Craig on Mets’ List?

Normally, I am the first to denigrate any trade proposals and I fully expect the Mets to do nothing of the sort, but given the dearth of news about the Mets these days, there really isn’t much else to write about and I need to scratch this itch. So here goes.

The Mets should trade LHP Jon Niese to the Boston Red Sox for LF/1B Allen Craig.

Boston added Craig at last year’s trade deadline, in exchange for John Lackey, a move that you may have missed due to some of the more dramatic trades made that week. A listfranc injury limited Craig to just 29 games for Boston in 2014. He batted a measly 128/234/191 for the Sawk, likely attributable to the injury. But in the previous five years with the Cardinals he hit 291/343/460 with OPS of 803. More on him in a minute.

In what most Met fans would consider as a disappointing year, Niese’s 1.28 WHIP was a career best and he logged 187 innings last year, three off his career high in 2012. With the exception of the now-departed Jon Lester, Niese statistically out-pitched every 2014 Boston starter and came close to matching Lester in several (good) categories. While not an ace, Jon represents the next tier of pitchers and is a solid, less costly left-handed alternative to Lester. The Red Sox have a glut of outfielders, first basemen and designated hitters, so the opportunity convert some of that into a pitcher such as Niese may prove hard for them to resist.

As for the Mets, they get a man who has been called one of the best pure hitters in the major leagues. A right handed hitter, he can provide relief for Lucas Duda or Matt den Dekker against tough lefties. He could hit anywhere from second to fifth in the lineup, extending both it and the bench. He has even played a little second base. It is worth repeating that the Mets don’t necessarily need to add a slugger as much as they need to add a slasher like Craig, who consistently puts the ball in play. And, he is not bereft of power— just ask the Texas Rangers.

Unfortunately, any Met trade discussion has to include salaries. Here’s the beauty of it, the Niese and Craig contracts are nearly identical for their duration:
Year          Craig           Niese
2015             $5.5M         $7.0M
2016             $9.0M        $9.0M
2017             $11.0M       $10.0M*
2018             $13M*        $11.0M*

*Team Option
On the flip side, Mets GM Sandy Alderson has been characterized as wanting to win every deal and this one carries some danger. The major risk for the Mets is Niese is two years younger than Craig and could be entering some of his prime years locked into a team-friendly contract. Craig’s foot injury is the type that might never heal and if so, his best years are behind him.   That’s why you have team doctors check him out first. The betting here is that the Mets have enough pitching to cover Niese’s departure (even if this deal is made and then goes south). I also think that they actually run a greater risk with an ill-advised free agent signing or  dealing away multiple prospects for a power hitter.
I am starting to talk myself into believing this could actually happen. What do you think? Sound off below.

A Mets fan since 1971, Dan spent many summer nights of his childhood watching the Mets on WOR Channel Nine, which his Allentown, PA cable company carried. Dan was present at Game 7 of the 1986 World Series and the Todd Pratt Walkoff Game in 1999. He is also the proud owner of two Shea Stadium seats. Professionally, Dan is a Marketing Manager in the Bulk Materials Handling industry. He lives in Bethlehem PA with his wife and son, neither of whom fully get his obsession with the Mets.
  1. Since68 October 11, 2014 at 7:54 am
    I think it’s a fair swap that would help Boston. Problem is, you would be locked in to an outfield with Craif and Grandy thru 2017. There is risk that both of these guys coulds bust, and the Mets rarely eat contracts. Plus, SA will have no place to put Nimmo or Conforto in a year.
    for that money, I’d go with Cudyer.
  2. Dan42 October 11, 2014 at 9:35 am
    After reading the below, there’s no way I’d take that risk, especially if he was expected to pay LF. One outfield albatross is more than enough for this team.

  3. DaveSchneck October 11, 2014 at 2:15 pm
    It is a reasonably proposal for sure but I would probably look elsewhere. Leaving the staff withouta lefty starter is a concern as is the risk involving Craig’s foot. Now, the market pricesfor an FA like Cuddyer or could change my mind.
  4. Scottie October 11, 2014 at 7:45 pm
    What happens the for games out of five that Niese doesn’t start? Is that so bad?
  5. argonbunnies October 11, 2014 at 9:26 pm
    Nice to see a realistic proposal. I’m sure the Sox would do that in a heartbeat. And the 2013 version of Craig is EXACTLY what the Mets need. Unfortunately, the guy can only play 1B. Don’t even think about giving him an inning elsewhere with that foot injury.

