Mets Minor League Blog - Latest Comments

Re: The Granderson Analysis

jshapps — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 13:20:21 -0000

Agreed. It's not a perfect situation, but it's the best fit available right now for an amount that shouldn't bust the budget. Maybe more importantly, what was the realist Plan B?

Re: The Granderson Analysis

Butch Huskey — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 13:15:34 -0000

I see the thinking beyond the "Granderson is only replacing Byrd" logic, except that I think Granderson's floor is comparable to Byrd's (2013) ceiling. Clearly you're paying more for Granderson, but his potential vastly exceeds Byrd's.

Re: The Granderson Analysis

Mark Kelly — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 13:06:50 -0000

I'm torn... happy mets actually signed a player of significance... Outfield defense should be pretty awesome with Lagaras in CF, Young/Grandy in LF/RF all 3 are above average defensive players who can cover a lot of ground.

But as people are saying on Twitter, really in essence all this does is replace Marlon Byrd, at a much higher cost... Not saying Mets should have kept byrd at all, just this doesn't make the mets better than they were last year YET. Sure he's a bigger name, and him, with Young and a full season of lagaras will probably add 1-2 wins on runs saved, but offensively speaking mets are in the same spot as 2013.

Wright, Granderson, Murphy = Wright, Byrd, Murphy...

Plus the comps to age and production about Granderson don't bode well for 2016 & 2017 potentially

Off-season is by no means finished yet, but another piece or 2 still needs to be brought in before I'm going to really start getting excited.

good start to shut up the constant gripes about spending... Still need to add more.

Re: The Granderson Analysis

MookiesTheMan — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 12:55:33 -0000

The 4th year bothers me only if the payroll isn't back up over 120+ million in the next couple of years. In this market, you need to be able to absorb some off years on the back end of any big deal.

If the payroll is going to hover around 100 million (or less), then I like the move only if they are going to trade him once he rebounds this year. Next year's FA OF market is looking pretty bleak, and Granderson might have strong value after a rebound season and 3 years on his contract, especially to an AL team. Or maybe they trade him after year two.

And even if the payroll is going to increase, it might be wise to dangle him in offseason trades once he rebounds, given next year's OF market and Granderson's age.

Either way - it's good that the Mets are adding actual MLB players who have real value. The team desperately needs assets of any kind.

Re: The Granderson Analysis

Henry Johnson — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 12:45:02 -0000

I'll go with option 3. Granderson is a huge upgrade to our team. He will be amazing in the clubhouse, and I'm sure fans will love him. Of your options, I'll go with number three. In four years the Mets will be able to carry a payroll worthy of its own market either because the Wilpons can spend or they have been bought out.

Re: The Granderson Analysis

Butch Huskey — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 12:36:11 -0000

Toby, I don't love the deal for all of the reasons you've mentioned, but ultimately this is the going rate for a power hitting outfielder in his early 30s. There are no other players available with Granderson's upside, at Granderson's cost. If he had duplicated his 2011-2012 performance last year, he would be looking at a contract close to twice the total value, plus an extra year or two, and we're not even having this conversation.

Ultimately the fourth year is the price you pay for a guy who can legitimately hit 30+ home runs. Not many of them out there, period, and even fewer are free agents.

Re: The Granderson Analysis

Kyle DeLeon — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 12:35:27 -0000

Although a 3 year deal would have been more palatable..... I think I like this deal, in line with market value, he walked in line with career norms last year if he brings K's down a little then his K/BB is back at league avg. Although his profile and comps scare me I believe his defense and slugging will make this alright The diminishing returns of 3 center fielders is overblown ... prices go up this is not the same market as last year, 5 years ago or 15 years ago... This is what this kind of player costs and if he's a 2 win player in years 3 & 4 it becomes a win. Let's just hope he can be a 3-4 win player in years 1 & 2....

Re: The Granderson Analysis

Julian Mannino — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 12:32:41 -0000

15 million a year for a guy who can hit home runs, runs well and is not a Duda out in the outfield is not a bad deal, even at 4 years.

Re: Mets Sign Curtis Granderson for Four Years $60 Million

BK_Machetero3191 — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 12:18:30 -0000

Oh well......i know Toby isn't gonna like this one but at the very least it improves us over what we had....i guess all we can do is hope...i for one am optimistic and i like the move =)

Re: The Doug Fister Trade in Mets Prospects/Assets

kasper — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 10:59:27 -0000

Two reasons why I probably wouldn't have parted with Montero for Fister:

1) Fister is only under team control for 2 years, and I don't see the Mets competing in 2014. Montero is a risk, as is any prospect, but I wouldn't want to give up 5-6 years of team control for 2 when the Mets won't be competing in one of those years.

2) This goes along with point 1, but if the Mets only have about $20M or so to spend, and they spend $7M (projected arbitration salary) on Fister, there isn't much room to add another OF let alone fill other holes. So, you aren't just giving up Montero, you are giving up valuable salary room as well. Granted, Fister is a bargain at that price, but with the Mets dire need for bats, they can't afford to commit $7M to another pitcher right now.

Re: The Doug Fister Trade in Mets Prospects/Assets

Saratoga_Jon — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 10:59:13 -0000

Just wanted to comment that I'm a BIG fan of this segment, Toby.

As a fairly avid follower of our farm system, I often find myself asking what it may have cost the Mets to pull off some of these deals or be in that conversation.

Thank you!

