A very disturbing trend (when the Mets are going to compete)

[metswon69]

Correct. The Mets have a habit of coming in under what is required.

To be fair there was no way they would have met his contractual demands on the spot if they were looking to gauge the market on interest for him.

So to say they lowballed him is unfair given they were trying to use the leverage they had to get the best possible deal they could.

Weren't you a proponent of the Dickey trade anyway?

[KnIckFaN.2883]

i think its gonna take a year or two for the mets to compete.if the everything goes like wheeler,harvey,d'Arnaud improve we can have a solid core, then i think we'll be a couple pieces away from being a contender.

[wdwyer]

I would happen to think that regardless of what we all ultimately want with this team. (A WS title or two). Yes it takes a multi-pronged strategy to move forward. But regardless of what we believe is really going on behind closed doors of the Wilpons. We are still at the beginning stages...seeing what we have.

[fanofclendennon]

I would happen to think that regardless of what we all ultimately want with this team. (A WS title or two). Yes it takes a multi-pronged strategy to move forward. But regardless of what we believe is really going on behind closed doors of the Wilpons. We are still at the beginning stages...seeing what we have.

Meanwhile Sandy has no problem at all entering the 2013 season with more holes than a large slice of Swiss cheese.

[JohnNY62]

Well then why should the Mets be any different than those teams?

Because we share a city with the Yankees?

Just because we are a big market team doesn't mean we are entitled to win and you're making it like the Mets are the staple for ineptitude when there have been other big market teams before and since that have had similar troubles winning.

Newsflash!!

They aren't..

If you're satisfied with ineptitude, there's no reason to want the Mets to be any different than SOME other teams. Boston and Philly and Chicago were run ineptly for decades .. and lost. Boston and Philly have been run well for the last decade and are in contention again .. though it sure looks like Boston's ownership is again flushing it's team back down the toilet. Chicago is Chicago.

The Yankees, the Cardinals, the Dodgers have by and large been well-run for decades. None of them fall out of contention for very long. None of them babble about rebuilds. Their stud teams get old, they retool -- and QUICKLY -- and get back into contention again. This professionalism is what I, FoC, McFly and others would love to see in the Mets. For awhile in the early days as George Weiss stocked up the minors, and then once more under Frank Cashen, we Mets fans got a glimpse of that professionalism. In between and after those guys, what we got was hand-wringing, pleas for patience and solemn murmurings about 'rebuilding'. Like what we get now.

I remain silent about Alderson because he's not running the show. The fish stinks from the head, as the Italians say and the head of the Mets organization smells to high heaven. The Wilpons have 4 winning seasons in the 10 they've been sole owners. Now it will take many more years before we're above .500 again. With their track record of mismanagement, why in the world would anyone believe they NOW know how to run a ball club? MLB is a BUSINESS, and the Wilpons are running this franchise every bit as well as those idiots who managed the U.S. auto industry into the toilet for DECADES.

Some of you insist on being 'optimistic' as if to be otherwise is to be disloyal to the Mets. Nonsense. We are loyal to the TEAM, not to the owners/management because there is NO reason to be optimistic about either their abilities or their intentions. These guys are dumping salary in exchange for bags of cheap magic beans. Some of you assume that these savings will result in future spending, but the real reason is that these guys are broke and are trying to staunch further bleeding. They're quite happy if Mets fans come out to watch 'the kids' because they're patient and assume the club will start spending again sometime in the future

And yes, it's nice to dream that our prospects are sure things, on a short road to being good/very good/excellent MLBers. But many of us here have seen lots of prospects .. Shawn Abner, Billie Beane, Generation K, Jay Payton, Lastings Milledge to name a few either not make it to the bigs or make it by their fingernails. Don't count your chickens guys.

Oh, and one other thing .. who gives a rat's *** that the Mets were above .500 for awhile last season? Almost any bad team (except something as bad as the 1962 Mets) will have good stretches during the course of a season -- just as any good team (except for teams like the 86 Mets or 98 Yankees) will have some bad stretches. But looking at only the slice of good or the slice of bad is a misuse and misreading of numbers .. cherry-picking the part you like out of one long sequence. You of all people, STuna, should know that.

