Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Is it telling?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    44,954

    Is it telling?

    That the Mets haven't brought back many of the guys who were on the team last year and are FA this offseason. There has been some innuendo going around that the clubhouse, chemistry and individual personalities on the team weren't meshing last season. We know how outspoken guys like Baez, Lindor, Stroman, Syndergaard, etc can be.

    I don't think that's coincidental and probably the reason why the Mets had so much upheaval this offseason. The acquisition of Scherzer certainly suggests that the Mets wanted changes in attitude and accountability.
    Last edited by metswon69; 12-05-2021 at 04:18 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Brooklyn New York
    Posts
    24,496
    Quote Originally Posted by metswon69 View Post
    That the Mets haven't brought back many of the guys who were on the team last year and are FA this offseason. There has been some innuendo going around that the clubhouse, chemistry and individual personalities on the team weren't meshing last season. We know how outspoken guys like Baez, Lindor, Stroman, Syndergaard, etc can be.

    I don't think that's coincidental and probably the reason why the Mets had so much upheaval this offseason. The acquisition of Scherzer certainly suggests that the Mets wanted changes in attitude and accountability.
    To be fair, itís not like the Mets didnít want these guys back. They made Baez an offer, QOd Syndergaard, and Lindor is still on the team. Stroman, I get the point though.

    I do agree with the overall aspect that the clubhouse needed improving. Accountability was virtually nonexistent last year with everyone making excuses as to why they were underperforming. I canít speak for Escobar, Marte or Canha but I know Scherzer adds another layer of competitiveness to the team.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    If Trump can become president with no political background then I don't understand why I need a resumť

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    44,954
    Quote Originally Posted by Zmaster52 View Post
    To be fair, itís not like the Mets didnít want these guys back. They made Baez an offer, QOd Syndergaard, and Lindor is still on the team. Stroman, I get the point though.

    I do agree with the overall aspect that the clubhouse needed improving. Accountability was virtually nonexistent last year with everyone making excuses as to why they were underperforming. I canít speak for Escobar, Marte or Canha but I know Scherzer adds another layer of competitiveness to the team.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Eh, if they really wanted Baez back they would have come closer to Detroit's offer. You could also make the case that they could have made a stronger push for Syndergaard once they knew his offer from the Angels. Then again, no one expected us to do that when it became clear that we were getting a compensatory pick for a one year contract elsewhere.

    I threw Lindor's name in there but obviously he's not going anywhere.

    That's an indictment on Rojas imo as well. The pendulum has swung so much in regard to player friendly managers that keeping clubhouses in check and coming down on players when they exhibit poor play or ****** behavior is no longer a thing.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Boogie Down
    Posts
    109,098
    Hen they were winning everybody loved the clubhouse aside off the raccoon thing. The minute they started to lose it became a problem.

    I get that you can make an argument why the guys they let go would help change the perception of a bad clubhouse.

    But they will also not bring back Conforto and neither did Loup who everybody loved. Stroman for his disdain of reporters and negative fans on Twitter always shouted out his teammates, Walker loves the dude.

    May their have been some kind of dived in the Lindor camp vs the McNeil camp? Likely.

    Anyways we always hear the fluff pieces about how good a clubhouse guy is when they get him and thatís all we heard about Lindor as well.

    To the Rojas point I do agree that he being too player friendly led to the craziness at the end of the season and thatís the bigger issue.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    36,028
    They brought in Scherzer because Scherzer is a bad *** pitcher.

    The rest of the stuff - maybe. More likely I think they saw this team lose a lot and guys play poorly and decided these guys probably shouldnít be coming back. Stroman is the one dude that I think they would have brought back if he didnít tweet his way out of NY.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Don't worry. He's got this.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    443
    Quote Originally Posted by Zmaster52 View Post
    To be fair, itís not like the Mets didnít want these guys back. They made Baez an offer, QOd Syndergaard, and Lindor is still on the team. Stroman, I get the point though.

    I do agree with the overall aspect that the clubhouse needed improving. Accountability was virtually nonexistent last year with everyone making excuses as to why they were underperforming. I canít speak for Escobar, Marte or Canha but I know Scherzer adds another layer of competitiveness to the team.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Exactly. One could argue the Mets did not want Stroman back. But, hey, we don't know what happens behind the scenes. Here we go again speculating based on limited information.

    As for Baez, the Mets said all along they wanted him back. The Mets made an offer of $120M, which was higher than what MLB Rumors projected for him. Sure, Cohen has lots of money, but that doesn't he has to overpay for every player.

