Mets Game 91: Win Over Pirates

Mets 4 Pirates 2

Mets finish their road trip 6-3 heading into the All-Star break. Is it good to finish on a high note or bad to have their momentum stopped?

Mets Game Notes

Dillon Gee was sparkling once again. Coming into the 2013 season Gee was projected by me to be a fifth starter, and Jeremy Hefner, a poor man’s version of Gee. Over the past month and a half, however, both are proving me wrong. Will they keep it up? We’ll see. It would be nice to see them continue to establish themselves.

The Pirates had one shot to break it open against Gee, in the third inning, but could only muster one run. After that, Gee cruised and pitched efficiently before running out of gas around the 95-pitch point in the seventh.

LaTroy Hawkins has been averaging about 92 MPH on his fastball this year, but turned it up a notch in throwing 95 beginning with Pedro Alvarez and through the end of his one frame. I guess he’s been saving that velocity for just the right time? He allowed a run but stranded Andrew McCutchen on third to end the inning.

It looks like John Buck has finally shaken off his 2 1/2 month slump. The key is being patient against inexperienced pitchers and going to the right side with two strikes.

Speaking of inexperienced pitchers, Pittsburgh rookie Gerrit Cole has raw talent but not yet polished — I understand completely why the Bucs left Cole down on the farm when spring training broke, and it wasn’t only due to starting the arbitration / free agency clock Cole throws hard — he was humming in the 97-98 MPH range — but his location is sporadic and he needs a lot of work on the mental game. Throughout his stint his body language was terrible — he was clearly uncomfortable and/or frustrated.

Pirates catcher Michael McKenry did a nice job blocking balls in the dirt. For the kids watching, hope you took note of McKenry’s method of using his hands to go after the ball, and letting the rest of his body move behind the hands. Contrary to Keith Hernandez‘s comment that McKenry was using “quick feet,” he actually was using quick hands. Wherever your hands go, your body will follow, so it’s best to move your hands first and get them to the ball on pitches in the dirt.

Ike Davis hit into a double play as a pinch-hitter in the ninth. It didn’t look like he was running hard out of the box. Acceptable?

By the way, Josh Satin went 1-for-3 with a walk facing righthanders in Ike’s stead. Just sayin’.

In the top of the seventh, Daniel Murphy was tagged out by Pedro Alvarez on a ground ball by David Wright. It was described as a “tough play” for Murphy, a “reaction play,” and the only criticism offered by Keith Hernandez was that “he should’ve gotten into a rundown.” Well, I’m going to go ahead and disagree. It was yet another terrible running gaffe by Murphy, and here’s why: the Pittsburgh infield was drawn in. When the infield is in, as a runner on third you have two choices: either you’re going to stick close to third and wait for a ball to enter the outfield, or you’re going to run home on contact. By Murphy’s aggressive lead, it is assumed his choice was the latter. The moment Wright made contact, Murphy should have head home and dealt with the consequences. Instead, he paused, then reneged on his original decision to go home on contact.

When Bobby Parnell entered the game in the bottom of the ninth, the SNY crew wondered aloud about the rumors Parnell could be traded at the deadline, scoffing at such a suggestion, because “why in the world would the Mets trade him when they finally found a closer?” Um, because closers aren’t terribly helpful for teams destined to finish last or second-to-last — not much value in someone who can close games unless there are games to close. Hmm … sound bite planted by Mets management? If so, expect another ho-hum trading deadline in Flushing. It sounds like Marlon Byrd will be sticking around, too, because the Mets reportedly want to “finish strong and build momentum into 2014.” Or, maybe they just need to keep momentum going after the All-Star game and sell as many tickets as possible before the end of 2013 — you make the call. This nonsense of keeping Parnell was further “explained” by Andy Martino, who still looks and sounds 13 years old despite the facial hair. Not that there’s anything wrong with being 13.

