AAA-
Pill 1.2 innings 8 hits 7 runs 2 walks 1 k (awful)
Muno 3-4, 2b, BB
Tovar 0-3
Rivera 1-3, 2b
Kirk 2-4, HR
Reynolds 0-2, 2 k's
AA
Cecchini 0-4, 1 BB, 2 k's
Maz 0-5, 2 k
Conforto 3-5, 2b (gotta be entering the "promote to add a spark" discussion pretty soon, 40 man issue may hold him back t0 2016)
Nimmo 2-5, 2 2b
Fulmer 6.1 innings 7 hits 1 run 3 walks 6 k's (nice start, walks are an issue so far this year)
Koch 1.2 innings 1 hit 0 run 0 walks 3 k's (FB up to 96 out of the pen)
A+
Stuart 1-4, k, SB (Stuart is a sad case. Tools to help the Mets one day, but k rate is absolutely awful)
McNeil 2-5, SB
Smith 3-4 (raking)
Rosario 1-4
Whalen 4.2 innings 4 hits 3 runs 4 walks 5 k's (not overly impressed with Whalen, local kid or not)
Savannah
Guillorme 0-4, 2 k's (0 for last 10 with 6 k's)
Becerra 0-4, K
Reyes 8.2 innings 3 hits 0 er 0 walks 11 k's (absolutely ancient for the level, live arm, promote)
Duff 0.1 1 k
Big 2014 IFA signing Kenny Hernandez is now 3/43 with 11 k's...............
Cyclones season begins today
Conforto is playing well. But to bring him up as a savior for our offense I think would be a huge mistake. Let him learn to be patient, let him learn to refine his approach, no need to set him back.
What's the move? Obviously Wright goes to 3B and plays without any question. Do you put Murph on the bench and use him as utility IF? Attempt to deal him? Knowing how easily Wright could hypothetically wind up back on the shelf I'd have to think they'd want to hang onto Murph for insurance.. but it's also hard for me to envision him as a bench player (though it doesn't matter much)
I guess if we dealt Murph and Wright had another setback you could move Wilmer to 3rd more permanently but then you have to put Tejada out there at SS every day.
If Wright is back to almost normal, you'd have to trade Murphy.
If Wright is back to almost normal, you'd have to trade Murphy.
not a chance. I know no one has accepted a QO yet, but I don't risk having to pay 15+M to Murphy for one year.
He's not that player and no advanced metric invented is going to tell me that's a good baseball or financial move.
What's the move? Obviously Wright goes to 3B and plays without any question. Do you put Murph on the bench and use him as utility IF? Attempt to deal him? Knowing how easily Wright could hypothetically wind up back on the shelf I'd have to think they'd want to hang onto Murph for insurance.. but it's also hard for me to envision him as a bench player (though it doesn't matter much)
I guess if we dealt Murph and Wright had another setback you could move Wilmer to 3rd more permanently but then you have to put Tejada out there at SS every day.
Not necessarily, Reynolds is an option. He's 24 years old and all of his numbers are pretty consistent with what he'd done last year in AAA (other than his BABIP).
Yes.
I'd drive Harvey to the airport. 100% yes.
Yes 100%.
I actually wondered about that same question a couple weeks ago during one of the Kris Bryant/Bryce Harper discussions.
The guy is a fucking beast. I love Harvey and he has the stuff to be as good as anyone in baseball (and has looked the part at times already) but the pitching would be more plausible to recoup.
Easy yes for me. The Braves traded Shelby miller for heyward bay. I think we can do Harvey for the best (ish) hitter in the game. Plus I'm bored of being bored watching our offense. Plus our remaining rotation is still a top one (assuming health but then again Harvey could easily get hurt again)
Anyway, yes
Link - ( New Window )
Not exactly inspiring
Over a 162 game season, Stanton might have more impact. But in the playoffs, a great pitcher can win 3 games in a series all by himself. Even the greatest hitter needs help from the other guys in the lineup. No hitter can dominate the way a pitcher can in a short series.
Gaby Almonte
Tyler Badamo
Matt Blackham
Nicco Blank
Gaither Bumgardner
Kevin Canelon
Jose Celas
Michael Gibbons
John Mincone
Craig Missigman
Christian Montgomery
Alex Palsha
Ruben Reyes
Corey Taylor
Carlos Valdez
Ty Williams
Over a 162 game season, Stanton might have more impact. But in the playoffs, a great pitcher can win 3 games in a series all by himself. Even the greatest hitter needs help from the other guys in the lineup. No hitter can dominate the way a pitcher can in a short series.
As much as I love Stanton and drool at the thought of him as a Met. I agree - you take the rare ace over the hitter if your goal is to win the playoff games.
During a regular season a good hitter and goo pitcher both are directly involved in 600 ABs a season. In the playoffs the pitcher is involved in 40-50+ while the hitter only is directly involved in about 30.
Hitters can absolutely carry a team if they're on fire. Beltran did it with the Astros in 2004.
Yes, and that's why Stanton would make the Mets a better team overall. You still have deGrom, Thor (hypothetically) or Matz (hypothetically) with the capability of dominating a given series and carrying you.
