We watch our NY Mets, for sure, and we also watch our Mets prospects - and yes, we can easily start to love our prospects.
And why not?
We're BASEBALL fans.
Rooting for the Metropolitans.
And their prospects are OUR prospects.
So it is amazing (and a reminder of reality) to see that the Mets were only ranked # 19 out of 30 teams for prospects by Mike Mayo and his evaluating group of gurus.
See attached:
https://www.mlb.com/rays/news/2021-farm-system-rankings
They have no Mets' prospects in the top 10 (Jarred Kelenic, ex-Met, is sitting at a lofty MLB # 4); and no Mets' prospects in the next 10, or the next 10, or the next 10.
True it is that the Mets don't have one until # 48, with 19 year old C Francisco Alvarez, who given a 2021 season, I'd say ought to be top 20 next year.
IF Ronnie Mauricio? # 67. We may think he is the greatest thing since sliced bread, but Mr. Mayo sees 66 tastier slices, currently. Maybe next season, though, the beefing-up Mauricio is a top 30.
SP Matt Allen at # #75, Also, next season, maybe a top 30.
IF Brett Baty? # 94. Possibly creeping up towards top 50 next ranking cycle.
Outside, but probably close to, the top 100 are two players:
IF Mark Vientos, who hit very well in a limited stint in spring ball? Not in the top 100. But should be next year.
OF Khalil Lee, whom the Mets picked up this off season? Not in the top 100. I guess, after a hitless spring, he shouldn't be.
Former Met prospect Simeon Woods-Richardson, now with the Jays, is at # 87, BTW, and had a fine spring. If he does not pitch too much in the majors in 2021, he might be in the top 10 next season.
Even had the Mets kept # 4 Kelenic and # 87 Richardson, (and the as-yet unranked Josh Wolf and Isaiah Greene) they'd probably move up about 10 slots, but not into the rarified air where teams like Tampa, the Tigers, Baltimore, and San Diego soar. They are prospects-locked-and-loaded.
Give the list a look.
We may love our prospects - but 29 other teams love theirs, too. Fans of teams with top 10 guys are probably drooling. See where ours are ranked, relatively low in the top 100, and consider that a # 19 ranking is probably a pretty accurate slotting for these prospects.
There is little doubt, though, that this time next year, the Mets could conceivably could give the Mets 7 players in the top 100. How?
With those four very young, currently ranked Mets Top 100 players being a year older, plus the likely move-up of Mark Vientos into the MLB top 100, along with J.T. Ginn and Pete Crow-Armstrong (he of the 2 for 13 spring in ELEVEN games despite never having previously played a pro game).
Then, with 7 top 100 guys this time next year, we'll be smiling more broadly when we say how much we love our prospects.
And the Mets' much more likely top 10 team prospects' overall ranking this time next year (absent more talent-stripping trades) will be the objective indicator of our wider smiles.
LASTLY - LINDOR:
To me, this feels like the annual NYS government budget. Every year, I wonder, "how the heck are they gonna plug these budget gaps? Will they get a budget done?" And, somehow, every year they do.
When the currently embattled Cuomo first took office about 10 years ago, in the midst of the financial crisis, NYS was staring at a $10 billion budget deficit. Without Joe, Chuck and Nancy around to write huge checks back then, what was there to do? I figured massive lay offs.
Nope. It turned out that the calculation formula for the State's huge Medicaid budget line (which was calling for a large spending increase) was apparently quite screwed up - someone finally took a hard look at it - and several billion dollars were cut merely by fixing the complicated formula. Hard to believe, but true. Problem with that formula fix was mostly solved, and Armageddon averted.
So, the "Lindor Gap" may look mighty big as of last night, but somehow, I think a deal with get done. If not, then it doesn't. I am not one of the negotiators, it is out of my hands, wake me when it is over. I am not losing any sleep over it.
One last inane point - Lindor may be truly great - but not as great as Lew Alcindor...who you may know as Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.
14 comments:
You need to build a team from the ground up. Free agency and big contracts to older players can be great if they work out (Carlos Beltran, Mike Piazza, Keith Hernandez) but problematic if they don't and not always a good return on the investment (Bobby Bonilla, David Wright, Johan Santana, Jason Bay, Pedro Martinez, Luis Castillo, Oliver Perez).
Maybe with all the analytics people they have just hired, maybe they will make better decisions with long term contracts and better develop young players.
Perhaps even follow the winning formula Edgardo Alfonzo established in Brooklyn in 2019...nah...why would they do that? Who needs championships.
We have drafted wonderfully in the past three drafts.
Unfortunately, we traded many of these chips away.
Every successful team has a mixture of former draft picks, international guppies, trade players and former free agents.
I don't mind trading a prospect like Kelenic if I can get an immediate positive return from someone obtained in the trade. We didn't so off went Mets Twitter.
Hopefully, we have learned our lesson here.