Speaking of planted sound bites, could Keith Hernandez gush any more about the “great” job being done by Terry Collins to “get everything out of his team that’s possible”? Really? If that’s truly the case, then should Sandy Alderson and his dream team be fired? Because last I checked, the Mets have been about ten games under .500 for the bulk of the season — and Collins is 30 games under .500 as a Mets manager (192-223). Every day I’m more amazed by the warped reality spewed by SNY. People wonder why I have a hard time calling myself a “Mets fan” — it’s garbage like this, in which we are expected to be morons and digest the absolute bull being shoved down our throats. I guess it works on those who don’t follow the games as closely (which is about 90-95% of the people who buy tickets to Mets games and buy David Wright jerseys).

I must confess to rooting for a Pirates win, because it would’ve been cool for them to have 57 wins at the All-Star Break, three years after winning only 57 games ALL SEASON in 2010.

Next Mets Game

The All-Star Exhibition is played on Tuesday at Taxpayer Field. The Mets next play next Friday night, July 19, hosting the Phillies. Game time is 7:10 PM and Jeremy Hefner is listed as the scheduled starter for New York; not sure who will be chucking for Philadelphia.

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.
  1. rob July 14, 2013 at 5:13 pm
    why do you have a blog if you have a Mets fan? Also, now I’m not sure, but I think Keith Hernandez is more knowledgeable at baseball than you? You’re a semi pro player. Great. Congrats.
    • rob July 14, 2013 at 5:14 pm
      if you are not a mets fan i mean…
      • Joe Janish July 15, 2013 at 9:54 am
        Why do I have to be a Mets fan to blog about the Mets? David Lennon, Andy Martino, Ken Davidoff, Adam Rubin, and others are paid to write about the Mets, and none of them are “fans.”

        As to the baseball knowledge of Keith vs. me, you are welcome to your opinion. I never claimed to know “more” than anyone else. At the same time, I try to impart what knowledge I have to help others understand the game.

        And further, playing MLB, in and of itself, does not automatically make one more knowledgeable about baseball than someone else. Trying to compare one’s “knowledge” vs. another is an exercise in futility anyway.

    • Jason M. July 14, 2013 at 7:37 pm
      Don’t mistake being a fan of the Mets’ history and lore, with being a fan (or a monetized victim of) the current mismanagement team that is currently running through our patience and pockets. Also, Keith Hernandez is so indifferent as a broadcaster — he’s inherited the Tom Seaver disease of not bothering to learn the players and referring to any non-front-line player as “young man” — that I wouldn’t expect him to pay any attention to a backup catcher on a small-market team like Michael McKenry.
      • Izzy July 15, 2013 at 7:45 am
        Excellent post Jason. Sadly, there is a cult that believes Alderson is a god and does no wrong. Keeping Byrd is the same failure as keeping Hairston was and keeping Reyes was, but the cult of Alderson is only here a short while, and the Mets record and real future is irrelevant to them.
  2. hart July 14, 2013 at 5:31 pm
    Gotta hope that talk about keeping guys like Byrd is just posturing buy the Mets in an effort to jack up their trade value. Clearly the team ought to worry less about this season and focus exclusively on the need to bring in some good, young position players. I watched the Futures game instead of the Mets today — both Syndergaard and Montero pitched effective innings, with Syndergaard, in particular, impressing me in that brief sampling. The pitching-future of this team looks bright indeed; now the Mets’ mandate must be to build the supporting cast at all costs, without any regard to how they finish this season.
    • Sidd Finch July 14, 2013 at 6:25 pm
      I agree and think the direction of this team based on where they play and their strengths should be focused on pitching, defense, and speed. Add a couple of power bats to the mix, and maybe Flores could be one of those bats, because I don’t hold out much hope for Duda or Ike.

      But under no circumstances should they trade Wheeler, Syndgaard or Montero. A rotation of those three accompanying Harvey could be the backbone of the franchise for the next several years.

      Their best trade chips right now are Parnell, Murphy, Byrd, and maybe Buck. If Hefner and Gee keep pitching well in the offseason why not look to move one of them. Grab either Choo or Ellsbury as a FA in the offseason. Then look to swing a deal for Kendry Morales to play 1B or see if Beltran would be up for a position change and an encore appearance in Flushing.

