AAA TBD
AAA2 TBD
AA KAY
A+ Dibrell
A TBD
AAA
Haggery 2-5, 2 k's
Gimenez 0-4, BB, K
Mazeika 1-5, 2b, K
Toffey 0-2, 2 BB, K (Extremely early but... 2/19 with 9 k's and 7 walks to start. Yikes)
Gibbons 5 innings 5 hits 1 run 0 walks 8 k's
Zanghi 2 innings 2 hits 0 runs 0 walks 2 k's
Villines 2 perfect 3 k's
A+
Tiberi 1-4, BB, 2B
Cortes 0-4, BB
Brodey 2-3, BB, 2B
Lindsay 0-4, 2 k's
Smith 4.1 innings 11 hits 3 runs 1 walk 3 k's
A
Mauricio 0-5
Vientos 1-4, K
Dirocie 2-3, HR
SWR 3 innings 1 hit 0 runs 0 walks 5 k's
Little Willy T 5 innings 4 hits 2 runs 1 walk 4 k's (Starter kit Harol)
Mitchell 1 perfect 2 k's
Speaking of Tejada, what happened to him? I thought the Mets re-signed him in ST to a minors deal.
Speaking of Tejada, what happened to him? I thought the Mets re-signed him in ST to a minors deal.
He's missed games leading to only 22 at bats in 5 games. Not sure if the reason he's missing games is an injury. He did real well in the limited ST action he got against actual big leaguers. Think it might be a tad early to interpret anything.
Ronny's 0-fer looks bad, but he hit 2 bullets that were turned into outs by the Braves. In the field, he made a nice turn on a DP -- they were in a shift and Ronny was almost on the 2B side of the infield.....this kid is smooth. The 1B Sharp made some good plays around the bag, and also roped a 2-out RBI double. Not so impressed with Vientos' fielding at 3B, he seems to have limited range - I've noticed this on a few games.
I think it's Szapucki's turn tonight, limited by pitch count but should get the start.
Quote:
is off to a rough start. I know some people on here thought he was more Rosario and less Tejada (Ruben Tejada), hopefully we can pump the brakes on those comparisons (for now at least).
Speaking of Tejada, what happened to him? I thought the Mets re-signed him in ST to a minors deal.
He's missed games leading to only 22 at bats in 5 games. Not sure if the reason he's missing games is an injury. He did real well in the limited ST action he got against actual big leaguers. Think it might be a tad early to interpret anything.
Absolutely. and I'm obviously hoping Gimenez becomes a great pro, just not as confident of it as some people.
Yea with the depth situation on this team there's no reason to even think about him until next year. He's still 1 of the youngest players in AA. Next year if there's an opening with a Lowrie-type injury or Cano needs to start moving off 2B more regularly and he's doing well maybe he enters the conversation, but even that might not be necessary.
Ideally the NL gets the DH in 2021 for Cano and he's ready to come up then for 2B.
So give him extra time at AA and AAA. No downside to that
So give him extra time at AA and AAA. No downside to that
Cano is 36. His end is unlikely to be a long way off. At least at 2B.
without exception it is always better for your prospects to be better than worse.
for may reasons.
Gimenez is blocked for the foreseeable future. Between Rosario, McNeil, Cano, Lowrie, Davis, and then nipping at his heels (even from a distance), the likes of Vientos, Newton, Mauricio and more.
Being the top rated prospect in the system, it's in the Mets best interest for Gimenez to play as great as possible and increase his value, perceived or real.
So worry about him or not (and I was not worrying about him), it's better for the Mets for him to be great. Now (as well as going forward).
One thing to keep an eye on is that month over month last year he was remarkably consistent and didn't really have any extended slumps. Will be interesting to see if that tracks again or if he has a more extended slump at some point.
One thing to keep an eye on is that month over month last year he was remarkably consistent and didn't really have any extended slumps. Will be interesting to see if that tracks again or if he has a more extended slump at some point.
My pump the brakes comment was just about some fans having high expectations. Not me worrying about him.
I like Gimenez, but I do see a lot of similarities with Tejada. He does everything decently, nothing great.
Look at Tejada's 19 year old season in AA. Carbon copy to Gimenez except Tejada played 134 games in AA at that age and Gimenez played just 37.
At 20, Tejada was in AAA (and Queens).