    Niese for Craig is a great trade if the Mets first package Duda in a trade for Tulo or something, but otherwise it doesn’t fit the Mets’ current roster.

    • DanB October 12, 2014 at 1:25 pm
      AB, would you trade Duda? Do you think he finally found the proper approach and expect more years like 2014? Or do you think he hit his ceiling and think he should be traded at peak value? I wonder if pitchers will adjust to his more aaggressive approach. Either way, I seriously doubt Alderson would trade away Duda while he is still considered a cheap power hitter.
      • argonbunnies October 12, 2014 at 5:50 pm
        I do think 2014 represents Duda’s ceiling, but it wouldn’t shock me if he could pull off something similar again. It also wouldn’t shock me if 2015’s numbers looked like 2012-2013. It’s a gamble. If a trade partner wants to bet the upside of that gamble, then I’d do the deal.

        I certainly wouldn’t trade Duda to someone who is NOT valuing him as a 30 HR guy, though. That’s why I mentioned Tulo — the trade would have to be ambitious. With Wright aging, we need a few stars to plug into our cast of guys who are just okay. So if any true stars become available, I’d be inclined to part with whoever it takes. I wonder how Stanton feels about the Marlins’ latest extension talks? If the Fish move him, a package of Duda-Wheeler-Plawecki might be tough to top…

        • Yeats October 13, 2014 at 3:10 pm
          I *love* Tulo, but… he’s only made the 140 game plateau once in the last 5 years. And he reportedly really wants to be a Yankee. I’m not sure this is a combination I want on my team.
  6. Bat October 13, 2014 at 8:59 am
    The contracts are not nearly identical because Craig is guaranteed $25.5 million and Niese is guaranteed $16.0 million, meaning that the risk associated with Craig’s deal is significantly higher.

    That is, if Craig continues to stink as he did in 2014 – negative 1.4 fWAR, which is horrible – the team holding his contract still owes him $25.5 million regardless of his performance whereas if Niese tanks the team holding his contract only owes him $16.0 million.

    Craig’s best year was 2.7 fWAR in 2012 and I don’t see him as part of the solution for the Mets. Again, he was horrible in 500 plus ABs in 2014.

    Possible that Craig rebounds in 2015? Sure, a definite possibility. But the Mets are strapped for cash and I think they can put this $25 million owed to Craig to better use.

    • Joe Janish October 13, 2014 at 1:47 pm
      Agreed – Craig is too risky and too expensive. I think Niese is just as risky, but I think other teams don’t see him as a risk and thus, the Mets can get more for Niese than Craig, especially if packaged with someone else.

      Something just hit me — “… the Mets are strapped for cash …” is something that has been said for at least five years now.

      FIVE YEARS!!!!!

      Who ever would have believed that a New York-based Major League sports franchise could be strapped for cash for half a decade? (Indoor soccer does not count as a “Major League sports franchise.”) And as part of an entity that is flush with nearly ten billion dollars of revenue and growing?

      Yet loyal fans sit back and accept it, believing it’s part of the “rebuilding process.”

      Now THAT’S “amazin’.”

      • Yeats October 13, 2014 at 3:12 pm
        The Jets. $20M under the salary cap and have the NFL’s lowest payroll.
        • Dan B October 14, 2014 at 8:45 am
          There is no salary cap in baseball. There is no advantage in having a lower salary. Also everyone assumes the Jets (and the Cubs) will spend when they find the players to spend it on.
        • Yeats October 14, 2014 at 1:01 pm
          @ Dan B: true, there’s no salary cap in baseball, but there is a luxury tax. And reportedly Woody Johnson is tired of spending money.

          My response to Joe wasn’t entirely apropos, the Jets simply popped into my head as a team currently unwilling to spend money.

          But you know what team has been a genuinely cash-strapped NY franchise for years? The Islanders.