  3. crozier July 14, 2013 at 5:48 pm
    Yes, Ike trudged to first, ensuring he’d still be out even if the relay was mishandled. Not a good sign. So much for his putting up some decent numbers on the road before facing the home crowd post-break. This isn’t going to end well for him, I suppose.

    I wouldn’t mind Parnell being traded if the return is worthwhile; I’d love to see Murphy traded and Flores promoted. But trading Byrd makes no sense. He’s a reason to see the Mets play; ergo there’s value in keeping him. I might feel diferently if he’d bring value in return — but he won’t.

  4. NormE July 14, 2013 at 5:57 pm
    I believe that Sandy would trade Parnell/Byrd if the offer was a really good one (see Beltran-Wheeler). The fact that there may not be a trade doesn’t mean that Sandy didn’t try. Neither one is an untouchable.
    • Izzy July 15, 2013 at 7:49 am
      But the fact that Faireson has only made one move in July does indicate that, if you are right, he truly is a Failreson. Not trying is better. Good defense. Lol.
  5. thegeneralfamily July 14, 2013 at 6:01 pm
    Joe: I read your blog daily – especially your game recaps because I value your perspective on the game. I also tend to agree with a lot of what you have to say, and at points in the games (throughout the season) take issue with a lot of what the announcers “offer.” While I believe Gary is likely fed a lot of “plugging info”, I think Keith’s arrogance is responsible for a lot of the backward thinking he imposes. The Mets are mismanaged, seemingly at every level, but this has long been established. After a solid win to conclude an “impressive” road trip (yes, the bar is admittedly very low), it rubs me the wrong way to hear that you were actually rooting for the Pirates. You’re pessimistic about the direction of this franchise, as am I for the foreseeable future in terms of their ability to compete for anything other than 4th in their own division, but any semi-competent Mets fan realizes that if in fact Hefner and Gee are even halfway this decent the rest of the season then maybe we can go into next year hoping to be that “surprise team.”

    As an ex-Knicks fan who gave up on the team after Dolan repeatedly made fools of us fans, I don’t know that I’m rooting for the team so much as I am the individual players. All of them have their faults, but they mostly play hard and you can’t blame them for being who they are – Jason Bay sucked but he didn’t sign himself…

    I lost my point somewhere in the midst of this rant, but I think it essentially was that – this is obviously a dysfunctional franchise, there’s no doubt about it. It’s your blog and you’re free to write whatever it is that you want to, but as a reader I would personally like to see a reprieve every so often when the team “deserves” one. There’s a lot of things to be negative about with regard to this team, whether they win or lose a particular game, and it’s refreshing for you to point out the faults/flaws of all characters involved – I just don’t think many readers want to see that you’re rooting for the opponent unless it’s to get someone fired or a high draft pick…

    Just sayin…

    • crozier July 14, 2013 at 9:29 pm
      I won’t speak for Joe, but here’s my perspective: this is a blog about baseball first.. The Mets are obviously the primary focus, but Joe’s an observer of the game, and he’s unbiased and objective enough to derive pleasure from a good performance and a good story, regardless of the source.

      What makes this valuable is when Joe spotlights a Mets’ individual or team performance, you know it’s for real. True, every so often I get irritated when he goes into a cynical tailspin, but at least he’s no Hawk Harrelson, for which I’m grateful.

      • Joe Janish July 15, 2013 at 10:12 am
        Thanks Crozier, you’ve pretty much summed it up.

        To thegeneralfamily: thank you for visiting my blog and for sharing your thoughts. I hope you continue to visit and add to the conversation going forward. You may be right about Keith’s arrogance.

        Furthering Crozier’s comment: I love baseball, love to talk about it and love to discuss / argue about it, and that’s the point of this blog — that just so happens to focus on the Mets. If I lived in Cincinnati, this would probably be a Reds blog. There was a time as a kid/teenager I was a Mets fan but after playing in college the “fandom” disappeared for a number of different reasons. I rarely find myself “rooting” for one team or another at the start of a game, but sometimes find myself hoping one team beats another as a game develops. To me it’s more about the process, not the result, and the Mets, most of the time, disappoint me with their process. Though, lately I’m disappointed with many MLB teams’ process, so it’s not just the Mets (and perhaps I’m getting old and curmudgeony).