[metswon69]

If you're satisfied with ineptitude, there's no reason to want the Mets to be any different than SOME other teams. Boston and Philly and Chicago were run ineptly for decades .. and lost. Boston and Philly have been run well for the last decade and are in contention again .. though it sure looks like Boston's ownership is again flushing it's team back down the toilet. Chicago is Chicago.

No one is satisfied with ineptitude but given the current state of this team rebuilding is their best course of action. That's all the argument was. They are in the process of dropping over 200+ million dollars in dead weight (between Bay, Santana, Oliver Perez, Castillo, FF) and considering their window to compete vanished after the 2009 season they've basically been hamstrung by a team going in the wrong direction with long albatross like contracts. Minaya's overspending really hurt this team towards the end as he was trying to salvage an already sunken ship.

The Yankees, the Cardinals, the Dodgers have by and large been well-run for decades. None of them fall out of contention for very long. None of them babble about rebuilds. Their stud teams get old, they retool -- and QUICKLY -- and get back into contention again. This professionalism is what I, FoC, McFly and others would love to see in the Mets. For awhile in the early days as George Weiss stocked up the minors, and then once more under Frank Cashen, we Mets fans got a glimpse of that professionalism. In between and after those guys, what we got was hand-wringing, pleas for patience and solemn murmurings about 'rebuilding'. Like what we get now.

The Yankees ironically are going through that transition and dare i say after next season the Mets could be better than they are with the proper acquisitions. The core is gonna retire and/or be too old to have the same impact they have had in the past. It's not going to be easy to replace all those guys not to mention their roster is just getting older a whole in general.

When i was making my point to McFly it was basically centered around the idea that even if you are a larger market team it doesn't guarantee you success. The Dodgers for all their history have had relatively similar success to the Mets over the last 30 years. And there are franchises like the Red Sox, Giants, and White Sox who all took 50 years+ to finally win a WS again. It's not even a sure thing for teams that have the resources to make it a surer thing.

The Yankees and Cardinals are the two best organizations in baseball, it's really hard to compare anyone to them and i think the Mets are unfairly judged because of how much winning the Yankees do. The Yankees aren't the norm for the rest of big market baseball so why do the Mets have to be held up to that standard?

I mean sure it would be great but it's unrealistic.

I remain silent about Alderson because he's not running the show. The fish stinks from the head, as the Italians say and the head of the Mets organization smells to high heaven. The Wilpons have 4 winning seasons in the 10 they've been sole owners. Now it will take many more years before we're above .500 again. With their track record of mismanagement, why in the world would anyone believe they NOW know how to run a ball club? MLB is a BUSINESS, and the Wilpons are running this franchise every bit as well as those idiots who managed the U.S. auto industry into the toilet for DECADES.

Because their payroll is minimal next year and there are pieces here to win that don't involve the Wilpons coming severely out of pocket for. This team has a solid core of younger talent that is being currently mixed in with a progressively better farm system. Those 2006-2008 teams were built mainly on FA and heavily escalating payrolls, this team can be competitive without that type of spending.

See that's the secret to the Texas Rangers, the St. Louis Cardinals, the Giants, etc etc. They can have great success with middle of the road payrolls because they have strong internal depth. They create their enough of their own stars which allows them tremendous financial affability. They also use those prospects as assets in trade or when they need to replace a parting FA.

It's not an accident that those teams have been so successful the last 3 years and in the Cardinals case even longer. That's what Sandy is trying to build here. Strong internal depth that precludes them from having to go into FA to fix every area of weakness.

It's the downfall of every major market GM. Look at what is currently happening with the Phillies, they are getting old, have no farm system depth, and are basically doing patchwork to ensure themselves nothing better than 3rd place.

Some of you insist on being 'optimistic' as if to be otherwise is to be disloyal to the Mets. Nonsense. We are loyal to the TEAM, not to the owners/management because there is NO reason to be optimistic about either their abilities or their intentions. These guys are dumping salary in exchange for bags of cheap magic beans. Some of you assume that these savings will result in future spending, but the real reason is that these guys are broke and are trying to staunch further bleeding. They're quite happy if Mets fans come out to watch 'the kids' because they're patient and assume the club will start spending again sometime in the future

No one is insisting on optimism, we just don't believe in Mcfly's assertion that this team will never win again under the Wilpon's ownership.

If there is literally no hope for the next 5,10, 15 years then why does he continue to root for this team?

