Tom Brennan: Ex-Met Duke Snider; Megill is Splitsville; Voit vs. Vientos Thoughts

The Duke of Brooklyn in 1953

I don’t know why, but I thought about ex-Dodger and Met Duke Snider and wanted to write a little about him.

The great Brooklyn Dodger Duke Snider was once upon a time a Met. Hard to believe that he died 13 years ago at the age of 84.

First it was Joe D and the Duke. 

Then it was Willie, Mickey, and the Duke. 

A Golden Era in centerfield in NY.

The Mets fans got end-of-career Mets play from Willie and the Duke.

Duke heading to the plate at the Polo Grounds in 1963

In Duke’s case, he was a Met for one season, in 1963 at age 36, and in 354 at bats, was slashing at .243/.345/.401. In the weak Mets line up, he was respected and intentionally walked 9 times. He racked up 14 HRs and 45 RBIs.

That was a mere fraction of his 1950s performance. A little before I was old enough to watch baseball, in a 3 year stretch from 1953 thru 1955, the Duke was a total beast, averaging .330/.420/.635, with 126 runs scored and 130 RBIs, and averaging 42 HRs for 5 seasons.from 1953 through 1957. WOW.

The Duke started his career in the low minors in 1944, but missed 1945 and 1946 due to military service. In 1947, he made a fairly brief MLB debut, split 1948 between the minors and majors, and was off to the races in 1949. Likely, those two years in the military lessened his career HR and RBI totals.

Duke used to play here.

He, like so many greats, was supreme through age 30, not only rippling with power, but hitting a ton, at close to .310 in his 20 to 30 age segment.

Thereafter, though, in his last 7 seasons, age 31 through age 37, he averaged just 13 HRs per year. Part of that, to be sure, was his less favored home park in LA starting in 1958. Described, as I often do with Citifield version one, as “cavernous”.

He was also, statistically, per his Baseball Reference page, a plus fielder in his 20s, and a minus fielder in his 30s. Partly due to cranky knees.

Sad to say, we all get old.

Had he played in the modern era of 2023 instead, and signed a 10 year free agent contract after his age 29 season, the team would have gotten one nice, 40 HR, 92 RBI season at age 30, and then that average of 13 HRs as well as just 340 RBIs in 716 games, while averaging about around .280 or a little less.

So…the team signing what probably would have been a 10 year, $350 million deal, would have overpaid. A lot.

I often wonder who the next Met will be that we will sign a contract with for big bucks that most likely will go years past his prime. That’s just me, I guess. It happens a lot.

For those who saw prime time Duke, I hope this article elicited some fond memories, of a time when 4 of the greatest centerfielders of all time played for the 3 NY baseball teams - Joe DiMaggio, Duke Snider, Willie Mays, and Mickey Mantle. Actually played for 4 NY teams, as both Willie and Duke played for our Mets in the twilights of their careers.

If you could pick just one at the start of his career to be your centerfielder, who would you pick?

The Mets had another “Duke” many years later…El Duque Hernandez….who went 18-12 in 2006-07 as a Met, at the ages of 40 and 41, no less. He was 160-82 lifetime pitching Cuban and major league ball.

SPLITSVILLE IN METSVILLE FOR MEGILL

As reported in the NY Post…

Let’s stop splitting hairs…Tylor Megill will be GOOD this year:

“The data the Mets received over the winter on Megill’s splitter — which last year he dubbed the “American Spork” — indicates it could be in that realm as an elite pitch. 

“Am I going to call it Kodai’s split?” Hefner said. “I don’t know, but it could be. We’ll see how the hitters respond to it.””

THE ROSTER SQUEEZE SCREWS MARGINAL BUT VIABLE HITTERS

A topic came up yesterday: If Luke Voit makes the Mets, then Mark Vientos will lose the ABs needed to prove himself.  I look at it another way.

I (and likely most of you) don't want to see Vientos lose ABs. I don't know if Voit has an out of his contract when spring training wraps up if he has not made the team. 

Players in his and Bickford's situations are getting severely squeezed $$-wise. Bickford (a pitcher, obviously) has 3 full seasons in, but had to go to arbitration to get just 20% over MLB minimum, rather than the 10% above minimum after 3 years.

Amed Rosario has been solid for years.  He hasn't been great, but has 10.3 WAR, which is good. Speedy .272 career hitter. So he signs as a free agent at $1.5 million, at a mere twice the MLB minimum? Crazy low.

With so many teams willing to pay multi-hundred million contracts to the big stars, more marginal but good guys like Amed get heavily squeezed on pay. 

There is only meaningful free agency for the stars, or injured former stars that teams hope will rebound. Rosario is a prime example of how somewhat lower productive players like him get screwed.

Back to Voit. I do not think Voit is finished yet. Yet, back in 1969, teams had 15 offensive players, but today it is 13. That's a lot of jobs lost.  Back in 1969, with 2 more offensive slots per team, Voit definitely is on a major league roster.

Here’s some Brennan math:

There were 15 offensive players X 20 teams, totaling 300 players in a country of 200 million. 

Now it is 13 offensive players x 30 teams = 390 players, a mere 33% increase in offensive players, but a 70% increase in population. 

Players like Voit, who'd most likely be happy to be on any MLB roster, even at $1 million, and who likely can still play at a MLB level, are caught in the owners-created numbers game. 

My strong suggestion?  

Go back to 15 offensive players. To do this: 

Increase team salary caps by $2 million. Result? 60 more offensive players on MLB rosters would get to play. Teams could carry a 3rd catcher or a speedster or a slugger in his twilight, or a pinch hitting specialist like Rusty or Eddie.

Pitchers? Take a look at how many pitchers the Mets used in 1969 - 15. 

15 X 20 teams is 300.

Nowadays, the average is 30. 30 X 30 teams is 900. 

Drastic increase.

33% more hitters, 200% more pitchers.  Pitchers have it made, while hitters get laid - laid off, that is.  Why should hitters get screwed because pitcher arms fall apart so often these days?

Give each team 15 offensive players again, not 13, and Vientos will play and we can also find out if Voit is still a viable major leaguer without making it mutually exclusive. Then, if Voit made the team with a strong spring, and he falters like Escobar did last year due to age, you cut Voit after 2 months and bring up a now-slightly more experienced Acuna or Gilbert.  

However, while I present this, the owners will not agree to this - adding $2 million more in salaries, plus benefits and travel costs, would add perhaps 0.5% to a team's total costs - but the owners are getting by with the status quo, so why should they spend more dough?  And the players' union would likely be uninterested in going to bat for these veteran hitters.

WHAT ARE THE ODDS?

Vegas still has the Mets’ betting odds at 82.5 wins. Dodgers 103.5, Atlanta 101.5, Philadelphia 90.5.

AL? Yankees (who else?) are tops at 93.5, Baltimore at 90.5.