        Am I often “hard” on the Mets? Yes, because it sickens me that they play in the biggest, most lucrative city in the country and operate like a small-town franchise. It’s not fair to the millions of people forking over their hard-earned cash — they shouldn’t be responsible for ownership’s mistakes over the years. It’s also incredibly annoying to me to hear and see all the b.s. the organization gives their legions of fans — it’s disrespectful.

        • NormE July 15, 2013 at 11:12 am
          Obviously, we’re all getting old (older, in my case) but the give and take in this blog is healthy, amusing and insightful. There are some very intelligent baseball fans who participate in this forum. You’ve given them (and yourself) a venue. Take a bow, Joe.
          Besides, you are our “curmudgeon” and I (we) wouldn’t want it any other way.
        • thegeneralfamily July 15, 2013 at 10:56 pm
          I appreciate the response and, as stated, am grateful for your take on the game. I could not agree with you more about how it’s a slap in the face for this team to be run as if it’s a small market club, but they’ve been hooting and hollering about all the money they’ll supposedly have to spend this offseason, so I guess we shall see. The FA crop doesn’t look too strong so that may buy them another year of “just wait” but as long been the case the reluctance of the team to invest in the draft due to the buddy-buddy relationship Wilpon and Selig share is absurd.

          I can understand fandom “disappearing” – at least to an extent – when playing at a level above high school. That said, I still believe the Mets are the perfect team for someone with no allegiance to root for; they are almost always the underdog, and they always play hard. Whether they play smart (can’t help but think about Murph) is a different story, as is whether they truly deserve to win. But I certainly think it’s “exciting” to root for guys like Quintinilla, Byrd, Hefner, etc. Would I want them on a team I realistically expect to compete? Sure, but probably not in their current roles.

          It’s been a helluva hard time being a Mets fan ever since Endy’s catch, but I think we all are crossing our fingers that we’ve hit rock bottom already and are improving from here. We shall see…

          Thanks again, and keep up the good work.

  6. Jon C July 14, 2013 at 8:49 pm
    In regards to trading Byrd or others, its only worth it if getting decent return—some folks are taking a stance that Byrd won’t be around in a couple years when we are competing, therefore, might as well trade him for ANYONE, as anyone would be better than no one. A fair point, but I would also add that if Byrd makes the mets more competitive, it will attract free agents. You just don’t see free agents flocking to teams that are consistent losers. So if we want to a have a chance to sign someone decent, I think we do need to play some decent ball here. Just another point of view to consider.

    Only one inning in a meaningless game, but I like how Syndergard is built…looks like hes genetically engineered to throw heat.

    Also, in defense of gary/keith/ron, they have sit on a plane with these guys. Its easy to call these players out on a blog, but its a different story when you are sitting next to them. GKR are not media, so we should not expect completely unbiased opnions. I accept their “praise” for what it is. Being out of town with the MLB package I have listened to a lot of announcing teams, and GKR are the furthest from being a homer out of any of them…so I appreciate that

    • crozier July 14, 2013 at 9:39 pm
      To clarify a point I made earlier, I’d have no issue if Byrd were traded in a package including Parnell and others if it got us an impact player now or, at worst, beginning of 2014. Trading Byrd straight up for a prospect would almost certainly yield nothing. He isn’t Beltran; everyone can reasonably expect this career performance to be his last. If it helps the Mets win games – and it certainly has – I’d rather enjoy a few more wins this year.

      Is that short-sighted? If they do trade him for a prospect, catch up with me in a couple years and we’ll see how it worked out.*

      (*Of course, If some GM is dumb enough to offer a Wheeler, all bets are off).

  7. TJ July 14, 2013 at 11:01 pm
    I totally agree with the Collins campaign coming out of the booth. I generally enjoy GKR, but G’s sales pitch really turned mew off. Plus, the night he is selling Collins, Collins inexplicably pulls Hefner after the 7th, in a game he is dominating with a microscopic pitch count. Really?