    I don' get it. A premise is stated and the evidence presented, no matter how speculative, is to mention several players. But in the end, the argument hinges solely on the fact that the Mets did not match what Detroit offered for one player? Doesn't matter the contract value, simply because we didn't match ipso facto that means the Mets did not want him. Nonsense.

    And to be more accurate, it is not that "the Mets haven't brought back many..." It is not many, it is a few guys. It isn't like there has been a complete turnover of the roster.

    Now, if you are talking about Pillar and Villar, that might hold that the Mets preferred not to bring them back. But they now have better players replacing them.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    44,954
    Quote Originally Posted by AUDIT View Post
    Exactly. One could argue the Mets did not want Stroman back. But, hey, we don't know what happens behind the scenes. Here we go again speculating based on limited information.

    As for Baez, the Mets said all along they wanted him back. The Mets made an offer of $120M, which was higher than what MLB Rumors projected for him. Sure, Cohen has lots of money, but that doesn't he has to overpay for every player.

    I don' get it. A premise is stated and the evidence presented, no matter how speculative, is to mention several players. But in the end, the argument hinges solely on the fact that the Mets did not match what Detroit offered for one player? Doesn't matter the contract value, simply because we didn't match ipso facto that means the Mets did not want him. Nonsense.

    And to be more accurate, it is not that "the Mets haven't brought back many..." It is not many, it is a few guys. It isn't like there has been a complete turnover of the roster.

    Now, if you are talking about Pillar and Villar, that might hold that the Mets preferred not to bring them back. But they now have better players replacing them.
    Its not entirely speculative. A few Met writers quoted multiple sources in the organization that didn't deny that there were issues in the Mets clubhouse last year when the question was asked. You dont need to complete a total roster upheaval to address that either.

    I dont find it coincidental that most of those guys who were talked about in that vein aren't going to be back. Maybe it's overstated but considering how many stories we heard/witnessed from last season, its not surprising that the Mets have changed over so much of the roster already.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    2,006
    Quote Originally Posted by AUDIT View Post
    Exactly. One could argue the Mets did not want Stroman back. But, hey, we don't know what happens behind the scenes. Here we go again speculating based on limited information.

    As for Baez, the Mets said all along they wanted him back. The Mets made an offer of $120M, which was higher than what MLB Rumors projected for him. Sure, Cohen has lots of money, but that doesn't he has to overpay for every player.

    I don' get it. A premise is stated and the evidence presented, no matter how speculative, is to mention several players. But in the end, the argument hinges solely on the fact that the Mets did not match what Detroit offered for one player? Doesn't matter the contract value, simply because we didn't match ipso facto that means the Mets did not want him. Nonsense.

    And to be more accurate, it is not that "the Mets haven't brought back many..." It is not many, it is a few guys. It isn't like there has been a complete turnover of the roster.

    Now, if you are talking about Pillar and Villar, that might hold that the Mets preferred not to bring them back. But they now have better players replacing them.

    Look at the facts, not speculation:

    The Mets could have had Stroman back but chose not to and that might have been based on him being a loose cannon. And that is the one pitcher the Mets need most now as their #3 starter. Self control is a hard thing to teach someone.

    The Mets gave both Conforto and Thor QOs understanding that Conforto was likely to test FA and Thor, at the end of the season, was intimating that his only wish was for the Mets to give him a QO (and Thor would have slotted in nicely as the #3 starter). The Mets did what they thought Thor wanted with the QO and Thor was not true to his word.

    In Conforto's case, he is still available but the Mets have taken care of replacing him (maybe more than replacing him) with Marte and Canha. They probably won't bring Conforto back but it is still possible.

    With Baez, we knew all along that the Mets wanted him, gave him their best offer, and he got more from Detroit. Baez is not a high on base guy, but is an excellent defender, power bat and arguably one of the best baserunners in the game. It would have been nice to have him back but we don't know what happened in the clubhouse and that whole thumbs down to the fans debacle didn't help. But the Mets did make a very strong offer to him.

    Loup, in my opinion, is the one who got away. He probably, based on his career stats, would not repeat last year's performance anyway. But the Mets are again in need of a good lefty reliever. He is obviously not available so the Mets need to find that lefty reliever/closer elsewhere.

    Pillar was out anyway. He basically underperformed and Nimmo was a better CF than Pillar was in 2021. Now they have Marte.

    Villar is someone the Mets might still bring back but he was never one of the top FA candidates and still isn't. The Mets are looking at pitching (a #3 starter and a lefty closer-type). Once they are comfortable with that endeavor and still have money, every team has a budget of some sort, then they might circle back. In the meantime, lockout is upon us and no deals for players are going down.