      • DaveSchneck October 13, 2014 at 7:47 pm
        I think the more accurate statement is “the Mets were strapped for cash”. At this point, that is nonsense, and you can count me among the “who” who don’t believe it. It is now a choice of how they choose to conduct business, avert risk, and sell it to the customers. With the Madoff settlement, the debt refinancing, the new TV money, and the significant increase in franchise and TV station values, there is plenty of money to support a mid-tier payroll in the neighborhood of $120 million. Even with Jeffy’s defense fund spending way beyond budget.

        I do agree with your conclusion, that “loyal” fans sit back and accept it. We all accept it to a certain degree, and deserve our fair share of the “blame”, but those providing the main source of funding, the “loyal” season ticket holders, are the ones that feed the beast the most. But, it is certainly their choice on how they spend their money.

      • argonbunnies October 14, 2014 at 7:56 am
        Nothin’ amazin’ about it. It’s simply Bud’s plan. And, well, the govt’s plan via the anti-trust exemption. Nothing in the MLB owner bylaws about spending to win! But come on, if this were a pure competition, where would the poor Brewers be?

        I’m sure Bud loves the Cubs — perpetual big-market losers, whose failures at buying a title have led them to stop trying that approach — and I bet we’ll see the Wilpons buy more and more into their marketing strategy. “Come to Citi Field! There’s a place for kids to hit! The upper deck concourse is nice! David Wright’s a likable guy! Music! Bobbleheads! $1.00 off hotdogs! Note: there will also be a baseball game.”

        • Yeats October 14, 2014 at 1:03 pm
          David Wright is such a likable guy, I kinda wish he played for another (read: good) team. /sadLOL
  7. mckeeganson October 13, 2014 at 2:45 pm
    I think the Red Sox with their excess of outfielders and lack of pitching, do represent an intriguing trade partner for the Mets, but not for Craig who is really just a 1B/DH and would fit best on an American League club. How about Shane Victorino? He’s coming of an injury plagued down year, so his value is low and only has one year left on his contract, but this is a guy who has always been on winning teams and excels at the #littlethings. He’s also a true right fielder who could push Granderson and his pop gun arm to left field. He would also immediately be the best table-setter on the team, whether you bat him first or second. Now what would it take to get him? I’m thinking Murphy and Gee would get it done. Murphy could play third for them in 2015 until Garin Cecchini is ready and Gee can at least plug one rotation spot.
    • Yeats October 13, 2014 at 3:16 pm
      Mets need #bigthings. Victorino is a slightly-above-average OF, and IMO the Mets need to aim higher.
      • mckeeganson October 14, 2014 at 12:27 am
        In 2013 Victorino was one of the most valuable players in the AL, so I would hardly call his addition a small one. That said, Victorino’s addition would certainly not preclude making a couple more, but it would be a start. In fact I suggested it with an eye on building a playoff contender for next year and with that in mind, you need to fix the holes in the lineup. It would obviously be pointless to bring him in and ignore the gaping hole at shortstop, but you can’t fix everything in one trade.

        Meanwhile the pleads for Cuddyer need to stop. He will be 36 years old next year, coming off a season where he was limited to 49 games and is about as capable in the outfield as Duda or Craig. The Coors effect inflated his numbers to .400 at home with a 1.255 OPS compared to .282 with a .734 OPS on the road. Now if we want to bring him in to platoon with Duda or den dekker and play against lefties who he mashed to the tune of .412/.483/.804 I would have no issue with that, but he will be quickly priced out of a platoon role on the free agent market.

        • argonbunnies October 14, 2014 at 8:01 am
          Victorino’s value in 2013 was mostly from his defense. I wouldn’t give up too much just to get a defensive upgrade over den Dekker (who might be almost as good).

          Shane’s floor with the bat is certainly higher than Matt’s, but I’m hoping we can get more than that for Gee + Murphy. If no one values those guys, though, then this move might be better than nothing.

          Agreed on Cuddyer. Would love to have him for limited $ and a limited role, but that ain’t gonna happen.

