Amen to that. There’s such a range of talent though—from you & say, Mike McGann at one end of the spectrum to pure garbage on the other—it’s difficult to imagine what the vetting process would be (for credentials). You report & opine, many just whine & opine.
“2…. I think that Omar's philosophy that subs should possess the ability to play multiple positions has cost the Mets victories.”
I agree that an insufficient bench has caused the Mets victories, but I attribute that more to talent-level than philosophy. A pure DH is not that great an asset in the NL, while flexibility in the double-switch gambit is.
IF 2 or more of my regular OF could be competent in CF, I would want two offensive “corner guys” (preferably one B/L one B/R) on my bench, a defensive MINF, catcher & an “other.” If I have only 1 competent CF in my starting OF, then yes, an all-pos 4th OF is a necessity—and Angel fits that bill better than, say, Endy. 5 Craig Biggio’s would make a nice bench too.
 |
| Michael G. Baron |
The Mets only have one “regular” outfielder signed up for the long run… and he’s a left fielder (Jason Bay).
In the current Mets’ pecking order is: Carlos Beltran, Angel Pagan, Kirk Nieuwenhuis, Matt den Decker, Darrell Ceciliani, and Gilbert Gomez.
You wouldn’t sign Beltran again…
Pagan is great at what he does, but if you use him long term, you need a big stick in right field…
Captain Kirk still has holes in his swing to fill (played well yesterday)…
Den Dekker is a white Pagan…
Can the Mets afford to wait for Ceciliani? He will not be ready by 2011 (you could play Pagan there once Carlos is gone).
Are you happy with an outfield of Pagan, Bay, and Fernando Martinez in right?
No comments:
Post a Comment