    The theme is what are the Mets most ardent needs now? A #3 starter and a lefty reliever who has proven he has the guts to close out a game - not just be a lefty specialist. Stroman or Thor would have filled the former spot and Loup probably could have filled the latter spot. And that is what the Mets need now in order to fill out the roster. Both needs can be acquired via trade or FA once the lockout is over.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    52,637
    Quote Originally Posted by GottaBelieve View Post
    They brought in Scherzer because Scherzer is a bad *** pitcher.

    The rest of the stuff - maybe. More likely I think they saw this team lose a lot and guys play poorly and decided these guys probably shouldnít be coming back. Stroman is the one dude that I think they would have brought back if he didnít tweet his way out of NY.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I heard he had a wallet that said "Bad Mother-effer"


    "You don't know how to drink. Your whole generation, you drink for the wrong reasons. My generation, we drink because it's good, because it feels better than unbuttoning your collar, because we deserve it. We drink because it's what men do."

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    443
    Quote Originally Posted by Sick Of It All View Post
    Hen they were winning everybody loved the clubhouse aside off the raccoon thing. The minute they started to lose it became a problem.

    I get that you can make an argument why the guys they let go would help change the perception of a bad clubhouse.

    But they will also not bring back Conforto and neither did Loup who everybody loved. Stroman for his disdain of reporters and negative fans on Twitter always shouted out his teammates, Walker loves the dude.

    May their have been some kind of dived in the Lindor camp vs the McNeil camp? Likely.

    Anyways we always hear the fluff pieces about how good a clubhouse guy is when they get him and thatís all we heard about Lindor as well.

    To the Rojas point I do agree that he being too player friendly led to the craziness at the end of the season and thatís the bigger issue.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    More importantly, and I think you started to allude to that, the issue is more why players didn't want to come back. Clearly Conforto is a curious case. Other than the reason of wanting to test the market, we don't really know why Conforto did not express a strong interest in returning and why in fact there was never any dialogue about re-signing Conforto. In the case of Stroman, okay, he tweeted himself out. But then again, as much as we can think he is a bit off the wall or whatever, there is a question about why he was tweeting that stuff.

    And then there is Syndergaard. Say what you will about California and the excuse that the Mets did not keep in touch with him, fact is that if he loved NY so much why did he not come back and give the Mets a chance to match or better the Angel's offer. It seems to me that he did indeed love NY, that is, the city and its environment et al., but not necessarily NY in terms of the Mets.

    You have to wonder about these three players and were they intent on escaping something that might be going on with the team? Who knows?

    I'm not necessarily singling out any particular player, but what changed between 2020 and 2021. It was mostly Lindor. Kudos to Lindor for wanting to win and his insistence that McNeil position himself in the infield and his getting upset when McNeil sort of blew him off. But, the racoon issue was not a positive way to handle and we also had the thumbs issue. And maybe Rojas wasn't strong enough to put his foot down, and maybe if he were a stronger personality, those issue may not have come up at all. I can't imagine these things would have happened with Gil Hodges as manager.

    It is something to think about and I believe it likely goes beyond Rojas. Because Rojas is gone and even after that the sentiments of people like Syndergaard and Conforto did not change.

    I do think having Scherzer on the team will create a better chemistry. I also think Cano may also have some impact in that regard.

    In the end, when the dust settles, I think chemistry wise the Mets are better off now.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    2,006
    Quote Originally Posted by AUDIT View Post
    More importantly, and I think you started to allude to that, the issue is more why players didn't want to come back. Clearly Conforto is a curious case. Other than the reason of wanting to test the market, we don't really know why Conforto did not express a strong interest in returning and why in fact there was never any dialogue about re-signing Conforto. In the case of Stroman, okay, he tweeted himself out. But then again, as much as we can think he is a bit off the wall or whatever, there is a question about why he was tweeting that stuff.

    And then there is Syndergaard. Say what you will about California and the excuse that the Mets did not keep in touch with him, fact is that if he loved NY so much why did he not come back and give the Mets a chance to match or better the Angel's offer. It seems to me that he did indeed love NY, that is, the city and its environment et al., but not necessarily NY in terms of the Mets.

    You have to wonder about these three players and were they intent on escaping something that might be going on with the team? Who knows?

    I'm not necessarily singling out any particular player, but what changed between 2020 and 2021. It was mostly Lindor. Kudos to Lindor for wanting to win and his insistence that McNeil position himself in the infield and his getting upset when McNeil sort of blew him off. But, the racoon issue was not a positive way to handle and we also had the thumbs issue. And maybe Rojas wasn't strong enough to put his foot down, and maybe if he were a stronger personality, those issue may not have come up at all. I can't imagine these things would have happened with Gil Hodges as manager.