        • Yeats October 14, 2014 at 12:54 pm
          The 2 years sandwiching 2013, his OPS was .700. And his career OPS+ is only 104. And he’s 33 yrs old. And he’s due big $$. No thank you.
  8. Yeats October 13, 2014 at 3:14 pm
    Joe, what is your opinion of the line of thinking that a rotation should have at least one lefty?
    • Joe Janish October 17, 2014 at 4:27 pm
      Mostly nonsense. Get the best pitchers you can get.
  9. Bat October 13, 2014 at 5:33 pm
    Joe, it is indeed unbelievable that the Mets have been strapped for cash for this long.

    I remember reading about the Madoff debacle as it unfolded in the early stages and it (quite understandably) never occurred to me that my favorite baseball team was going to be impacted by Madoff for 10 years thereafter.

    Another thing that is unbelievable – and this goes to Cappy’s point that Craig is an advisable acquisition at $25.5 million over three years – is how much salaries continue to skyrocket. Some people on Fangraphs are projecting that Cuddyer gets 4 years / $50 million in free agency so if Cuddyer is worth that much, maybe Craig – who will likely rebound from this horrible 2014 to be a 2 win player or so – is a $25.5 million player over the next three years. But can’t MDD and Eric Campbell basically get you 2.0 WAR or so for a lot cheaper? Maybe / maybe not, I guess. Both of these guys showed something this year, but neither have proven they can hit major league pitching. What I mean is, quite possible that both of these guys are outed in 2015 as AAAA players – it’s still in doubt and you can’t say that these guys are each of a ML platoon or even quality bench players.

    The thing is, if you watch the NL playoffs Craig, his body type looks like Lucas Duda’s. And my understanding from people that watch him play and advanced metrics is that he basically plays the OF like Lucas Duda. Do we need that?

    • Joe Janish October 15, 2014 at 8:13 pm
      Yes, you’ve touched on a touchy subject — the fact that salaries continue to skyrocket, while the Mets continue to be broke. I believe we are just at the tip of the iceberg in terms of salaries increasing, as we’re only starting to see teams shell out big bucks thanks to the new TV contracts. Seattle going all in on Robbie Cano should’ve have been a slap of reality convincing the Wilpons to sell out — by the time they get out from under their debt, and can increase payroll to, say, $110M, the best teams in MLB will be operating with payrolls just below the luxury tax, because they’ll be able to afford to do so and it won’t make sense not to.

      All of the arguing I see elsewhere in the blogosphere about “higher payrolls don’t necessarily equal winning” will soon go out the window, because nearly ALL payrolls are going to continue to increase — teams will be spending more money merely to keep the players they have, never mind spending to obtain players from the outside.

      I continue to see the sh*t-eating grin on Alderson’s face when he was making fun of the Nationals for “overpaying” for Jayson Werth. Who’s getting the last laugh on that one? Similarly, someone this year is going to “overpay” for someone like Cuddyer or Pablo Sandoval — maybe not to the tune of 7/$126M, but it will be a similar situation of someone who doesn’t SEEM like a huge payday guy, yet will get a huge payday and again raise the bar for everyone at that level (while sending superstar salaries like V-Mart, Scherzer, Ham-Ram into the stratosphere). It will also be interesting to see how much teams pay for power, now that there’s a serious shortage.

      • DaveSchneck October 16, 2014 at 8:15 am
        Great description on the grin. That irks me too, but I must admit I’d have it too if I was getting around $3 mil a year of Wilpon money to shield Jeffy from the NYC magnifying glass.
      • DanB October 16, 2014 at 1:44 pm
        Wilpons are never selling until Willis Point is done. Owning the Mets is just a vehicle to get to that development money. I hate to say it but I don’t see the Met payroll getting over $100 millio any time soon.
  10. mckeeganson October 14, 2014 at 11:03 am
    Victorino was certainly plenty good on defense in 2013, but consider that he had an OPS of .801 which is higher than everyone on the Mets last year other then Duda, as well as 15 HR and 21 SB in only 122 games and I would say that you are selling his offense a little short. He’s a true all around player.
    • Dan Capwell October 14, 2014 at 11:33 am
      Living in Philly country I heard a lot about Victorino during that horrible period of their dominance. He would fill the need for a leadoff man and FWIW, I would be in favor of picking him up.