    Regarding Parnell, I have to disagree, First I’ll state that anyone any everyone is tradable, based on return. Sure, ?I would deal Parnell for a young, controllable, MLB-ready player with all-star upside. However, I completely disagree with this notion that the Mets are a bad team, so they don’t need a close. Why? Because there is absolutely no logical acceptable reason in the world that the Mets can’t field a playoff caliber team in 2014. Any excuses or behavior to the contrary is BS. I’m one that will believe it when I see it, but after all this garbage the last 3 years, they WILL have money and MLB-close chips to fill enough holes to back young, quality pitching. They should be adding to Parnell in the pen, not weakening it, unless he brings back a premium player to fill an everyday hole.

    Regarding Ike, it is really really close to the time to move on.

    • Izzy July 15, 2013 at 7:57 am
      Inexplicably pulled Hefner!!! You are kidding of course. Is not the object of the to try to win? Pitchers have been pulled for a pinch hitter in the 8th inning thousands and thousands of times. In a tie game for a little detail. Trying to WIN. But the new generation thinks a manager fails because the starter did not throw 102 pitches. Another example of winning being irrelevant to these statistical lovers. It’s not little league. You play to win the game. There is plenty to pan Collins about. Do it for a baseball reason next time.
      • Dan42 July 15, 2013 at 8:36 am
        If there were no outs, or runners in scoring position it would have been a good move, but with 2 outs, no RISP, and an overtaxed bullpen, it was truly inexplicable, evidence being the same and next day results.
        • Steven A July 15, 2013 at 8:47 pm
          I believe it was at the beginning of an inning that he pulled Hefner. I think that terry even said he would not have pulled Hefner had there been two outs. Terry hoped to get a lead off batter on where the chances of scoring are about 50% with most teams. It didn’t work out but it is not a stupid move
        • Dan42 July 16, 2013 at 8:59 am
          It was the lead off spot, but with Valdespin hitting the odds are 3-1 against him getting aboard for the 50-50 shot at scoring, exactly the same as rolling a single dice for a number. In a different situation (2 of 3 of starter getting tired or ineffective, rested bullpen, better pinch hitter) it could be a good move, but at that stage of that game, with the starter on a roll with a low pitch count and a worn out pen, inexplicable is one of the kinder words I can think of to accurately describe it in polite company.
      • DaveSchneck July 15, 2013 at 9:33 am
        I have seen plenty of baseball in my day. Additionally, I am not obsessed by pitch counts, and was not in the dugout. That said, Hefner was dominating that game and appeared to have plenty of gas in the tank. If that was the case, then I stand by my statement. As Dan42 rightly pointed out, this was not the midst of a rally. Had the Mets had a baserunner and it was a non-bunting situation, I would have had no problem with it. I will suggest to you that throughout the history of baseball, there have been many more examples of a dominating and not spent starter being left in a tie game on the road with 2 outs and none on in the eight than examples of the manager putting up a pinch hitter, and a bad one at that.
      • DaveSchneck July 15, 2013 at 9:41 am
        One other note, Collins did not have Hawkins available, and had a kid that never pitched in the bigs in the pen as well. FYI – the game was in Pittsburgh, which is a road game for the Mets. As a baseball historian, I am sure you realize what that means about using your closer on the road – there is a good chance he won’t get in the game unless you get the lead.
  8. Dan B July 15, 2013 at 7:09 am
    Crozier, I endorse your endorsement of this blog. For the pass few years, if trading a player saved money, they traded him (Beltran, KRod, Dickey). If the player had a low salary and it might effect attendance, he wasn’t traded (Hairston, Reyes, Capuano, Izzy). Finances over team building. Complain about Collins or Alderson or Ike Davis but the real source of the Met’s problems has been the Wilpons’ financial mismanagement.
  9. Mic July 15, 2013 at 8:06 am
    The mets have 3 ready 1st basemen, and 3 plus at 2nd if you include Omar, murph, wilmer, satin,and turner.