Re: The Doug Fister Trade in Mets Prospects/Assets

oleosmirf — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 08:05:42 -0000

Judging prospects is more than just comparing statistics. Potential plays such a large role

Re: The Doug Fister Trade in Mets Prospects/Assets

amazins8669 — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 07:50:04 -0000

No he isn't....Montero's numbers blow Ray's out of the water and in terms of FIP deGrom is far closer.....why are we all scouting the box score all of a sudden? This isn't how prospecting works.

Montero also dominated in AAA....Montero is probably a B+ prospect while Ray is a B-

Re: The Doug Fister Trade in Mets Prospects/Assets

Zach Ripple — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 06:17:37 -0000

Maybe I really am overrating Mets prospects, but Montero is a far better prospect than Ray, and I like him enough that I wouldn't have made a trade of Montero/Edgin+ for Fister, who I think is overrated, gives up a ton of hits and wouldn't be able to improve in Citi Field as much because he's already a ground-ball specialist. He gave up far more hits than innings pitched last year, and that doesn't bode well for his future, especially now that he's entering his 30's. I'd rather give Montero a chance to establish himself and have him cheap and under control along with Harvey, Wheeler and Syndergaard for a while to come.

Re: Top 41 Prospects Process | Mets Minor League Blog

Peter — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 05:59:12 -0000

I find it curious you are soliciting our enthusiasm for a supposed 2014 Prospect List when the 2013 Prospect List was never posted at any time prior to or during the season - now we just skip a year and go on believing all will be well? Why, it's like Mets management.

Re: Top 41 Prospects Process | Mets Minor League Blog

Marcus — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 02:08:29 -0000

This might seem like a strange question, but where are the 2013 Top 41 Prospects?

Re: The Dexter Fowler Trade in Mets Prospects/Assets | Mets Minor League Blog

Marcus — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 00:53:24 -0000

I would go Gee and something else for Fowler. Truth is, Gee isn't very talented. He was always assumed to be a AAA guy/spot starter coming up. He's succeeded, but there's only so long you can sustain success while having an innate lack of talent. So if the opportunity came along to get Fowler for him, I'd do it, because I have to expect Gee will finally exhaust what little natural talent he does have. He's a guy who survives on a lot of guts.

There's much more talented players, like Pelfrey, who can't compete because they're nervous on the mound. With Gee, he's got the guts to survive, but the raw physical talent just isn't there in enough quantity to sustain success. And so if a player like Fowler came along for Gee, I'd have to pull the trade.

Last year when Gee was awful to begin the season I said, oh there it is. He's done. I knew it. And then he got it together and proved me wrong again. He's quite a remarkable player but I still have my reservations about him.

Re: The Doug Fister Trade in Mets Prospects/Assets

ClydeBasil — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 00:38:33 -0000

tobys point is that you shouldn't just speak in generalizations because that makes for a lousy/boring debate.

Ah, ill help you out
* via fangraphs

Ray 21 at AA: (2013 season, now he's 22)

ERA: 3.72 FIP: 3.42 IP: 58 K/9: 9.31 BB/9: 3.26 K/BB: 2.85 LOB%: 71.1

Montero 22 at AA: (2013 season, now 23)
ERA:2.43 FIP: 1.88 IP: 66.2 K/9: 9.72 BB/9: 1.35 K/BB: 7.2!!! LOB%: 68.7

Degrom 24 at AA: (2013 season, now 25)
ERA: 4.80 FIP: 3.70 IP:60 K/9: 6.60 BB: 3.00 K/BB: 2.2 LOB%: 62.1

Montero is much closer in value

Re: The Dexter Fowler Trade in Mets Prospects/Assets | Mets Minor League Blog

Marcus — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 00:35:31 -0000

It is really an outstanding metaphor.

Re: The Dexter Fowler Trade in Mets Prospects/Assets | Mets Minor League Blog

Marcus — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 00:34:48 -0000

Try again. Gentry is plenty special.

Re: Top 41 Prospects Process | Mets Minor League Blog

Marcus — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 00:28:46 -0000

I've always had Nimmo as the #1 prospect in the system but I realize he's got to earn it and get closer to the big leagues before he gets that distinction. Nimmo and Wheeler are the Mets high priests for me.

Re: Top 41 Prospects Process | Mets Minor League Blog

Marcus — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 00:26:28 -0000

Indeed it does. A sort of circular logic.

Re: Top 41 Prospects Process | Mets Minor League Blog

Marcus — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 00:24:28 -0000

I'll be campaigning hard for Robert Whalen out of Davenport, Florida.

Re: The Doug Fister Trade in Mets Prospects/Assets

Marcus — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 00:05:32 -0000

I had Fulmer, Valdespin, and Edgin as equivalents but I didn't put a lot of research into it. I'd be hesitant to deal Montero for Fister because of my concerns about Fister's arm strength.

Re: The Doug Fister Trade in Mets Prospects/Assets

Sylvan — Thu, 05 Dec 2013 23:31:02 -0000

Tejada is waaay more valuable than Lombardozzi, but yeah, I'd still have pulled the trigger on that, easy.

Fister would be clearly the #1 starter in our rotation while Harvey is out, and perhaps a bigger upgrade than anything on the FA market short of Cano.

Losing Edgin just isn't a big deal. He's a nice piece, but Scott Rice is still around and there's the Kolarek/Leathersich/Huchingson/Gorski pile to draw on for lefty depth.