      Just not for Niese (or even Murphy), or any top ten prospect. There is also the little matter of the $13M he is owed for next year.

      • mckeeganson October 14, 2014 at 1:24 pm
        I get it, but you have to give something up to get something of value and considering that Victorino has 6 different seasons posting a WAR above 3 while Murphy has only ever reached 3 WAR for one season I hardly consider this a one sided deal. If Gee is included in the deal then their combined salary just about equals what Victorino will make next season. I think his style of play would do a world of good as an example for Lagares who has a similar defense first game. His one year deal would also limit the risk of any decline with age. If he performs well you could resign him to a shorter deal until Nimmo is ready. If you wanna build a winning team you have to bring some guys in who actually know what it means to win.
    • Yeats October 14, 2014 at 12:55 pm
      (posting this twice, sorry)

      The 2 years sandwiching 2013, his OPS was .700. And his career OPS+ is only 104. And he’s 33 yrs old. And he’s due big $$. No thank you.

      • mckeeganson October 14, 2014 at 1:32 pm
        True 2012 was a poor season for him… and he still produced a 2.6 WAR, better then Murph managed this past season. As for last season, he was limited to 30 games, which is a very small sample size to make declarations about, but even if he only performed to those standards his 0.5 WAR translates to 2.5 WAR which would still be more then Murphy and Gee combined. Because he’s a superior defender and baserunner he is always going to supply decent value and when he hits closer to his career .771 OPS he’s a borderline all-star.
        • Yeats October 14, 2014 at 2:06 pm
          He’s 4 years older than Murphy and more expensive. Murphy also has a higher OPS+. Victorino will be 34 next month, so there is no guarantee – or even strong probability – that he will return to form. He also missed significant time in 2013.

          The Mets have already been down this road with Granderson, although at least Victorino is a good defensive player.

          If Victorino were a couple years younger or had a lower salary, I’d consider a straight-up swap. As it is, if the Sawx want Neise or Murphy, the Mets need to get more than just Victorino.

        • DaveSchneck October 14, 2014 at 9:06 pm
          Alderson and the Mets only have so many bullets, so they need to be right on target. Victorino has his plusses, but he is not strong enough vs LHP to be considered an everyday leadoff hitter. I would prefer that they prioritize a professional RH bat in a corner OF spot. While TDA looked good in the 2nd half, they are still short from the right side, and DW is no given coming off his 2014 season. I think that RH bat is a higher priority, unless they can land an everyday, all-star caliber leadoff hitter. What is very interesting this offseason, is that while the Met needs are clear, there are many ways they can be addressed. How they solve one will impact how they solve another, so the GM will really need to have his head on a swivel to be prepared for many different scenarios that can present themselves. Victorino could make sense in some scenarios.
        • argonbunnies October 15, 2014 at 2:48 am
          I thought Victorino was seriously underrated for his whole career through 2011. Then in 2012 he looked just terrible at the plate, and the Phils seemed to think his defense had gone backwards too. He got traded to the Dodgers and many of us wondered if that would be the spark and get him hot, but instead he was even worse. The he turned 32, and when the Red Sox gave him $39 mil for 3 years, most critics viewed it as an overpay for a guy in decline.

          Then he was awesome in 2013. “Oh, I guess we were wrong!”

          The he was bad and injured in 2014. “Oh, maybe we were right after all.”

          He’s about to turn 34, and in his last healthy year his steals dropped from 39 to 21, and his triples from 7 to 2 (after 16 in 2011). This sounds to me like a guy who’s slowing down. I have ZERO interest in a slow Shane Victorino.

          If we make a fair trade for a mediocre corner guy, great; I like the fact that he has some upside beyond that. But if we make a fair trade for the 2013 model, I think our odds of that working out are lousy.

