Mets are one of the few teams with an ownership of 99%.

So I'm hearing a lot of different rumors... like Mark Cuban, Donald Trump, Jerry Seinfeld and Charles Wang.

I honestly don't know what to think about that other than OH GOD PLEASE NOT WANG!!!!

Charles Wang has run my favorite hockey team (the NY Islanders) in the proverbial ground. The LAST person I want to see dipping his hands into the Mets well is him.

Listen, an influx of cash into the team could only be a good thing in my opinion. Yes there is potential to some future issues if someone with a strong personality (and strong media presence) becomes a part owner and decides he/she has a different ideology than the Wilpons on particular issues... however this team is just starting to stabilze itself and the road to respectibility is going to need something solid... like a credit line.

I think the Mets will be a better team than a lot of people seem to think they will be in 2011, however I have no delusions... and to fully compete with the Phillies and Braves going forward the team will HAVE to spend some money. Serious money for some serious players.

I would welcome a Mark Cuban or Donald Trump in here. Both of those names will come with a sense of entitlement and blowhardism... but both of those names would fall into the SPEND, SPEND, SPEND!!!!! mentality the George so aptly had over in the bronx... and look how well that has turned out when the combination of money and baseball smarts are put together.

I've seen the Mets spend money. I've seen the Mets make good decisions. However, those two things haven't always gone together. When they do... it's a wonderful thing.

So, bring on the rich blowhards! Put some serious cash in Alderson's hands. It's about time.

One Month Until Spring Training!

Wow. That actually kinda went fast.

Well, in 30 days we'll all be excited and hopeful as all the MLB team fan bases should be (except for likely the Royals and Pirates).

I'm looking forward to getting back to the basics and the baseball season to start up. I miss it. I miss meaningful games and despite the very low expectatations everyone has for the Mets, I expect this season to have some excitment and a ton of meaningful games.

Mets Ink Chris Capuano

In what is likely to be one of the bigger moves (and yes the irony of that line is not lost on me) of the offseason for the Mets, they have signed Chris Capuano (formerly of the Milwalkee Brewers) to a one year $1.5 million dollar contract (with an additional $3 million in incentives).

Capuano won 18 games in 2005 and was an All-Star in 2006. He had tommy-john surgery after the 2007 season and missed the entire 2008 and 2009 seasons. He pitched decently in 2010 going 4-4 with a 3.95 ERA.

No one is expecting another 18 win season, but I think this is a good move with little risk and fairly decent rewards expectations. I see Capuano as either a long man out of the bullpen or the 5th starter (depending on if the Mets make any other expected moves for another starter.

This is the sort of thing I'm expecting the Mets to do this offseason. I think they'll get at least one or two more players in this same vein (ie: pitcher with past success coming off injury with something to prove). I'm fairly confident the Mets will wind up with Jeff Francis or Chris Young... both of who I'd be quite interested in. The thing is, I have faith in Mike Pelfrey and I think the Mets will be able to count on R.A. Dickey and Jon Niese to pitch fairly well. If they can get two servicable pitchers out of Dillion Gee, Capuano, and whom ever they sign next they can hopefully stay in contention until the return of Johan Santana, I know it's not ideal, but it's not out of the question either.

Phricking Phillies

Ok, so I've pretty much kept away from the whole Cliff Lee stuff, since there is nothing I'm going to say that wasn;t said in the first hour or so after the announcement.

It certainly was the worst place he could have gone. If he had gone to the Braves it would have been just about as bad I suppose, but basically anywhere else would have been preferred.

Ok, lets get this out of the way... I cannot IMAGINE the Philies (barring major injury to one or more of their now seemingly insurmountable starting rotation) do not win the NL East. They are basically as assured of a playoff spot as one can be assured of one.

Does it mean they will win the whole shebang? I would say the odds favor them but nothing is a sure thing.

As a Mets fan, it does suck. It's just another thing the inane Philadelphia fans get to crow about... and oh GOD do they crow.

I REALLY have to say that the majority of Philadelphia fans (baseball, football and hockey at least) come across as very crass and arrogant and plain... well... mean spirited. It makes this sort of thing even harder to take.

The Phillies ARE an older team though, and I have the feeling that the "win now" mentality will hurt them in the long run. However, that long run will not be 2011 or 2012.

So for the next two years (at least) we have the spectre over our heads. I will say though, 2014 and beyond may be quite rough on that team, but for now... they shouldn't care. They have (once again) made a move that made their team better and if nothing else you have to respect that.

Just remember, this doesn't keep the Mets from being able to compete though. I expect this organization to rise from the ashes here. I expect them to be competitive in 2011 (I see no reason this team cannot win 85 games and at least be in it in September even if I don't expect a playoff spot) and I expect them to make some serious moves and make the team better for 2012 and be ready to go into battle with the playoffs a possibility.

Having said that though?

Oh GOD I HATE THE PHILLIES.

Say what you want about how good they are (or expect to be) but this team is full of arrogant jerks. If nothing else the Mets had better be ready to stand up to these idiots and give as good as they get.