    I don’t know but Pittsburgh might be a decent place for Murphy. I think Ike will come good but not necessarily in citified. I still think there is an essence that TC is part o the problem, but with options available the mets could take the easy way out.

  10. James July 15, 2013 at 12:06 pm
    Not a Mets fan…well this is the best Mets blog out there, most incisive and objective and though i would like for you to bleed orange and blue i understand.
    However the Parnell issue is huge…first because if you have followed the Mets the last 6 years you should know that they have had three fundamental problems as a team playing in a pitchers park and it’s not the lack of power hitting (fourth issue)…the three problems are finding good players to pitch the seventh, eighth and ninth innings. Finding and developing a cheap in house player to take care of the ninth means the difference between 75 and 68 wins which its of psychological importance. Also you want Harvey to get 14 or 15 wins and not get frustrated by top many blown saves. Rebuilding teams have a rocky curve of ascent that can be shortened with hard to find pieces like closers, set up men, good fielding players up the middle, and someone who can hit 30 Homers. Joe if you were a true met fan you would realize the psychological damage to the players and fan base of too many late inning collapses. Only God knows if this met team will emerge next year even if 2015 is more likely. So leave Parnell alone and find another edge issue to harp on, please.
    • NormE July 15, 2013 at 5:10 pm
      James, you have a good argument. The problem is that I don’t see the difference between 68 and 75 wins. Neither is good, but the 68 might move the Mets up in the draft.
  11. Joe July 15, 2013 at 2:10 pm
    Too my Terry love. I don’t think him as bad as some think he is, but the idea it is a slam dunk he should be re-signed or anything is silly. It sounds like they are homers or something. If the team doesn’t for the nth time fall apart in the second half, maybe, get back to me.

    As to trading, if Byrd et. al. can get someone in return, fine, but if the only thing he is going to get is a kinda maybe (as compared to your usual maybe) prospect, it would have to be weighed with their value now.

    Keeping interest for the rest of the year, including helping the players we are watching to see if they have potential by putting some good product on the field (if not, they just go thru the motions, since they are human like the rest of us) , matters too.

    Trading Hairston for some low level maybe last year didn’t seem to some of us much of a trade. If you get something for Byrd of actual use — especially if you can shop him with someone else to do so — fine. There are also pieces that simply don’t offer much for which trading for not much would be acceptable. Byrd is not that.

    Closers are useful for teams like the Mets for the reason suggested above. We complain when the team is dead. If the team will keep on blowing games because they don’t have a good closer and this causes problems throughout the pen, it will affect the team as a whole. If winning doesn’t matter, fine, but it matters to some people. And, it isn’t just winning. Good product improves overall play, including up and comers.

    The Mets given the WC and the average talent out there has a chance to with the right moves and luck to fight for the Wild Card in the next year or two. They need many things. If they give up one of the few things they have for a maybe, they will now need one more thing and MIGHT have another piece to fill. If someone can “wow,” fine.

    Wows rarely happen, especially when you are trading from the bad position the Mets are trading.

    • Dan B July 15, 2013 at 8:13 pm
      Cubs got a low level prospect for a Hairston who was playing poorly and overpaid. This past offseason the Mets trade a low level prospect (Matre) for an outfielder (Cowgill) who couldn’t make most rosters. Last year the Mets traded a low level prospect (Beato who is pitching well for Boston) just to watch Shoppach for a few weeks. Yet the Mets couldn’t get an useful part for Hairston last year and Byrd this year?
  12. Mic July 15, 2013 at 2:44 pm
    Once upon a time, 2008 roughly, the mets blew a great chance to go to the post season. Though I have blocked it out there were a triumvirate of late crashes.

    In one particular failure they turned down a bobby p for Huston street trade. Then bobby was barely in AA. I think that trade seals a playoff spot. To remedy this failure they went straight after Krod that off season giving up a first round pick (24th), to get him. There is a nice article out that talks about how that pick could have been Mike Trout taken 25th.
    Hindsight is great isn’t it. But my point is that the mets can’t trade a player they can’t replace (yet). they do have other assets they can trade. Dave Aardsma, scot rice, John buck, Murphy, Turner all who could help a contender. I doubt we see bobby moved.
    Note;I see Jenry is coming back. Could he be a bullpen candidate (again)? With Harvey up, wheeler up, synder farad and Montero knocking, where would Jenry fit? If he is healthy he could be in New York by September and may well be a surprise.

