I'm just ranking them by quantifiable OPS, rather than putting in my opinion, or factoring in fielding, and so on. This will be ongoing over the next few weeks.
1. Brian McCann, Atlanta (.834 OPS)
McCann's been at or near the top of the NL's best catchers over the last couple of years, but you haven't read a lot about him. That should change at some point – it may take a career season to do so, however.
2. Miguel Montero, Arizona (.832 OPS)
Took a significant step up last year. A little less power than McCann, but a few more singles and walks. I'd take either one of them.
3. Carlos Ruiz, Philadelphia (.780 OPS)
The Phillies really need a platoon partner for Ruiz – they let Chris Coste go halfway through the season. I don't think he's capable of handling 110 games by himself without his numbers taking a hit.
4. Chris Ianetta/Yorvit Torrealba, Colorado (.773 OPS)
The Rockies have waited patiently for Ianetta to arrive, even signing Torrealba to a two-year deal after winning the 2007 pennant. The wait has paid off; Ianetta's now at about the same level as McCann or Montero, and Torrealba's a free agent. Torrealba can still hit, but he's got injury issues and threw out just 14 percent of baserunners trying to steal, worst in the NL.
5. John Baker/Ronny Paulino, Florida (.761 OPS)
Marlins dealt for Paulino last year even though Baker was coming on, but having them split the receiving duties was a good idea. Baker has more power, Paulino hits for average better.
6. Bengie Molina, San Francisco (.727 OPS)
Hit 20 homers last year, and plays good defense. That's all he does. He took 13 walks in 520 plate appearances. He's a free agent, and will shift into a platoon role unless the Giants panic and offer him arbitration.
7. Yadier Molina, St. Louis (.714 OPS)
Took 22 walks in 510 plate appearances, which was far better than his brother. Also hit .294, a career high. Good defense, doesn't hit for power.
8. Nick Hundley/Henry Blanco, San Diego (.712 OPS)
Hundley had a pretty decent first year and Blanco adds a little sock and is a good defender. Not a strength, but the Padres have a lot bigger issues than this.
9. Ryan Doumit/Jason Jaramillo, Pittsburgh (.697 OPS)
Doumit missed a lot of last year due to injury; if he plays 100 or more games, he'll rank in the top four. Jaramillo's a catch-and-throw backup.
10. Ramon Hernandez/Ryan Hanigan, Cincinnati (.696 OPS)
A couple of years ago Hernandez was among the better catchers offensively, but time and injuries have taken their toll; now he takes a lot of walks but little else. Hanigan pitched in when Hernandez was hurt in August; inexplicably the Reds resigned Hernandez for another season.
11. Russell Martin, Los Angeles (.680 OPS)
Los Angeles needs to do a major rethink here. A few years ago Martin was neck and neck with Brian McCann; now he's among the low middle catchers in the league, likely because he's playing too much (his 586 plate appearances were 38 ahead of McCann and 66 ahead of everybody else). A platoon partner might help. Brad Ausmus is not that partner.
12. Geovany Soto/Koyie Hill, Chicago (.674 OPS)
Soto was the Rookie of the Year in 2008, but he reported to camp in 2009 out of shape, played in the World Baseball Classic, and then had an awful season. Hill's a catch and throw guy who's just happy to be in The Show after some of the injuries he's had.
13. Omir Santos/Brian Schneider, New York (.665 OPS)
I don't the Mets have a clue here. They sent Ramon Castro packing early in the season while Schneider was still on the DL, leaving the catching in the hands of unproven Omir Santos. Santos had an okay year, so Schneider was allowed to leave as a free agent. Josh Thole is the catcher of the future – a poor man's Joe Mauer – but he needs about 300 AB at Triple A.
14. Chris Coste/Humberto Quintero, Houston (.638 OPS)
Coste was released by Philadelphia during the season, but latched on with Houston after they concluded J.R. Towles won't hit major league pitching. Quintero doesn't hit much, but has the best throwing arm in the league.
15. Jason Kendall, Milwaukee (.6361 OPS)
Should not be offered a starting position. Lowest slugging percentage among the NL catching group, and only avoided lowest OPS due to getting hit by 17 pitches. I read in a recent Mets blog entry they should go after Kendall, because if he hit .270 they'd be happy… but Kendall hasn't hit .270 since 2006. Also among the league's worst at throwing out baserunners.
