1/24/15

The Morning Report – 1-24 – Dave Cameron, Paul Swydan, Maury Brown, Michael Salfino, Brian Mangan

14 comments


Here’s the abbreviated Saturday report, featuring links to five of the top Mets writers in the business.

Fangraphs  –
Comment From Colin - Change in Citi Field dimensions: do you predict a large effect, small effect, or no effect?


Comment From Optimetstic - Will Dillon Gee be considered a fallback option via trade for teams that don’t land Shields? What kind of return will the Mets get?
Paul Swydan: If the Mets were going to be able to get anything good for Gee, he’d have been traded a month ago. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/fangraphs-after-dark-chat-12015/


Maury Brown/Forbes –

            The Mets ranked 21st in paid attendance last season with a total of 2,148,808 or an average of 26,860. That average was 64.3% of Citi Field’s capacity. So, maybe the Wilpons think the video board will not only inflate Citi Field’s valuation, maybe they think it will draw fans through the gate. http://www.forbes.com/sites/maurybrown/2015/01/20/new-york-mets-investing-in-massive-video-display-over-investment-in-players/?utm_campaign=Forbes&utm_source=TWITTER&utm_medium=social&utm_channel=Business&linkId=11850839



Michael Salfino/Wall Street Journal –

            The Mets’ plan to return to prominence on the strength of their young starting pitchers took a hit this week when the division-rival Nationals signed Max Scherzer, winner of the 2013 American League Cy Young Award.
Based on last year’s numbers, the Mets have little chance of competing with Washington for the National League East title. And they don’t fare much better in a composite of the best projection systems used by fantasy baseball enthusiasts.


Brian Mangan/The Read Zone

Apparently we are turning into Fire Joe Morgan. My apologies, but certain information must be disseminated to the public, and certain misinformation must be debunked. Let’s start with one that has bothered me all offseason, perhaps the most problematic theme of them all: the idea that the Marlins are going to be really good in 2015. They aren’t.

Let walk that back slightly in the interest of accuracy: it would be a big surprise if the Marlins were much better than a .500 team next year. They would need a lot of luck, and then some, in order to present a real challenge to the Nationals. If Giancarlo Stanton comes back healthy and as good as ever, if Mat Latos pitches a full season at a high level, if Christian Yelich emerges as a star, and if Michael Morse can rewind to 2011 and hit 30 home runs … then maybe we’re on to something. But even then, the Marlins would, in all likelihood, still be looking up at the Nationals.


14 comments:

Thomas Brennan said...

Fences: effect "small".

Not much to go by there. As I said in the fall, I'd have done more to help Wright, like 400 or 402 in center. But Wright seemingly did not advocate for it, so he only has himself again to blame.

Stephen Guilbert said...

Brain Mangan nailed this and I've been saying it all winter-- What is up with the love fest over the Miami Marlins? I do not see a good team there. 2/5 of their rotation consist of one guy who's perpetual hurt and has a terrible motion and the other is a guy who might take his talents to retirement.

Add that to them trading away two other electric starters (Eovaldi and Heaney) for two infielders who really aren't as good as people think and I hate what the Marlins did this winter. But everyone is crushing over them.

Best move they made all winter was getting Ichiro to be their 4th outfielder.

Zozo said...

I am one if those that think the Marlins did very good this winter. Their offense is stacked and pitching should be fine since they play half their games in the biggest park in the MLB.

Mack Ade said...

Miami may be one of those teams that will prove that trading a bunch of people doesn't always bring happiness.

Hobie said...

Now, Wilmer, there's a "no range" guy whose BB card you should tape in your locker-- Ernie Banks.

OK, half the HR, but the more I think of it... Let's play two.

RIP

joshapiro said...

If the Marlins lineup is stacked, so is the Mets. Marlins should have a terrific, young OF. I like Gordon, but I wanna see him do it again before I believe. I would've been upset if we traded one of our good, young, power arms for Martin Prado. Plus, with Salty, Hechaveria & the pitcher, they're getting zero out of a third of the lineup. But they have some nice building blocks that will be tough competition for the next few years. At least we shouldn't have to concern ourselves with the Phils or Braves for a while.

Mack Ade said...

I've said this before...

I only hope that the Mets haven't made the wrong decision in not trading a guy that has never thrown a major league pitch (Thor) for one of the many stars and/or prospects that have been offerred

Lew Rhodes said...

Barring injury, Thor will be the real

Miami will be 500 team, no better

Thomas Brennan said...

THOR IS SO YOUNG, HE'LL BE GREAT. Think of another tall guy who started much slower than Thor will who is entering the Hall: Randy Johnson. Lots of folks probably thought he was a huge question mark when he was 23

bob gregory said...

Like it or not. ..injury potential is a key aspect in deciding whether to make such a trade.
It seems pitchers are more susceptible to injury that significantly affects their long term production.
Does this make trading Syndegaard for the bat a better move?
How much does the quality of the pitching staff as a whole influence the choice?
How much does the quality of the other pitching prospects in the Mets organization influence the choice?
These are all aspects a successful GM is able use in making the correct decision.
Alderson is supposed to be able to be proven correct in the long run for the decision he makes.
No excuses if he keeps Syndegaard and Syndegaard fails.
No excuses if he trades him away and what comes to the Mets fail.
Syndegaard is a good potential test subject to see if Alderson is ever held accountable for the choices he makes.

Charles said...

There's no garentee that Harvey will still be dominant. I certainly don't expexct deGrom to be Harvey-lite like he was last year. Wheeler is probably the surest bet because he's steadily improving. Then we have Niese and Colon who are wild cards due to age and injury history.

Now the offense...it's even more of a wild card. The best bet you can make on this team is their bullpen.

This Mets team has a good chance to win 85 games....or 75.

I wouldn't be shocked if they are a .500 team. I'd be shocked if they made the playoffs. I'd be upset that ownership didn't do more if they finished a game or two out of the playoffs.

That said, keeping Thor is a no brainer. The ONLY reason they'll be competitive is because of their arms. They can't afford any other expensive pieces. And chances are that won't change in a year or two. So plain and simple, they gotta keep Thor.

Dallas said...

DeGrom is Harvey lite? At this point in their careers has Harvey really accomplished anything more than DeGrom? I'm guessing their peripherals through the same number of starts arent that far off either. DeGrom won ROY and tied a MLB record for strikeouts starting a game and was arguably one of the top players in the NL after the first few starts he had. So lets not call him Harvey liight!

bob gregory said...

Dallas

Very eye opening view point.
You have demonstrated a reason for re evaluation of both Harvey & DeGrom.
A reason not to get "stuck" by what we want to see or assume we should see.

joshapiro said...

I thought it would be closer, but after just taking a look at the stats, no knock on deGrom, Harvey was significantly better. deGrom was pretty awesome last year, but Harvey was just a friggin beast.

deGrom:
W/L 9-6
IP 140.1
ERA+ 130
FIP 2.67
WHIP 1.140
H9 7.5
HR9 0.4
BB9 2.8
SO9 9.2
SO/W 3.35

Harvey
W/L 9-5
IP 178.1
ERA+ 157
FIP 2.01
WHIP 0.931
H9 6.8
HR9 0.4
BB9 1.6
SO9 9.6
SO/W 6.16

Mack's Mets © 2012