That's what i don't understand.

Part of being a fan is having some hope as dim as it might be.

And i don't look at it that way in regards to the average Met fan. There is a reason why attendance has dropped from over 4 million in 2008 to barely over 2.2 million last year and that's because apathy is sinking in.

People know whats on the field is not a quality product and if it continues to deteriorate less people will continue to show up. If the Wilpons have any interest in making significant ballpark related revenue again they are going to need to improve and invest in this team.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/05/sp...they-want.html

Even if most of that goes in their pocket (which i am sure it will) there is money there.

And yes, it's nice to dream that our prospects are sure things, on a short road to being good/very good/excellent MLBers. But many of us here have seen lots of prospects .. Shawn Abner, Billie Beane, Generation K, Jay Payton, Lastings Milledge to name a few either not make it to the bigs or make it by their fingernails. Don't count your chickens guys.

I understand your skepticism about prospects but specs of this caliber don't fail at the rate that they used to when the Mets were drafting the Shawn Abner's of the world. It's gotten much easier to project minor league talent specifically elite minor league talent. Scouting is better, player development is better and handled much more carefully (and with a finer tooth comb), guys aren't injured as often coming through the minors (which impedes a prospect's development), and with where these guys are currently ranked many of the top team 25 prospects in baseball year to year reach their major league potential (where D'Arnaud and Wheeler will be ranked this year)

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/ar...articleid=5892

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/ar...articleid=7092

Oh, and one other thing .. who gives a rat's *** that the Mets were above .500 for awhile last season? Almost any bad team (except something as bad as the 1962 Mets) will have good stretches during the course of a season -- just as any good team (except for teams like the 86 Mets or 98 Yankees) will have some bad stretches. But looking at only the slice of good or the slice of bad is a misuse and misreading of numbers .. cherry-picking the part you like out of one long sequence. You of all people, STuna, should know that.

As for that, i don't expect much out of the 2013 Mets. They will have stretches where they play well, all teams do unless they are the 62' Mets or the 03' Tigers. The Mets will have a couple of 5 game winning streaks that get the blood moving a little bit but i think everyone knows that this team is nothing more than 70-73 win ballclub.

[Marty Mcfly]

Meanwhile Sandy has no problem at all entering the 2013 season with more holes than a large slice of Swiss cheese.

\But it's silly to worry about the current team, in year 3 of a rebuild that no-one can see the end of, apparently.

[Marty Mcfly]

I would happen to think that regardless of what we all ultimately want with this team. (A WS title or two). Yes it takes a multi-pronged strategy to move forward. But regardless of what we believe is really going on behind closed doors of the Wilpons. We are still at the beginning stages...seeing what we have.

Three years in and we're still seeing what we have?

Alexander conquered half the known world in twelve years...

For the most part we know what we have, a fair infield, a catcher or two on the way, a promising rotation, and the worst OF in baseball and a terrible BP, the mediocre middling mid twenties type 'prospects' and ex 'prospects' are not and never will be the solution.

Nimmo is 4 years away, KN is exposed, Dud is no good, MDD K's way too much - if we're planning on waiting for this group plus the 4th/5th OF crud we brought in to develop, we may as well pack up now.

God only knows what they told DW but I bet it wasn't 'we need to see what we have for another 2-3 years, but then by golly we'll definitely be thinking about looking at some free agents'.

[fanofclendennon]

If you're satisfied with ineptitude, there's no reason to want the Mets to be any different than SOME other teams. Boston and Philly and Chicago were run ineptly for decades .. and lost. Boston and Philly have been run well for the last decade and are in contention again .. though it sure looks like Boston's ownership is again flushing it's team back down the toilet. Chicago is Chicago.

The Yankees, the Cardinals, the Dodgers have by and large been well-run for decades. None of them fall out of contention for very long. None of them babble about rebuilds. Their stud teams get old, they retool -- and QUICKLY -- and get back into contention again. This professionalism is what I, FoC, McFly and others would love to see in the Mets. For awhile in the early days as George Weiss stocked up the minors, and then once more under Frank Cashen, we Mets fans got a glimpse of that professionalism. In between and after those guys, what we got was hand-wringing, pleas for patience and solemn murmurings about 'rebuilding'. Like what we get now.