16. Josh Bard/Wil Nieves, Washington (.6357 OPS)
Nationals platooned two guys who washed out on five different teams between them, which is more than I need to know about the Nationals.
Monday, November 23, 2009
Friday, November 13, 2009
We Just Want a Hit
It's frustrating enough the Mets can't develop good hitters. I'm not even sure they know what one is.When Derek Jeter was making his chase toward the Yankees' all-time hit record earlier this year, three things stuck out for me:
1) this was an awful lot of coverage for a team hit record. I mean, would anyone on the Kansas City Royals or Milwaukee Brewers get the same amount of coverage?
2) a radio announcer said Jeter had a chance to break Pete Rose's all-time hit record, which I initially dismissed, reviewed, and revised my opinion (more on that some other time);
3) the Mets' all-time hit leader is still Ed Kranepool.
Actually, I knew about that one a long time ago. In Bill James' 1992 Baseball Book, his notes on the Mets stated the Mets' all-time hitting records, even considering they're an adolescent franchise, were disgraceful. "Ed Kranepool, for Chrissakes, is the all-time Mets hit leader. And no one's chasing him." Well, that was 18 years ago, and the situation's still the same.
The problem is not Ed Kranepool's fault – hey, he got the maximum out of his limited abilities, and played for the team for 19 seasons – it's the Mets' fault for their inability to develop hitters. I put together a list of the 100 players with the most hits that have played since the Mets started business in 1962 (so Stan Musial, who retired after the 1963 season, is on this list, while Ted Williams, who retired in 1960, is not), and added the team that developed the player. (For the most part, that's the team for whom the player toiled in the minors, although I've made a couple of exceptions -- Roberto Clemente, for example, would likely never have played for the Dodgers, but the Pittsburgh Pirates saw something and drafted him away.)
Of the 30 teams now playing, only the four most recent expansion teams -- the Colorado Rockies, Florida Marlins, Arizona Diamondbacks, and Tampa Bay Rays -- and the Mets are the only teams with nobody on the list.
1. Pete Rose, Cincinnati Reds
2. Hank Aaron, Atlanta (Milwaukee) Braves
3. Stan Musial, St. Louis Cardinals
4. Carl Yastrzemski, Boston Red Sox
5. Paul Molitor, Milwaukee Brewers
6. Willie Mays, San Francisco (New York) Giants
7. Eddie Murray, Baltimore Orioles
8. Cal Ripken, Baltimore Orioles
9. George Brett, Kansas City Royals
10. Robin Yount, Milwaukee Brewers
11. Tony Gwynn, San Diego Padres
12. Dave Winfield, San Diego Padres
13. Craig Biggio, Houston Astros
14. Rickey Henderson, Oakland Athletics
15. Rod Carew, Minnesota Twins
16. Lou Brock, Chicago Cubs
17. Rafael Palmeiro, Chicago Cubs
18. Wade Boggs, Boston Red Sox
19. Al Kaline, Detroit Tigers
20. Roberto Clemente, Pittsburgh Pirates
21. Frank Robinson, Cincinnati Reds
22. Barry Bonds, Pittsburgh Pirates
23. Harold Baines, Chicago White Sox
24. Brooks Robinson, Baltimore Orioles
25. Andre Dawson, Montreal Expos
26. Ken Griffey Jr., Seattle Mariners
27. Vada Pinson, Cincinnati Reds
28. Derek Jeter, New York Yankees
29. Al Oliver, Pittsburgh Pirates
30. Tony Perez, Cincinnati Reds
31. Roberto Alomar, San Diego Padres
32. Rusty Staub, Houston Astros
33. Bill Buckner, Los Angeles Dodgers
34. Dave Parker, Pittsburgh Pirates
35. Ivan Rodriguez, Texas Rangers
36. Billy Williams, Chicago Cubs
37. Omar Vizquel, Seattle Mariners