  11. Dan42 October 15, 2014 at 6:26 am
    Considering that we already have mediocre corner guys, why trade for one?
  12. mckeeganson October 15, 2014 at 2:14 pm
    I think this is truly a case of overrating our own players. Dave Schneck says that he would like a professional right handed bat in an outfield corner who mashes lefties… That would be Victorino, a player who has never struck out 100 times in a season, and is his career versus lefties bats .303/.372/.503. He won a gold glove in 2013 and still fielded well last year, so this isn’t exactly a case of a guy who suddenly can’t play anymore. As for his injury marred season in 2014? That is the only reason he would even be available for such a trade, because if you think a one tool player like Murph and a number 4/5 starter like Gee are getting you 2013 Victorino then you must be joking.

    Of course it’s not like it really matters what I think since he may not even be available and I don’t see Alderson making such a bold move, but a man can dream.

    What are people’s thoughts on a shortstop solution? I was really hoping JJ Hardy would land in our laps, but the Orioles locked him up. The free agent market is now underwhelming aside from Hanley Ramirez who is probably more of a third basemen now and certainly will need to be moved there eventually. The trade market has a few options, but I am not a fan of either Castro or Baez of the Cubs, who I think will both ultimately not end up being shortstops. I have a weird affinity for Didi Gregorious who is above average defensively while also showing 10-15 home run power and pretty good plate discipline. His BABIP was unusually low and that dragged down his batting average. He also is blocked at shortstop by Chris Owings and might be a prime buy-low candidate. I have no idea what it would take to get him. Maybe Reynolds and Montero? Or perhaps quite a bit more.

    • Dan42 October 15, 2014 at 4:09 pm
      I would think he’s available, but he has been worthless vs LHP, his overall hitting is inflated by a hot July, and his defense is somewhat over rated.
      • mckeeganson October 17, 2014 at 4:07 pm
        Good point about his splits, didn’t realize he was that inept against lefties. I suppose if we kept Tejada around they could maybe platoon. I really would love to see Flores get a chance to play every day at 2nd place, where I think he would be an upgrade defensively over Murphy. He has much better hands, a better arm and turns the double play surprisingly well. Their range is pretty similar but Flores just looks much smoother out there.
    • DaveSchneck October 15, 2014 at 7:37 pm
      Actually you make a good point with Victorino that I hadn’t considered. He could actually be a better RH value than Cuddyer although he would cost players in addition to money. He’s worth consideration if the price isn’t too high, since Victorino is only under contract for 2015.
  13. DanS October 15, 2014 at 4:46 pm
    I love reading you guys because the posts are almost always thought provoking. I’m not sure about the back and forth on Shane Victorino. Thirty-four years old and seriously declining skills. The Red Sox would probably give him away to clear the salary…and one thing the Mets can’t afford is another unreasonably priced, unproductive player. I would love to see a deal for a productive MLB shortstop. Not sure how Starlin Castro would handle NYC, and there seems to be some question about his work ethic, but can we really afford another season of Tejada/Flores? One other question: is this team stuck at a self-imposed $84-million “salary cap” indefinitely?
    • Joe Janish October 15, 2014 at 7:58 pm
      No, the salary cap is not indefinite. From what I understand, Sandy Alderson will be working toward creating payroll flexibility over the next few years, focusing on promoting players from within the organization and signing veterans only to short-term deals. It sounds like the Mets will be looking to compete in about 3-4 years, once they clear out some bad contracts and the youngsters begin to mature.

      Oh, wait …

      • Dan42 October 16, 2014 at 6:28 am
        The Fiftieth Anniversary special on it’s way, complete with prior years of exquisite agony.
  14. argonbunnies October 17, 2014 at 12:25 am
    Bad news: an organization that excels at player development just spotted a useful guy in the Mets system and grabbed him. New Orleans hitting coach George Greer is now a Cardinal.

    If Sandy & Co. are prioritizing building from within, this is the kind of thing that cannot happen. If you’re not going to be the highest bidder for proven major leaguers like Ellsbury, then you need to be the highest bidder for development guys like Greer. Doing neither = simply waiting to get lucky. Sad sad sad.

    (Not that I was high on Greer before — didn’t know anything about him, really — but if the Cards want him teaching their youngsters, he must be good.)