I remain silent about Alderson because he's not running the show. The fish stinks from the head, as the Italians say and the head of the Mets organization smells to high heaven. The Wilpons have 4 winning seasons in the 10 they've been sole owners. Now it will take many more years before we're above .500 again. With their track record of mismanagement, why in the world would anyone believe they NOW know how to run a ball club? MLB is a BUSINESS, and the Wilpons are running this franchise every bit as well as those idiots who managed the U.S. auto industry into the toilet for DECADES.

Some of you insist on being 'optimistic' as if to be otherwise is to be disloyal to the Mets. Nonsense. We are loyal to the TEAM, not to the owners/management because there is NO reason to be optimistic about either their abilities or their intentions. These guys are dumping salary in exchange for bags of cheap magic beans. Some of you assume that these savings will result in future spending, but the real reason is that these guys are broke and are trying to staunch further bleeding. They're quite happy if Mets fans come out to watch 'the kids' because they're patient and assume the club will start spending again sometime in the future

And yes, it's nice to dream that our prospects are sure things, on a short road to being good/very good/excellent MLBers. But many of us here have seen lots of prospects .. Shawn Abner, Billie Beane, Generation K, Jay Payton, Lastings Milledge to name a few either not make it to the bigs or make it by their fingernails. Don't count your chickens guys.

Oh, and one other thing .. who gives a rat's *** that the Mets were above .500 for awhile last season? Almost any bad team (except something as bad as the 1962 Mets) will have good stretches during the course of a season -- just as any good team (except for teams like the 86 Mets or 98 Yankees) will have some bad stretches. But looking at only the slice of good or the slice of bad is a misuse and misreading of numbers .. cherry-picking the part you like out of one long sequence. You of all people, STuna, should know that.

Give that man a harumph. Very eloquently stated my good man.

[fanofclendennon]

No one is satisfied with ineptitude but given the current state of this team rebuilding is their best course of action. That's all the argument was. They are in the process of dropping over 200+ million dollars in dead weight (between Bay, Santana, Oliver Perez, Castillo, FF) and considering their window to compete vanished after the 2009 season they've basically been hamstrung by a team going in the wrong direction with long albatross like contracts. Minaya's overspending really hurt this team towards the end as he was trying to salvage an already sunken ship.



The Yankees ironically are going through that transition and dare i say after next season the Mets could be better than they are with the proper acquisitions. The core is gonna retire and/or be too old to have the same impact they have had in the past. It's not going to be easy to replace all those guys not to mention their roster is just getting older a whole in general.

When i was making my point to McFly it was basically centered around the idea that even if you are a larger market team it doesn't guarantee you success. The Dodgers for all their history have had relatively similar success to the Mets over the last 30 years. And there are franchises like the Red Sox, Giants, and White Sox who all took 50 years+ to finally win a WS again. It's not even a sure thing for teams that have the resources to make it a surer thing.

The Yankees and Cardinals are the two best organizations in baseball, it's really hard to compare anyone to them and i think the Mets are unfairly judged because of how much winning the Yankees do. The Yankees aren't the norm for the rest of big market baseball so why do the Mets have to be held up to that standard?

I mean sure it would be great but it's unrealistic.



Because their payroll is minimal next year and there are pieces here to win that don't involve the Wilpons coming severely out of pocket for. This team has a solid core of younger talent that is being currently mixed in with a progressively better farm system. Those 2006-2008 teams were built mainly on FA and heavily escalating payrolls, this team can be competitive without that type of spending.

See that's the secret to the Texas Rangers, the St. Louis Cardinals, the Giants, etc etc. They can have great success with middle of the road payrolls because they have strong internal depth. They create their enough of their own stars which allows them tremendous financial affability. They also use those prospects as assets in trade or when they need to replace a parting FA.

It's not an accident that those teams have been so successful the last 3 years and in the Cardinals case even longer. That's what Sandy is trying to build here. Strong internal depth that precludes them from having to go into FA to fix every area of weakness.

It's the downfall of every major market GM. Look at what is currently happening with the Phillies, they are getting old, have no farm system depth, and are basically doing patchwork to ensure themselves nothing better than 3rd place.

No one is insisting on optimism, we just don't believe in Mcfly's assertion that this team will never win again under the Wilpon's ownership.