  13. argonbunnies July 15, 2013 at 7:20 pm
    Short version:
    A GM who can’t bring in valuable pieces for the future by trading Byrd and Parnell is not resourceful enough to help the Mets.

    Long version:
    I would rather follow a Mets team that loses 162 games in 2013 but makes tangible strides toward a championship run than a Mets team that loses 82 games in 2013 and looks poised to do the same year after year.

    If I’m the only one who feels this way, perhaps Alderson is playing his cards correctly by giving each year’s team a shot at .500.

    If I’m not the only one who feels this way, Alderson’s an idiot.

    If his media quotes are any evidence, I think he’s passive. He waits for markets to develop; if great opportunities fall into his lap, he’ll take them, and otherwise, he’ll keep waiting. The problem is that teams that need as much fixing as the Mets do have to push an agenda and create the markets they want. That other team’s stupid general manager who’d give you way too much talent in a deal? He’s not usually going to just materialize out of thin air; if he did, it’d be a 29-team race to get to him first. No, you have to seek him out. Alderson hoped the D’backs would check in with him before accepting the Braves’ pathetic offer for Upton. The Braves didn’t hope. They formed a plan, pushed hard to get their way, and succeeded.

    • Dan B July 15, 2013 at 8:25 pm
      Argon, I agree with you. I want good prospect nurtured and roadblocks (Murphy, who I root for, and Ike come to mind) gone. I care less if they won 90 games this year if it doesn’t lead to playoffs and a championship. I understand there is GM speak before deals are made but it is the GM speak after deals are not made that make me sick (how come the Mets don’t trade away players because other teams are only giving low level prospects but they also don’t trade for established players because teams ask for too much? How can it be both ways?) All we hear is that there are too many buyers this trade deadline and not enough sellers
      • Dan B July 15, 2013 at 8:30 pm
        Oops I wasn’t finished. Too many buyers and not enough sellers. Well Jeff Wilpon’s community college business class should of told him to buy when others sell and sell when others buy. This year is written off. Despite the PR spin, the Mets are not spending money next year either. Let’s use the situation to our advantage rather continual efforts to reach 500.
        • DavwSchneck July 15, 2013 at 9:49 pm
          Dan and Argon,
          I mostly agree with this. There is some value in finishing strong, so long as the strong finish is lead by players that will be part of the 2014 team. The worst case scenario is that the finish above the bottom 10 teams (no protected pick) but below .500 (not a strong finish). Byrd needs to be dealt not only for what they get back, but they also need to free up innings and ABs to further evaluate Lagares, Captain Kirk, Duda, even Andrew Brown and possibly Den Dekker.
        • Mic July 16, 2013 at 2:09 pm
          How? Ike hit pretty well last year eventually his defense, bat and pedigree were supposed to take him to lofty heights this year.
          In comparison Bobby is looking pretty good after several years of patience and luck.

          Bottom line, the next 70 games will say very little about the players you mention. Better that Montero, Syndergaard and Flores play, players who have not been tried at the ML level, but who have more upside.

  14. argonbunnies July 15, 2013 at 7:29 pm
    As for SNY, I don’t find the announcer biased beyond the usual factor of not berating guys you spend every day with.

    I think Keith is an emotional and opinionated guy, and a lot of what he says is not particularly objective. He likes Murphy because Murphy has generally worked and played very hard over the years. He likes Collins because Collins makes the strategic moves he (Keith) would make, shows passion without starting media trouble, and has presided over a team that has at times played hard despite being hopelessly outclassed.

    Gary is a die-hard Mets fan who’s seen a whole lot of bad and is eager to embrace any good, even if it’s short-term. I’m sure it makes him happy to see Byrd out there playing well every night. I don’t think the Mets or SNY has to tell him to say that.

