Jump to content

2021 New York Mets Offseason Thread


Colorado Rockies 1976
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm not as worried about the win-now approach given Cohen's willingness to spend, they'll seemingly always have the room for patch signings such as the guys they brought in this offseason, so long as they don't blow up what little farm system they do have given Brodie's own two-year plan backfiring.  I do think they won't just keep robbing peter to pay paul (i.e. trading top prospects) until they at least have more of a foundation with the farm system to build off of first and they'll surely spend as much international money as they can.  Just so long as they don't screw up the draft with another Rocker-type fiasco.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stroman to the Cubs for a 3-71 deal with an opt-out after two years.  Kind of surprised he opted for the mid-term deal albeit with a higher AAV but his next FA at 32 with his style of pitching he can maybe get a five-year deal.  Then again it's not a great look when you're a FA and your two former teams who are both spending left and right (and needed pitching) this offseason bypassed him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn’t want him back.  Not nearly as good as HE thinks he is.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Get the feeling the managerial position is more or less Showalter's to lose.  If he's hired, I have no issue with it.  Mets tried the unproven first-timers, and it was a disaster.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least at this point they can take their time with the manager search given only one other team needs a manager (and we know the A's will likely hire another stat-reader under 50 years old), and given these a$$holes are probably gonna stay locked out for at least a couple months if not several. 

But yeah it almost sounds to me like they want to appease the public - and Max, who put his preference out there - by getting Buck, and I'm not always in favor of the whole listen to the fans approach but it just makes too much sense with a veteran team anyway to get the most accomplished manager out there this side of Bochy (who probably ain't giving up retirement to go cross-country into the NY meat grinder).

Edited by NJDevs4978
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah there really isn’t any reason at all to rush this.  They pretty much have all of the time in the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Buck is the new Mets manager.  100% the right move…not another rookie, and not a complete slave to analytics. Feels like the right guy for this team.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad they came to their senses and went with the established, veteran guy. He's a known, proven commodity, he's turned teams around, he's managed in NY and can deal with the stresses and pressure (and media). He is a bit old but 65 today isn't what it was 30 or 40 years ago. He still has the fire to go out and win a World Series. Finally we have a guy who won't make repeated bonehead decisions. We can actually be a team that outmanages others during a game. Buck is an all around good baseball man and I'm glad he's here.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Mets retiring Keith's number in July (Saturday the 9th against the Marlins), assuming we're actually playing baseball by then.  Being as he was my first favorite player in any sport and I still have a ratty paper copy of his book diary of the '85 season with the '86 epilogue, I'll be there - and I haven't been to a Met game 'at all' since the pandemic, or even just gone on mass transit since for that matter.

Even I admit to having some reservations on whether Keith 'should' have his number retired as I did with Koosman, but someone of my age range is gonna enjoy this regardless.

Edited by NJDevs4978
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mets to retire Keith’s number this summer.

14 players wore #17 after his playing days ended (Cone switched to it as a tribute to Keith).  Kinda feels anticlimactic when a team waits this long, but Cohen clearly wants to step up where the Wilpons came up short.

 

Lol Has, we obviously got the news at the same time.

Edited by Colorado Rockies 1976
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I still think Keith is a Hall of Famer.  I get it, he wasn't a pure HR hitter, first baseman are supposed to be sluggers, etc, but the fact is he was a phenomenal defensive first baseman (guy saved so many errors, was a beast on bunts, etc), and was plenty clutch...he was one of those guys who when he came up to the plate, you were expecting good things to happen.  Had an incredible knowledge of the game, which translated on the field AND at the plate.  I feel like he never got enough credit for the fact that he came up with a boatload of big hits (and was a lifetime .300 hitter until late decline years knocked him down to .296), and was as good as it got as a fielder.  Did he really need to hit 10 more HR per season to be so much better?  He put up a 131 OPS+ before the bottom fell out (his final three MLB seasons)...that's plenty above-average.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me Keiths number retirement is more a lifetime service # retirement rather than an acknowledgement of just his playing career. He's been a beloved Mets broadcaster for a while now (and part of maybe the best booth in baseball). As a player, he had a nice run with the Mets, but really it was only 7 seasons or so (with three of them being top 10 in MVP voting) so I'm really looking at this as an honor due to his career service to the Mets in several capacities. If it was just playing days...then I'm very stingy with number retirements (I would not have done Stengels who I feel every generation of Mets fans view with indifference and maybe some curiosity)

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah that’s well put and pretty much how I feel about it too. In a vacuum if you retire Keith’s number as a player don’t you kind of have to retire 8 too? And wither 16 and 18, who were star players for longer than either but obviously had and have other issues.

I do think his post playing career with the Mets plays into it, especially given it exposes a new generation of fans to Keith, which is why I’m fine with it as well. Plus he probably should have gotten more consideration for the HOF than he has and if he ever gets in on a vets committee it will be as a Met, given his post playing career as much as his playing career.

Edited by NJDevs4978
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both Keith and Gary came here late enough that neither could really expected to have extended runs of success here…and neither really did.

Agree that with Keith at this point, his number being retired has to do with what he meant to the Mets as a player, and what he means to them now as a broadcaster and a guy who really seems to “feel” our pain when the Mets struggle, and our joy when they actually don’t get in their own way and have a little success.  He’s truly and fully a Met and always will be.

Don’t really think Carter should get his number retired…he had two Carter-like years here, and then it went downhill very quickly.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.