If there is literally no hope for the next 5,10, 15 years then why does he continue to root for this team?

That's what i don't understand.

Part of being a fan is having some hope as dim as it might be.

And i don't look at it that way in regards to the average Met fan. There is a reason why attendance has dropped from over 4 million in 2008 to barely over 2.2 million last year and that's because apathy is sinking in.

People know whats on the field is not a quality product and if it continues to deteriorate less people will continue to show up. If the Wilpons have any interest in making significant ballpark related revenue again they are going to need to improve and invest in this team.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/05/sp...they-want.html

Even if most of that goes in their pocket (which i am sure it will) there is money there.



I understand your skepticism about prospects but specs of this caliber don't fail at the rate that they used when the Mets were drafting the Shawn Abner's of the world. It's gotten much easier to project minor league talent specifically elite minor league talent. Scouting is better, player development is better and handled much more carefully (and with a finer tooth comb), guys aren't injured as often coming through the minors (which impedes a prospect's development), and with where these guys are currently ranked many of the top team 25 prospects in baseball year to year reach their major league potential (where D'Arnaud and Wheeler will be ranked this year)

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/ar...articleid=5892

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/ar...articleid=7092




As for that, i don't expect much out of the 2013 Mets and of course they are going to have stretches of the season where they play. All teams do unless they are the 62' Mets or the 03' Tigers. The Mets will have a couple of 5 game winning streaks that get the blood moving a little bit but i think everyone knows that this team is nothing more than 70-73 win ballclub.

This is one of my pet peeves in here and no, this is not directed at Metswon69 specifically. I'm merely using this as the latest example of my pet peeve.

John wrote a lucid, articulate post that covered many different aspects to make a central point, namely that he doesnt believe there is any reason to believe in the current ownership's ability to manage this team successfully.

It was not several different posts to be taken out of context and addressed individually. It would be nice if you could have responded to his entire post with one succinct comment of your own addressing as many points as you feel appropriate. Makes it easier to follow that way.

Again, this was not directed as you personally but rather the forum in general. Just a pet peeve.

[metswon69]

This is one of my pet peeves in here and no, this is not directed at Metswon69 specifically. I'm merely using this as the latest example of my pet peeve.

John wrote a lucid, articulate post that covered many different aspects to make a central point, namely that he doesnt believe there is any reason to believe in the current ownership's ability to manage this team successfully.

It was not several different posts to be taken out of context and addressed individually. It would be nice if you could have responded to his entire post with one succinct comment of your own addressing as many points as you feel appropriate. Makes it easier to follow that way.

Again, this was not directed as you personally but rather the forum in general. I just feel breaking out quotes and responding to them individually is just a lazy way of responding. It also makes it harder for the rest of us to follow.

Just a pet peeve.

You know that's the first time i ever multi quoted something on this forum and here i was thinking i was making it easier trying to break down and address individual points.

Guess not lol..

[YoungStuna]

This is one of my pet peeves in here and no, this is not directed at Metswon69 specifically. I'm merely using this as the latest example of my pet peeve.

John wrote a lucid, articulate post that covered many different aspects to make a central point, namely that he doesnt believe there is any reason to believe in the current ownership's ability to manage this team successfully.

It was not several different posts to be taken out of context and addressed individually. It would be nice if you could have responded to his entire post with one succinct comment of your own addressing as many points as you feel appropriate. Makes it easier to follow that way.

Again, this was not directed as you personally but rather the forum in general. Just a pet peeve.

Yeah I hate when people break up my posts.

[fanofclendennon]

You know that's the first time i ever multi quoted something on this forum and here i was thinking i was making it easier trying to break down and address individual points.

Guess not lol..

LOL, EVERYBODY does it. Generally it's a lazy way of responding to someone's argument or views since its easier to cherry pick than to address the entire thought. I apologize for using your first multi quote response as the example.

[fanofclendennon]

Dupe.

[metswon69]

LOL, EVERYBODY does it. Generally it's a lazy way of responding to someone's argument or views since its easier to cherry pick than to address the entire thought. I apologize for using your first multi quote response as the example.

Nah honestly i find it a little pretentious to individually counter every point of another poster myself.

I don't know why i was inclined to use it, maybe because i knew i would end up writing a small essay in response and didn't want my points to be taking off in all directions.