    It is something to think about and I believe it likely goes beyond Rojas. Because Rojas is gone and even after that the sentiments of people like Syndergaard and Conforto did not change.

    I do think having Scherzer on the team will create a better chemistry. I also think Cano may also have some impact in that regard.

    In the end, when the dust settles, I think chemistry wise the Mets are better off now.

    I place the full blame of the "raccoon incident" on Luis Rojas's inexperience and apparently allowing Lindor to run the team in the field - something Lindor is not ready to do and might never be given what I will call his selfishness and brashness. He is not David Wright and never will be.
    Hell, he ain't Jacob deGrom who right now is the leader of this team nor the new co-leader Scherzer.

    Unfortunately for the Mets (including McNeil and Lindor) was McNeil basically sucking when he played and also being injured for part of 2021. It enabled Lindor to pair with Peraza or Villar or Baez as his second base partner for most of the year. 2022 hopefully will be different and McNeil returns to his hitting form.

    In that case, Lindor will have to learn how to play with McNeil.

    Now, if what has been said about McNeil not endorsing the shift the way the team wanted - that situation belongs in the manager's hands. Since Gil Hodges recent HOF selection is fresh on our minds, do you really think he would have condoned McNeil's behavior or allowed another player to take it into his own hands - no effing way. Gil was the "only" leader of the team and would have taken it upon himself to straighten out McNeil so as not to cause an issue between 2 players, like Rojas did by not handling McNeil's insubordination himself. I believe a manager like Showalter would be more like Hodges than like the inexperienced Rojas.

    That is something the Mets brass need to carefully consider as they interview and select their next manager.

    In hindsight, Luis Rojas's loss of not only the clubhouse but also the team on the field and his in game moves are why he lost his job. I have analyzed that Rojas's in-game moves cost the 2021 Mets 5 losses just by himself. The underperformance of certain key players accounted for at least 5 losses and the loss of deGrom during the last half of the season cost at least 4 losses. The 2021 team, on paper, should have won 91 games.

    The most glaring of Rojas's inexperience or his lack of leadership skills was the "raccoon incident" and the thumbs down to the fans incident. I think the Front Office was looking for action from the manager and he did not handle either of those situations as an experienced manager would or should.

    I agree that Scherzer being here will help with the team chemistry and leadership. I also agree with you that Cano, as much as we Mets fans like to point out his PED suspensions, has always been known as a team leader by example and a mentor to his teammates. If he is here in 2022 (we have to assume the IF), then he could help with team chemistry and maybe become a mentor of sorts to Lindor (who needs to be more of a team player before he can become a team leader).
    Last edited by swbwtr; 12-07-2021 at 11:33 AM.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Location
    Shea Stadium
    Posts
    1,360
    Quote Originally Posted by swbwtr View Post
    I place the full blame of the "raccoon incident" on Luis Rojas's inexperience and apparently allowing Lindor to run the team in the field - something Lindor is not ready to do and might never be given what I will call his selfishness and brashness. He is not David Wright and never will be.
    Hell, he ain't Jacob deGrom who right now is the leader of this team nor the new co-leader Scherzer.

    Unfortunately for the Mets (including McNeil and Lindor) was McNeil basically sucking when he played and also being injured for part of 2021. It enabled Lindor to pair with Peraza or Villar or Baez as his second base partner for most of the year. 2022 hopefully will be different and McNeil returns to his hitting form.

    In that case, Lindor will have to learn how to play with McNeil.

    Now, if what has been said about McNeil not endorsing the shift the way the team wanted - that situation belongs in the manager's hands. Since Gil Hodges recent HOF selection is fresh on our minds, do you really think he would have condoned McNeil's behavior or allowed another player to take it into his own hands - no effing way. Gil was the "only" leader of the team and would have taken it upon himself to straighten out McNeil so as not to cause an issue between 2 players, like Rojas did by not handling McNeil's insubordination himself. I believe a manager like Showalter would be more like Hodges than like the inexperienced Rojas.

    That is something the Mets brass need to carefully consider as they interview and select their next manager.

    In hindsight, Luis Rojas's loss of not only the clubhouse but also the team on the field and his in game moves are why he lost his job. I have analyzed that Rojas's in-game moves cost the 2021 Mets 5 losses just by himself. The underperformance of certain key players accounted for at least 5 losses and the loss of deGrom during the last half of the season cost at least 4 losses. The 2021 team, on paper, should have won 91 games.

    The most glaring of Rojas's inexperience or his lack of leadership skills was the "raccoon incident" and the thumbs down to the fans incident. I think the Front Office was looking for action from the manager and he did not handle either of those situations as an experienced manager would or should.