  15. Dan B July 16, 2013 at 8:32 am
    dave, I was in agreement with you up to the “more time to evaluate” line. If the Mets don’t know what they have in those players who have been playing in the Mets system for years, then they need new scouts, not two more months of evaluation. I guess I get bitter since the Mets use the “time to evaluate” linf as code for “let’s put off investing in the team”.
    • DaveSchneck July 16, 2013 at 8:55 am
      To clarify, for like Brown, Kirk, Lagares, etc., it would help to get a bigger sample size at the MLB level. If Lagares and Kirk show improvement in their offensive game in the 2nd half, getting regular or platoon time, they may consider that they have a workable internal solution for CF. That to me is much more valuable than Byrd putting up 24HR 85RBI, leading to a couple more wins, and leaving. Brown to me has looked good in a limited role. He is not a starting OF, but he well could be a 4th OF, RH 1B and PH. That has value to the 2014 team. Regardless, I don’t see any of these players, sans Young, as filling the two key offensive hole – leadoff and cleanup. I could buy Young if he finishes like he has played so far and if they have a plan B. If they do not bring in a cleanup bat for 2014, they will continue this pattern of lying to the fans. I agree with you 100% about the double speak of evaluation time really meaning rebuilding and not investing, We all expected better, but as time has gone by and money is coming off the books, even that lame excuse is no longer valid. They have the balance of 2013 to make decisions, and there are zero excuses for not starting opening day 2014 with a team that can make the playoffs.
      • Mic July 16, 2013 at 4:20 pm
        Dave, your comments are intelligent so please don’t be offended. but in discussing sport there are no guarantees.
        Who is Eric young? What is the chance this guy who we picked up for virtually nothing will maintain? He might and we have touted him before. In 1999 we needed a leadoff hitter after beating around with Benny and jay Payton, so Phillips got Rickey Henderson. My point here is that identifying the need and filling it well is what GMs are supposed to do.

        i really llike marlon Byrd; the roles he fills:
        Leader. Yes, clutch hits, HR and decent defense. He is just as valuable as Young.

        • DaveSchneck July 16, 2013 at 5:38 pm
          No offense taken. The odds that Young can be an everyday quality leadoff hitter, based on his career so far, are quite low. That said, at age 28, if he kept up his current numbers, or improved, over the remaining 71 games, that would improve the likelihood that he could continue it in 2014. It would lessen the need. All your points on Byrd are fair, but unlike Young, Byrd’s is a FA after this season, and will be turning 36. The likelihood of him repeating the performance in 2014, along with the likelihood of the Mets resigning him, are very very low. That is why I would prefer to see the remaining 2013 innings and ABs in the OF go to guys like Young. Now, if they like Byrd enough to extend him right now, that would be a different story.
    • argonbunnies July 16, 2013 at 6:18 pm
      Dan, agreed 100%. As a fan, I want to see more of Duda to help make up my mind about what kind of hitter he’s likely to be.

      If management is at where I’m at, the Mets are in deep trouble. The whole advantage from knowing you’re own players is that you’re supposed to ahead of the industry consensus. Obviously the Mets aren’t the only team that fails at this (hope Cincy’s enjoying Cozart and Mesoraco over Gregorius and Grandal), but in their position, they really need to do better at trading away limited players before their limits become obvious. I bet at this time last year we could have gotten a haul for Tejada, but Alderson never considered that because he was enjoying the momentary productivity, same as the average fan.

  16. Vilos July 16, 2013 at 11:35 am
    Hello to all,
    This thread that started as a discusión about the blog has drifted to our periodic organization evaluation. Let me give my two cents.
    With respect to the blog, the writing, the knowledge, the general mets setup is what hooked
  17. Dan B July 17, 2013 at 6:39 am
    For the record, I was begging the Mets to trade Tejada last year because his value was high yet his minor league career and second half 2012 did nothing to support that value. I think the Mets were too busy patting themselves for not resigning Reyes to notice Tejada is a weak hitting backup middle fielder.