Home » 11-12 Offseason » Mets Re-sign Scott Hairston
19
January 5, 2012 11-12 Offseason Joe Janish

Mets Re-sign Scott Hairston

Stop the presses! Scott Hairston is returning to the Mets!

It’s true — we Mets fans will enjoy another year of Scott Hairston. This news certainly takes the sting out of losing Jose Reyes, and rounds out what is looking like a fabulous outfield.

Fingers are still crossed hoping that there’s enough money left to bring back Willie Harris as well.

Please do not contain your excitement — pour it all out in the comments.

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. JoeJP January 5, 2012 at 11:24 am
    Lol. He turned out okay though his end of the year injury made not getting rid of him at the trading deadline (if anyone wanted him) look bad in retrospect. And, I don’t know what prospect is ready to play in his place.

    I’m not saying anyone is going to be real excited about this.

    • HobieLandrith January 5, 2012 at 12:32 pm
      Prospect to play in his place? What IS his place? Bench warmer and RH pinch-hitter? Hmm … Josh Satin, Zach Lutz. Nick Evans would have been a nice fit, but the Mets would rather have a 30-something bit player than a 25-year-old who just might have a teeny bit of upside. And you’re telling me there wasn’t any minor league free agent still in his 20s available this winter who could have been signed to the MLB minimum and provided the same or better performance? Makes no sense.

      Isn’t signing washed up never-wases the reason everyone wanted Omar Minaya gone?

      • JoeJP January 5, 2012 at 1:37 pm
        If Nick Evans was so useful, I’m not sure why no one took him off waivers & the best he could do is a minor league deal with the Pirates. The other two might or might not be ready (one wasn’t called up last year) and at least one might still be tossed in as a back-up infielder/bat.

        His place was a useful pinch hitter/back-up OF with emergency IF ability with MLB experience. I really don’t care too much about him one way or the other really and if we are going to complain about something, he’s pretty far down there. But, go right ahead if you like.

        • HobieLandrith January 5, 2012 at 5:17 pm
          If Scott Hairston is so useful, how come the only team interested in signing him is the Mets?

          It’s not about whether or not you care about Scott Hairston, it’s about what is supposedly the “long term plan”. Where the heck does Hairston fit into it?

          Tho maybe Alderson is feeding him some of McGwire’s vitamins and knows he’ll hit a bunch of HRs, and the Mets can deal him before he tests positive.

        • JoeJP January 5, 2012 at 8:31 pm
          First off, sorry guys, it seems that Willie Harris is not coming back. Crushing blow!

          As to Hairston, it’s January 5th. Who knows who would sign him by Spring if he was available? Really, again, Hairston is just not who I really care about. Mike makes a decent point but really, who cares?

          Those who want any excuse to complain, probably. When the Mets are real contenders, Hairston’s slot will be filled by some other older vet, not some prospect. The long term plan is to deal with past bad financial decisions, which short term is playing on the cheap.

          The team has enough to worry about — finding one or more starting pitchers. Dealing with new relievers. Middle infielders that are young and/or inexperienced. A first baseman coming off a strange injury. A LF adapting to his position etc. And you are worrying about Hairston? Okay.

        • HobieLandrith January 6, 2012 at 9:20 am
          Forget it, you clearly don’t get it. This has nothing to do with Hairston. It has to do with the precious few spots on the 40-man roster, and, ultimately, the 25-man roster.

          But as you continue to say — who cares? Really, why should anyone care about wasting one of those spots on a guy who will provide absolutely nothing toward the Mets future, and who will be taking at least double the MLB minimum out of the team’s miniscule budget.

          As someone else suggested, we should continue to be pleased about terrible moves like this, as they are accelerating the Wilpons’ self-destruction.

          And yeah, who cares if the Mets suck for the next five years? We can go to Yankees games instead.

