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

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

Yeah that's the thing, we can't really say the Mets gave 17 to nonentities like Luis Lopez and whomever cause that was Fred and Jeff.  This is clearly Cohen having a different idea of who should get homage paid in Met history.

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

  • 1 month later...

So apparently in a wrongful death suit involving pitcher Tyler Skaggs, then-teammate Matt Harvey admitted to giving him Percocet and using cocaine himself, among other things 

Tbh the only thing that surprises me is that this was somehow kept under wraps in the modern age of social media when everyone knew about Doc’s demons as far back as 1987.  People knew Harvey liked to ‘party’ but you can’t automatically make the leap from that to coke

The parallels between the two now aren’t just they had meteoric rises and falls with the Mets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah guess we’ll be hearing more about how bad it got for Harvey in time…obviously Doc’s memoir went into considerable detail.  Does shed some light about why it went south so quickly for Matt.

Re:  Doc, one thing some people don’t realize is Doc was actually clean for about 7 years after he was first busted, which is why he was still often solid through 1993…but when 1994 rolled around, even though he had moments (like the no-hitter) and even some solid runs, that when his relapses really hurt his game.  Who knows when Matt first started using.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not Met-related, but Paul O'Neill is the latest Yankee to get his number retired.

The Yankees take their fair share of flak for having too many numbers retired (they might have to go to triple digits in the not-too-distant future, heh heh), but I think O'Neill is pretty deserving.  He really was one of the first pieces of the "We're back!" Yankees, and the guy was plenty productive...over his first 6 seasons, he slashed .317/.397/.517 (.914 OPS, 138 OPS+) and averaged 114 RBI per 162 GP...even in his decline years, he was still solid (.279/.340/.447 slash, .787 OPS, 102 OPS+), averaging 105 per 162 GP.  For his nine seasons, he slashed .303/.377/.492 (.869 OPS, 125 OPS+), and definitely played a huge role in the Yankees winning championships again.  He's a face that people absolutely associate with those terrific Yankees teams...he wasn't some "right place right time, along for the ride" guy.  I think he's earned this.  

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

Marcus Stroman doing a great job reminding me why I wasn't sorry to see him go.  He's a punk who thinks and carries himself as much being much better than he really is...wanna burn a bridge, go ahead pal.  

This would be nuts is this actually happened:

Freddie Freeman update: 'Growing belief' Freeman will leave Braves and join NL rival (msn.com)

If I'm Alonso (who's clearly worked hard to try to be a solid first baseman), I'd be surprised if he was all that thrilled about having to give up his position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/22/2022 at 1:43 PM, Colorado Rockies 1976 said:

Not Met-related, but Paul O'Neill is the latest Yankee to get his number retired.

The Yankees take their fair share of flak for having too many numbers retired (they might have to go to triple digits in the not-too-distant future, heh heh), but I think O'Neill is pretty deserving.  He really was one of the first pieces of the "We're back!" Yankees, and the guy was plenty productive...over his first 6 seasons, he slashed .317/.397/.517 (.914 OPS, 138 OPS+) and averaged 114 RBI per 162 GP...even in his decline years, he was still solid (.279/.340/.447 slash, .787 OPS, 102 OPS+), averaging 105 per 162 GP.  For his nine seasons, he slashed .303/.377/.492 (.869 OPS, 125 OPS+), and definitely played a huge role in the Yankees winning championships again.  He's a face that people absolutely associate with those terrific Yankees teams...he wasn't some "right place right time, along for the ride" guy.  I think he's earned this.  

Plus he hit those two home runs for that sick kid in the hospital. Well, a HR and a triple with a throwing error charged to Martinez if we’re being technical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So apparently the sh!thead owners are going to shut down the sport because they're scared to death Cohen's going to be like the oil magnates who spend the sh!t out of the Premier League.  fvck all of you hypocritical fvcks like Reinsdorf who whined in '94 that skyrocketing salaries were ruining the sport then gave Albert Belle the richest contract in baseball just out of the lockout, we had to deal with decades of being just on the outside looking in while the Yankees and Dodgers drove up salaries, now we suddenly get to play in that park and the owners want to throw around punitive tax penalties like first-round draft picks...bite me.

 

Edited by NJDevs4978
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can all go screw as far as I’m concerned; the product isn’t even all that compelling anymore.  There was a time when I’d turn a game on and watch it fully, start to finish, completely focused.  Between the constant strikeouts, the lack of action, and the glacial pace of many of the games…what are we really missing at this point?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And negotiations break down again, the first week of games canceled.  At this point I think it's going down to the wire whenever that is (early June?) for a season period.  As much as I detest the owners it really is a pox on all their houses at this point - union, owners, Manfred.

Edited by NJDevs4978
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bigger things going on in the world than (many) millionaires and billionaires squabbling.  If they’re this tone-deaf, the hell with all of ‘em.  We’ll all find other things to do with our summer.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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