    • DanB October 17, 2014 at 9:13 am
      I have been saying this for years! I have not seen signs of the Mets investing money in their farm system despite all this talk about how teams need to build from with in. Why are the AAA Mets in Vegas? Where are innovators in the system? Is it true they cut back on field scouts and rely on video tape? UgH….
      • DaveSchneck October 17, 2014 at 2:14 pm
        Dan and AB,
        Agreeing with both. Not sure what the details were with Greer, so hard to say in that one instance, but overall, this is another glaring inconsistency between what is being said and what is being done. Vegas is by far the biggest issue. Regardless of how it is spun by Alderson and crew, It is the worst AAA affiliate. For an east coast team to be stuck with it is a huge indictment. Several closer affiliates came up for renewal this year, and if I am not mistaken, some switched affiliation. Nashville went from the Brewers to the As. This would have been a huge improvement for the Mets, having a team much closer, one time zone away, a 2 hour direct flight away, and in a warm weather climate that would not freeze players out at the beginning of the season but not be as extreme as Vegas in the summer. So, the Mets lost out to the A’s, all the way on the west coast, or they chose not to try for Nashville, or Nashville didn’t want to deal with them. In any even, this is yet negative another mark against the franchise. I wish the beat writers would call out Alderson on that one.
        • mckeeganson October 17, 2014 at 4:11 pm
          This is a great point. Vegas makes every hitter look like a potential stud and most pitchers too overwhelmed to even be considered major league worthy. It would be nice if all the stats didn’t have to be taken with 12 grains of salt.
    • Joe Janish October 17, 2014 at 4:32 pm
      Greer is a solid, incredibly generous guy who knows baseball and knows hitting. I met him a hundred years ago at an ABCA conference when he was still coaching Wake Forest and learned more about baseball in a one-hour lunch than I’d learned in the previous 10 years.

      Greer is the guy who helped out Ike Davis (albeit briefly), shortened den Dekker’s swing, and got d’Arnaud going — among others. Hopefully the Mets can hold on to Lamar Johnson and Wally Backman, but if those two get plucked as well, I’m not sure who will be left to “finish” the maturing youngsters.

  15. TexasGusCC October 25, 2014 at 1:42 am
    Hi everyone. I would like to point out another player. One that the Mets can get for Dillon Gee only. One that has about a 10% BB rate, hits in the .280 range with a lot of doubles and around 15-20 HR in a tough ballpark, plays ok defense, has consistently been better than 2 WAR, and is 32 years old. He has been the right fielder for his team for many years and now they are just dying to move him and would probably eat half his salary. Andre Ethier. Not fancy, but healthy and effective. You could get him for Gee alone, or maybe even Montero. He has always been consistent although never flashy.

    Also, with TDA, Lagares, Flores, and Wright in the lineup, why do they need another RH bat?

    • argonbunnies October 25, 2014 at 3:40 am
      At 32, I’m inclined to think Ethier’s decline is real. Also, he’s bad enough vs LH that a platoon is required. At this stage for the Mets, Ethier might help the team more than Gee, but there’s no way they’ll want to use up that much of their budget on Ethier’s contract. If the Dodgers decide to even the money, not a bad idea. Depends on whether you think Gee will bounce back; if so, it’s kinda selling low.
      • TexasGusCC October 25, 2014 at 9:23 am
        Argon, I expect the Dodgers to eat some of his deal that has three years at $17MM per year as we have heard in the past. He has been a steady player when getting 500 at bats except for this year when he played here and there. I just look at Gee outside of Citifield and I don’t want see his numbers getting better. Just a thought.
        • TexasGusCC October 25, 2014 at 10:03 am
          Sorry, that last line should be that I just don’t see Gee’s numbers getting better, but I would want them to, lol.
        • argonbunnies October 25, 2014 at 9:17 pm
          My take on Gee is that his success is fragile. He still has it in him to be a well above average starting pitcher, but he also has it in him to be a mediocre #5. And his inconsistency isn’t start to start; he gets in extended grooves where he can locate everything with precision, and then he gets in extended un-grooves where he misses his spots and gets crushed.

          As usual, the Mets missed what might have been a chance to sell high on Dillon after 2013. If we dealt him now, I doubt we’d get a lot — maybe Ethier but with no money thrown in.