Quote:
apologies if that's over-reading it, I certainly agree with your last post entirely. Statistically his performance at AA last year set a surprisingly high bar. We could probably count on 1 or 2 hands the number of teenagers that posted a .700 OPS at a premium position at that level. If he improves upon that this year he will likely be a top 20 prospect heading into next year and even if it remains similar there could still be some developmental positives that move him up.
One thing to keep an eye on is that month over month last year he was remarkably consistent and didn't really have any extended slumps. Will be interesting to see if that tracks again or if he has a more extended slump at some point.
My pump the brakes comment was just about some fans having high expectations. Not me worrying about him.
I like Gimenez, but I do see a lot of similarities with Tejada. He does everything decently, nothing great.
Look at Tejada's 19 year old season in AA. Carbon copy to Gimenez except Tejada played 134 games in AA at that age and Gimenez played just 37.
At 20, Tejada was in AAA (and Queens).
Carbon copy misses a lot of context.
a) Tejada's 19 year old season was an outlier. In his 10+ year career it was the only year other than rookie ball that he posted better than average offensive production (rc100+). It was also just 1 year removed from an awful year at A+ where he'd hit .220 the with a slugging % under .300. In contrast, Gimenez has been better than league average every year of his so far and at every level. So his hitting performance was part of a trend, not an outlier.
b) Gimenez was/is a higher pedigree prospect because he has undeniably better athletic tools. They may not be elite but they are at least above average, whereas Tejada's athleticism was average at best or below. If Gimenez has the hitting ability Tejada had, with more athleticism, and a better work ethic, that's likely a very good starting level player.
c) Tejada's work ethic was a well known problem that even Reyes commented on publicly. It's probably a big reason he regressed over time. Gimenez is supposedly opposite that.
And even with all that said, Tejada wouldn't be a terrible outcome. His first 2 seasons were better than Rosario's. Over those 200+ games he hit almost .290 with a good OBP and decent defense. So it's not like he was a total bust. If anything he overachieved his prospect pedigree. He just never progressed and worked hard enough to become a true full time player.
Athletic ability, work ethic, and other intangibles should eventually show up on a stat sheet and propel Gimenez (if they are differentiating traits)
I think people (not you necessarily Eric) see minor leaguers and imagine the best possible outcome, and sometimes miss the most likely outcome.
whatever happens, I hope Gimenez becomes an everyday major league regular, not sure he will or if he does not sure it's as a replacement level player or not.
but in the meantime I hope his performance improves, increasing his value. He's blocked for the foreseaable future, better performance = higher trade value.
The Mets OF prospect pool is so thin, and middle infielders probably the strength of the system (majors and minors - probably even more than starting pitching with it's depth).
Gimenez would have made way more sense than Kelenic.
Reports I read were Seattle "demanded" Kelenic.
SP wise they obviously have 3 big arms, but Wheeler is a FA after the year, after him... Kay, Kilome who won't throw a pitch this year, Szapucki, Peterson and not much else.
MI they have McNeil, Rosario, Gimenez, Mauricio, Newton and even Lugo and Palmer who are interesting.
OF they have almost nothing at all. Top 5 OF prospects in the system include 2 17 year olds and 0 players with good odds to be big league regulars.
Gimenez would have made way more sense than Kelenic.
Reports I read were Seattle "demanded" Kelenic.
Seattle was in NO position to make demands in that trade -- they wanted to dump salary. Brody had all the leverage when he picked up most of the Cano contract. And that's not my second guess.....I said that on the day the trade went down.
Quote:
Gimenez over Kelenic.
Gimenez would have made way more sense than Kelenic.
Reports I read were Seattle "demanded" Kelenic.
Seattle was in NO position to make demands in that trade -- they wanted to dump salary. Brody had all the leverage when he picked up most of the Cano contract. And that's not my second guess.....I said that on the day the trade went down.
You and I can say whatever we want about who was in a position to make demands and who wasn't.
Reports are the Mets tried to include McNeil but Seattle pushed back for Kelenic. No word if the Mets tried to substitute Gimenez that I read, but my guess is the Mariners targeted Kelenic.
Gimenez projects as a positive value SS, Kelenic may not even stick in CF.
Kelenic almost definitely will have more power but I think almost every other tool goes in the direction of Gimenez, and he's produced on the field 2 levels higher. Kelenic's still very much an unknown, whereas Gimenez seems like he's on a decent track to being similar to Cesar Hernandez or Dee Gordon, though probably not quite that prolific stealing bases.