John, we're finding out first hand how expensive free agency can be - Lindor negotiation is in effect a free agent deal (if it happens)
Keeping real star kids is important - distinguishing between the dime-a-dozens and the stars - developing Pete Alonso and Jeff M star types saves big $$ for years, which helps the whole thing work financially
Mack, very true. We knew Kelenic would be very good - but 4th best prospect in baseball? They either underestimated his ceiling or they gambled big. Keep the really good kids.
Tom as you said "Keeping real star kids is important"...trading Kelenic for a 2B when you already McNeil...was nuts but we learned our lesson right?
No. We needed a CF and traded for a SS when we had Gimenez. Is Gimenez a Lindor? Well he had a higher WAR in 2020 than Lindor but no. Will he have a higher WAR than Lindor in 5 years? Very possible...and cost a lot less...and allow you to pay a CF.
He who ignores History makes the same mistake. Brody and Sandy are both guilty of this.
On Kelenic: Wish we had kept it.
But it was all the Wilpons who had little money and a win-now mandate. Brodie should not have included him. Regrettable. But he was working within a given reality, a context that many critics simply wish to wave away.
Jimmy
On Lindor:
There's really no significant gap. The AAV is settled for the most part. He wants 12 years, the Mets offered 10. Let's split the difference and call it a day. If he's willing to reduce the AAV then, fine, let's go twelve. Lindor will not get a better deal anywhere else and he knows it.
In retrospect -- and even at the time -- it could be argued that Sandy misread the market and jumped the gun. He could have looked at all the shortstops entering free agency after 2021 season and decided to go after one of them, even Lindor, then. Instead signing Springer and solidifying elsewhere (extensions, etc). Kept Gimenez for another season at SS (which most of us were fine with). Built the pen. And so on -- keeping Wolf, Rosario, and the outfield prospect, too. Perhaps for a different trade. That is, truly embrace a two-year plan.
Instead Sandy went this route and put the team, and Cohen, in a tough bargaining position. Shrug. I don't know. This year we sign the deal and enjoy Lindor now and moving forward. I'm good with it. What's done is done. And, since we live in the present, I'm anticipating an exciting, highly competitive 2021 season.
Jimmy
One last comment on Brodie trading prospects and the pain of that:
He was sacrificing long-term for short-term. That's the way it works. Unfortunately, Brodie got very unlikely.
The dope never anticipated the pandemic. Last season should have been built upon a wonderful, joyful 2019 season where the Mets won 86 games and were finally good.
The Wilpons were never going to sign Wheeler, so Brodie traded for Stroman to plug that gap. And so on.
Building for short-term, and experiencing a lost season to Covid-19, was a perfect storm. You need some luck in this life.
Jimmy
Lets remember Steve is worth what 14 BILLION dollars and he's chasing the Dodgers so he has to sign Lindor or look like the Wilpons. Lindor is his "statement" move this off season so what's 350 million just get it done. The Dodger payroll is 50 million more than ours and Cohen knows it so to keep up he has to dig into his wallet alot deeper going forward but again I'm sure he knew all of this before he bought the club I'm just excited to see how all this pays out going forward LGM!
Good comments, folks.
Keep in mind that each significant player has two benefits:
1) What they produce (e.g., WAR)
2) Gate power and franchise value increase.
On # 2, Lindor has it. It is doubtful Gimenez will ever have much of it.
Also, yes, they did have McNeil when they got Cano - but they were really prying 57 save, multiple-years of control Edwin away from Seattle. They had to take Cano.
Yes, a misnomer to call it the Cano trade.
The Mets were coming off a season where they had the worst BP in baseball. A solid core, some interesting talent, but a pen that needed a lot of work.
Diaz was 24, came with years of team control, and looked like the best reliever in baseball.
Let's remember that the option that some folks liked was signing Kimbrel for big bucks (he got $43 million from the Cubs). Mets360, for example, has been merciless and willfully misleading in regards to that trade -- but they were the ones advocating for Kimbrel.
Fixing bullpens is hard. The whole thing is hard. I was always impressed that Brodie was actually trying to win, after years of lackluster Sandy punting at a time when the NL East was a disgrace: the Braves, Phils, and Marlins ALL not competing intentionally.
Brodie gave up too much, but it wasn't totally insane. Again, if Cano plays up to established norms, if Diaz is not a total shitshow, the Mets win the NL East and maybe make a run to the WS.
Noah was also terrible that year and the team was built around the idea of him being good.
THAT SAID . . . I decided that a good rule of thumb is not to trade for relievers. They are just too erratic; it never seems to end well.
Jimmy
Jimmy, true most times bullpen deals are a crap shoot - but when the Yanks swung those deals to get Miller and the laser-throwing Cuban, that was a stroke of genius.
It's why I hated the idea of keeping Matz as a starter - but was willing to see if he could be the next Hand or Miller out of the pen, given his live arm. You wins some, you save some, you lose some.
I don't think Matz has the elasticity or the durability or the toughness to be a reliever in the Miller mode.
He's a Siamese cat. It doesn't seem to be in his makeup.
But maybe you are right. Who knows!
A little more than a year ago, I really hoped that he'd finally turned a corner and was set to fulfill that potential. Maybe this is the year. Oh well!
Jimmy
It was as inane point.
Post a Comment