      • Mike B January 5, 2012 at 2:09 pm
        The problem is the spot Harriston fills is not meant for a prospect. You never want to call some one up thats playing everyday in the minors and sit him on the bench in the majors. Im with Kranepool, at this point the worse it gets the better it is for us in the long run. I dont want to be 10 games out of the wild card every year, but more like 25-30 games out.
  2. gary s. January 5, 2012 at 12:11 pm
    Can Chin Lung Hu be far behind?
  3. Mike B January 5, 2012 at 12:44 pm
    This is a waste, he will be 41 when the Mets are ready to contend for a wildcard in 2022.
  4. Kranepool January 5, 2012 at 12:55 pm
    Not to worry. If you believe, as I do, that the Mets cannot be fixed until the Wilpons are forced to sell–both because their financial pressures have cut the payroll from over $130 million to around $100 million (including the dead weight of Bay and, I’m sorry to now say, Johann) and because Jeff Wilpon is a entitled moron– then bad is good. Given the loss of Beltran and Reyes, and the weakness of the rotation, this team could go down to 70 wins (and be mind-numbingly boring). If that drives attendance down another few hundred thousand, the increasing revenue losses and the Wilpons’ reported debt loads could force them to sell (I don’t see investors bailing them out in the currently proposed minority offering…they’ve been unsuccessfully trying to raise equity money for a year and a half now). So, perverse though it may seem, the worse 2012 is, the better the chances of new owners by 2013.
    • Steve S. January 5, 2012 at 4:59 pm
      Attendance will be down to under 1.7 million this year, but the Wilpons may hang on for a couple more years (with the help of the bankers and Selig). My hope is that the Wilponzis and Katzscammed are lying about the minority investors ponying up $20 million each this month!

      The Mets will be bad—between 75-79 wins.

      New owners by 2013? I hope!

  5. Rob January 5, 2012 at 1:21 pm
    Not to mention that the worse the Mets play in 2012, the better position they’ll have in the draft. I’m figuring that three or four years of really bad finishes will position them nicely for the minor league organization of the year award in 2015 or 2016. That’s when they can fold the team and simply play meaningful games in Buffalo and Binghamton.
  6. DaveSchneck January 5, 2012 at 1:33 pm
    Looks like the box of chocolates worked with Scott. Not a bad reserve OF/PH, even for a 2nd division team…he at least can play CF in a pinch. I am going to try to hold out my excitement until the announce the re-signing of Livan Hernandez.
  7. argonbunnies January 5, 2012 at 4:13 pm
    Every time we need to fill a spot that may or may not get much playing time, I think of how the Phillies pickd up an OF reserve in spring 2006. This guy had some tools, had taken a long time to develop, had hit a little in his age 25 season, had mostly sucked in his age 26 season, and had lost his age 27 season to injury.

    That guy was Jayson Werth.

    Was he a long shot? Yes. Was it likely he’d pan out the way he did? No. But if you keep trying with players like that, maybe one of them does give you a pleasant surprise. If you keep bringing in Scott Hairston, what you get is… Scott Hairston.

    A winning team that needs a pinch-hitter vs lefties and an OF backup should sign Hairston. A non-contender like the Mets should sign a handful of wannabe-Werths.

    • NormE January 5, 2012 at 4:31 pm
      Hopefully a guy like Loewen could be that guy.
      • argonbunnies January 6, 2012 at 4:12 am
        Could be! Let’s get more of ’em!

        I remain vaguely interested in Mike Baxter, actually. .310/.390/.490 at AA and AAA in ’09 and ’10 pre-injury. I thought his acquisition might have been a steal… But then we gave him no playing time, and DFAed him pre-Rule 5. So I dunno if he was ever seriously considered or not. If I remember right, though, he did re-sign with us, so could have another shot…

    • HobieLandrith January 5, 2012 at 5:20 pm
      Exactly! SOMEBODY GETS IT!

      JoeJP are you reading this?

    • JoeJP January 5, 2012 at 8:33 pm
      Norm has a point and the Mets have a lot of other things to worry about. So, they find one slot where they play it safe. Big deal.
  8. argonbunnies January 6, 2012 at 4:37 pm
    Anyone else in the Mike Baxter fan club?