    I agree that Scherzer being here will help with the team chemistry and leadership. I also agree with you that Cano, as much as we Mets fans like to point out his PED suspensions, has always been known as a team leader by example and a mentor to his teammates. If he is here in 2022 (we have to assume the IF), then he could help with team chemistry and maybe become a mentor of sorts to Lindor (who needs to be more of a team player before he can become a team leader).
    Its one thing if Lindor said "Hey Jeff, I've faced John Doe many times in the AL and every time he hits it to second, its to deep second." That I could see Lindor asking Jeff to move. However, I doubt that was the case. Looked like Lindor wanted Jeff in certain areas for whatever reason and became more like a wife telling a husband what to do and when to do it.

    But definitely Rojas should have treated them like children and put them in their place. He didn't and let it go and thus let it blow up.

    If I was the owner, I'd be awfully mad that during a game, my employees are running into the dugout tunnel or clubhouse to verify if its a rat or raccoon. That is for clubhouse attendants or some other clubhouse personnel to handle.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    443
    Quote Originally Posted by swbwtr View Post
    I place the full blame of the "raccoon incident" on Luis Rojas's inexperience and apparently allowing Lindor to run the team in the field - something Lindor is not ready to do and might never be given what I will call his selfishness and brashness. He is not David Wright and never will be.
    Hell, he ain't Jacob deGrom who right now is the leader of this team nor the new co-leader Scherzer.

    Unfortunately for the Mets (including McNeil and Lindor) was McNeil basically sucking when he played and also being injured for part of 2021. It enabled Lindor to pair with Peraza or Villar or Baez as his second base partner for most of the year. 2022 hopefully will be different and McNeil returns to his hitting form.

    In that case, Lindor will have to learn how to play with McNeil.

    Now, if what has been said about McNeil not endorsing the shift the way the team wanted - that situation belongs in the manager's hands. Since Gil Hodges recent HOF selection is fresh on our minds, do you really think he would have condoned McNeil's behavior or allowed another player to take it into his own hands - no effing way. Gil was the "only" leader of the team and would have taken it upon himself to straighten out McNeil so as not to cause an issue between 2 players, like Rojas did by not handling McNeil's insubordination himself. I believe a manager like Showalter would be more like Hodges than like the inexperienced Rojas.

    That is something the Mets brass need to carefully consider as they interview and select their next manager.

    In hindsight, Luis Rojas's loss of not only the clubhouse but also the team on the field and his in game moves are why he lost his job. I have analyzed that Rojas's in-game moves cost the 2021 Mets 5 losses just by himself. The underperformance of certain key players accounted for at least 5 losses and the loss of deGrom during the last half of the season cost at least 4 losses. The 2021 team, on paper, should have won 91 games.

    The most glaring of Rojas's inexperience or his lack of leadership skills was the "raccoon incident" and the thumbs down to the fans incident. I think the Front Office was looking for action from the manager and he did not handle either of those situations as an experienced manager would or should.

    I agree that Scherzer being here will help with the team chemistry and leadership. I also agree with you that Cano, as much as we Mets fans like to point out his PED suspensions, has always been known as a team leader by example and a mentor to his teammates. If he is here in 2022 (we have to assume the IF), then he could help with team chemistry and maybe become a mentor of sorts to Lindor (who needs to be more of a team player before he can become a team leader).
    Agreed, Lindor needs to be more of a team player.

    But, as you mentioned, we have to point the finger at Rojas. So here is an example of how the word communication can have such a general meaning, yet I think we could make the argument that Rojas lacked the proper communication in terms of control in that these things, like the racoon incident and the thumbs up, occurred.

    If indeed he had good communication with his players then he could see these things developing before it actually hit the fan. There is something to be said for a stern, no nonsense, serious manager, ala Gil Hodges. Again, the manager doesn't necessarily have to be liked, but he should, at least to some degree, be respected.

    Now, we don't know what actually happened prior to those incidents, but one would think that Rojas would see this coming and have a sit down talk with each player. Maybe he did, but if so, it didn't work.

    That is why we need an established and experienced manager with a lot of credibility. Credibility in terms of the manager being able to walk in with the reputation of I been here, I done that, I know what a winning team is like, but I will listen and I am open to new ideas. But, like in the military, as well as normal businesses, you can throw it out for discussion and listen to what people say and suggest, but once the decision is made that is it. You follow the leader.

    BTW, in the papers it mentions Brad Brach lauding the merits of Buck. The number of people lining up to recommend Buck for the job is expanding. Terry, Scherzer, Brach....I'm sure we will hear from more individuals...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •