Home » Around the Blogs » Who's Next for DL, Albert Pujols and PEDs
5
August 28, 2009 Around the Blogs Joe Janish

Who’s Next for DL, Albert Pujols and PEDs

MetsmerizedOnline hears from scouts around the league that Francisco Rodriguez could be the latest Met hiding an injury. The same article also displays some frighteningly awful numbers from K-Rod since the All-Star break.

Also on MMO, Joe D wonders if the Mets were duped in the Billy Wagner deal — and predicts dark days ahead.

Andy Martino of the Philadelphia Inquirer says we still don’t know if MLB players are clean — and invokes the name of Albert Pujols.

In somewhat related news, the courts have decided that federal agents were wrong to seize the infamous drug list and samples of 104 Major League Baseball players who allegedly tested positive for performance-enhancing drugs in 2003. Hard to take a stance on this one. On the one hand, the players’ rights of privacy were infringed upon. On the other hand, the wrongly-obtained evidence did show that many broke the law by taking illegal drugs and drugs without a prescription. As a result of this decision, Barry Bonds remains “innocent” and Victor Conte looks like a whistleblowing civil rights activist, rather than the fly-by-night drug-peddling shyster depicted by Game of Shadows. It’s up to you to decide who’s right and who’s wrong.

Back to the Mets, Metsgrrrl Caryn Rose has a primer for the team on how to be more fan-friendly.

Tags: , ,

Joe Janish began MetsToday in 2005 to provide the unique perspective of a high-level player and coach -- he earned NCAA D-1 All-American honors as a catcher and coached several players who went on to play pro ball. As a result his posts often include mechanical evaluations, scout-like analysis, and opinions that go beyond the numbers. Follow Joe's baseball tips on Twitter at @onbaseball and at the On Baseball Google Plus page.
Related Articles
  1. isuzudude August 28, 2009 at 9:20 am
    To rebut Joe D from MMO, Braves fans seemed just as thankful of Omar and the Mets for taking Francoeur off their hands in exchange for perennial all-star Ryan Church, and so far I’d say the Mets have gotten the better end of that deal. So it’s quite unfair and irresponisble to call a trade bad just because the fans of the other team are happy it was made.

    Plus, with the way the Mets like to slot during the draft, who’s to say they would have gotten any useful talent with the picks they would have recouped from offering Wagner arbitration? Far be it for me to say I don’t really have the utmost amount of confidence in this team to evaluate young, raw talent. At least we know that Carter can handle AAA pitching and is primed and ready to contribute at the major league level.

    Though, news has now come out that the Yankees claimed Carter off waivers and thus blocked Carter from coming to the Mets. Their reasoning: handcuff the Red Sox into keeping Carter on their 40-man roster for the rest of the season. Yeah, it’s a smooth and calculated move by the Yanks, but give me an f’n break. Just how far do the Yanks think they’re putting the Sox behind the 8-ball by blocking the trade? Nominally at most. And yet they have absolutely no problem stepping on the Mets’ toes in the process and playing big bad @sshole on the block. If I were a member of the Mets brass I’d be seething at the Yankees right now. As if our season hasn’t gone badly enough, now the Yankees have to jump on the pile because they want to prevent the Sox from having something so insignificant as an extra 40-man roster spot. Are we aware now why the Yankees are the most hated franchise in all of baseball? I hate to say it, but if it does come down to the Phillies and Yankees in this year’s WS (which looks like a strong possibility), I’m cheering for the Phillies. F the Skankees and all their f’n fans.

  2. joejanish August 28, 2009 at 9:44 am
    First, I don’t believe the Mets got the “better end” on the Francoeur-Church deal. The way I see it, it was an even swap, and both teams have benefitted, for different reasons. I won’t say the Mets “won” until/unless they offer arbitration to Francoeur and have him around in 2010. And with all we’re hearing about the Wilpons’ cash flow issues, there’s a good chance Francoeur moves on.

    I also can’t blame the Yankees for doing what they did (if in fact they did claim Carter). Why the heck should they care about the Mets auditioning a AAAA player? They’re focused on winning the World Series, and the Red Sox are a potential threat. You know, they’re playing “meaningful games in September”. Meh.

  3. isuzudude August 28, 2009 at 11:04 am
    Joe, please re-read my post: “…and SO FAR I’d say the Mets have gotten the better end of that deal.” Francoeur has hit .305 while notching 6 HR and 26 RBI in 164 AB since the trade, while Church stands at .271, 2 HR, 17 RBI, and 96 AB. There’s no argument that Francoeur has outperformed Church since the trade, and that’s all I was saying. I know not what the future holds so I am not judging the trade on anything but past performance. Plus, my point was that Atlanta fans crucified the Mets for the trade, as if expecting Francoeur to hit .200 over the rest of the season. Likewise, it seems like Boston fans are slamming the Mets for giving up Billy Wagner for a AAAA’er in Carter. So, after seeing how wrong Atlanta fans were on Jeff, it would be wise for Joe D at MMO to take that into consideration when listening to the Boston fans also slam the Mets for accepting what was, in their opinion, a favorable deal.

    I also don’t blame the Yankees for doing what they did either. But really, given the chance to stick it to both the Red Sox and Mets in one fell swoop, I doubt they needed any extra motivation to block the Carter trade. And that’s what I believe their intentions were. Because to think that they believe preventing the Red Sox from opening up one extra 40-man roster spot is going to put them at any kind of disadvantage over the rest of the season is insane. Plain and simple, the Yankees are acting like @ssholes but are going to hide behind the “we’re just playing by the rules and pulling out all the stops to win” routine. I’m not buying it.

  4. joejanish August 28, 2009 at 11:25 am
    I still disagree with the assessment that the Mets “got the better end” — to me it’s still a good move for both sides. The Braves rid themselves of someone who they thought grounded into too many DPs and didn’t get on base enough, and whose fall from grace was becoming a burden. They were beholden to keep putting him in the lineup as long as he was a Brave, and non-tendering him in the winter would’ve been an ugly scene from a PR standpoint. So in return they got a guy who more fits into their style, and is doing an admirable job filling in at both CF and RF — and someone people won’t miss if they non-tender him. Ah, and also a player who will be much cheaper if he does go through the arbitration process.

    Meantime, the Mets get a guy who can put the ball over the wall and adds a lot of hustle, grit and spirit. I think he’s tremendous for dealing with the press as well.

    As for the numbers, in the month of August, Francoeur is .316 AVG /.881 OPS, while Church is .300 / .871. Not a huge difference. The biggest difference between the two has been in homeruns. And in the end, both teams seem pretty happy with the trade.

    In regard to the Yankees, I find it very, very hard to believe they even considered that they were “screwing” the Mets by claiming Carter. I doubt it even came into their mind.

  5. Darren Pare August 28, 2009 at 4:03 pm
    I hate the fact that we completely forget the credo innocent until proven guilty. I’m not talking about a court of law necessarily but at least have something resembling evidence before you throw names out there. It is just irresponsible and haters throwing guys not on their team under the bus.

    I have just had my first baseball novel published, 33 Summers. You can check out the first few chapters at http://www.darrenpare.com/ under the announcements link on the home page.