Hitters can absolutely carry a team if they're on fire. Beltran did it with the Astros in 2004.
Arc,
Not so sure that's the best example to use when saying you take a hitter over a pitcher - to carry you to a World Series title lol.
Quote:
What Bumgarner did last year was basically unprecedented. I wouldn't even expect Harvey to do that (and I think Harvey is elite when he's on)
Hitters can absolutely carry a team if they're on fire. Beltran did it with the Astros in 2004.
Arc,
Not so sure that's the best example to use when saying you take a hitter over a pitcher - to carry you to a World Series title lol.
Ha, yeah.. I know. There are other examples though. Nelson Cruz in 2011? Stanton is the type of dude who could totally sway a series on his own with his power. We don't have anyone else like that on the roster or anyone even close. At least we have other arms with the ability to dominate.
Not adding him. The NEED to add him. He doesn't need to be 40 man added until after NEXT season which means if they add him know they may cost them another player and the guys who are eligible are plentiful this year.
Bowman, Reynolds, Fulmer, Gant, Koch, Nimmo, Gsellman, Becerra are all Rule V eligible
Reynolds, Fulmer, Nimmo and Gsellman are seemingly LOCKS. Becerra is going to be a tough call and I dount they are eager to lose Koch or Gant. They will treat lightly. Super two will be a consideration as well.
Looking it over quick, seems like there are a bunch of easy ones that will be freed up:
C. Torres
Colon and probably Niese (trade)
Campbell
Tovar
Murphy (let him walk or trade)
Mayberry
Edgin
Carlyle
Puello
21 innings 30 hits 8 walks 6 k's... not a typo. 6. He's been an abomination to this point. 6.16 FIP. THE WORST in the PCL (2nd worst is 5.84, 38 year old former OF Jason Lane)
2015...4.13 (4th worst mark in the PCL, worst is again... Jason Lane) and 2nd worst is someone named Ross Wolf drafted in 2002.
Career 7.6 K/9
Because he's actually been trending the WRONG way in terms of missing bats. He's also allowed 11 homers so it's not as if he's coaxing grounders in place of the k's.
April 5.54 FIP
May 5.82
June 5.93
The relevance is he's not turning it around, he's getting progressively worse
Link - ( New Window )
2. Siena (2b)
3. Katz (1B)
4. Bernal (RF)
5. Mathieu (DH)
6. Perez (3B)
7. Garcia (C)
8. Tharp (CF)
9. Reyes (SS)
P. Badamo
_________________
Siena is the best of the bunch, Mets have talked up Bernal in the past, Reyes has a good glove. Crap lineup prospect wise though. BK is stinky this year.
Link - ( New Window )
Link - ( New Window )
He's not that player and no advanced metric invented is going to tell me that's a good baseball or financial move.
Sorry in advance for the wall of text.
Here's an argument for giving a QO to Murphy that doesn't involve any advanced metrics at all: The total number of players who have accepted a QO since its introduction is 0. Zero. In three seasons. 34 offers have been made, and 34 offers have been turned down. Most of those players ended up getting more on the open market, but there are at least a few examples of players who, in retrospect, would have been better off accepting the QO.
If we assume that everyone who could conceivably be offered a QO will turn it down, then teams should offer the QO to everyone so that all the players who leave turn into compensatory picks. But of course, that's not the assumption we should make, because the 34 players who have turned down QOs before don't provide a guarantee that the 35th player will also turn it down. That being said, there's a simple equation we can use to determine whether the QO is worth offering (see, I lied, there's math involved - but it's simple math!).
Let's say that the probability Murphy will accept the QO is P, the value of the compensatory pick the Mets will receive is C, and the difference betwee the QO price and Murphy's actual expected value to the Mets (either on the field or in a trade) is V. We don't actually know what these values are, but two of those values are whatever the Mets happen to think they are - only P is out of their control. In any case, we can make our own best guesses for each of these.
Offering Murphy the QO has an expected value and an expected cost. The expected value is
The expected cost is
I'm going to pick some values now, you can pick whatever you want (if you're still reading). Let's pretend that P is 30 percent, C is $3 million, and P is $5 million (e.g. the Mets value Murphy's potential contributions for 2016 at $11 million. In that case, the expected value of offering the QO is $3M * (1 / 0.3) = $2.1M, and the expected cost is ($5M * 0.3) = $1.5M; the Mets would achieve a positive expected value by offering Murphy the QO, and should probably do it. Of course, I just made those numbers up. Maybe the Mets only value Murphy's services at $6M, think the draft pick only offers about $1M of surplus value, and think there's a 60 percent chance Murphy accepts a QO; in that case the math comes out strongly against offering one. Or maybe the Mets think, based on historical precedent, that the odds Murphy accepts the QO are only 5 percent, that the compensatory pick is worth $4M, and that Murphy's worth $14M next year, in which case offering the QO is obvious. The point is, the decision-making process here depends on several inputs here, and both decisions are in fact entirely justifiable as long as the inputs to that process have some rational basis.
tl;dr: Whether the Mets should offer Murphy a QO and whether Murphy is actually worth the QO contract value are related questions but not the same question.
I see what you're saying, but it really depends on what "P" is. We need Murphy to finish strong.