38. Gary Sheffield, Milwaukee Brewers
39. Luis Aparicio, Chicago White Sox
40. Nellie Fox, Oakland (Philadelphia?) Athletics
41. Tim Raines, Montreal Expos
42. Steve Garvey, Los Angeles Dodgers
43. Luis Gonzalez, Houston Astros
44. Julio Franco, Texas Rangers
45. Reggie Jackson, Oakland (Kansas City) Athletics
46. Ernie Banks, Chicago Cubs
47. Richie Ashburn, Philadelphia Phillies
48. Willie Davis, Los Angeles Dodgers
49. Steve Finley, Baltimore Orioles
50. Alex Rodriguez, Seattle Mariners
51. Joe Morgan, Houston Astros
52. Buddy Bell, Cleveland Indians
53. Garrett Anderson, Los Angeles (California) Angels of Anaheim
54. Manny Ramirez, Cleveland Indians
55. Fred McGriff, Toronto Blue Jays
56. Ted Simmons, St. Louis Cardinals
57. Frank Thomas, Chicago White Sox
58. Jeff Kent, Toronto Blue Jays
59. Ozzie Smith, San Diego Padres
60. Jim Rice, Boston Red Sox
61. Red Schoendienst, St. Louis Cardinals
62. Dwight Evans, Boston Red Sox
63. Mark Grace, Chicago Cubs
64. Kenny Lofton, Cleveland Indians
65. Johnny Damon, Kansas City Royals
66. Mickey Mantle, New York Yankees
67. Sammy Sosa, Texas Rangers
68. Chipper Jones, Atlanta Braves
69. Ryne Sandberg, Philadelphia Phillies
70. Chili Davis, San Francisco Giants
71. Brett Butler, Atlanta Braves
72. Lou Whitaker, Detroit Tigers
73. Alan Trammell, Detroit Tigers
74. Carlton Fisk, Boston Red Sox
75. Orlando Cepeda, San Francisco (New York) Giants
76. Joe Torre, Atlanta (Milwaukee) Braves
77. Barry Larkin, Cincinnati Red
78. Bernie Williams, New York Yankees
79. Andres Galarraga, Montreal Expos
80. Dave Concepcion, Cincinnati Reds
81. B.J. Surhoff, Milwaukee Brewers
82. Eddie Matthews, Atlanta (Boston?) Braves
83. Jeff Bagwell, Boston Red Sox
84. Kirby Puckett, Minnesota Twins
85. Gary Gaetti, Minnesota Twins
86. Tony Fernandez, Toronto Blue Jays
87. Willie McGee, St. Louis Cardinals
88. Ron Santo, Chicago Cubs
89. Marquis Grissom, Montreal Expos
90. Jose Cruz, St. Louis Cardinals
91. Vladimir Guerrero, Montreal Expos
92. Bert Campaneris, Oakland (Kansas City) Athletics
93. Edgar Martinez, Seattle Mariners
94. John Olerud, Toronto Blue Jays
95. Mike Schmidt, Philadelphia Phillies
96. Willie Stargell, Pittsburgh Pirates
97. Graig Nettles, Minnesota Twins
98. Darrell Evans, Atlanta Braves
99. Willie McCovey, San Francisco Giants
100. Willie Randolph, Pittsburgh Pirates
The player with the most hits the Mets developed is Ken Singleton, who had just over 2,000 hits. (Of course, he only played a little over one season for the team before he was traded away.)
Speaking of Singleton, note this is the organization that developed the hitter. He may have been traded away after before his career got in gear (that's why Lou Brock is listed as a Chicago Cub, much to the embarrassment of fans here).
The interesting thing is no team has more than six players on the list, and all but two of the other 25 teams has at least three (Kansas City has two, and the Angels one). A bunch of teams are tied with six: Atlanta, Boston, the Cubs, Cincinnati, and Pittsburgh.
Now, the Mets have 14 players who played for them at one time or another one the list. (No big deal, the Yankees have 13.) They are:
#6 - Willie Mays
#7 - Eddie Murray
#14 - Rickey Henderson
#31 - Roberto Alomar
#32 - Rusty Staub
#38 - Gary Sheffield
#44 - Julio Franco
#47 - Richie Ashburn
#58 - Jeff Kent
#71 - Brett Butler
#76 - Joe Torre
#86 - Tony Fernandez
#94 - John Olerud
#100 - Willie Randolph
Notice something here? With the exceptions of Staub, Kent, and Olerud, all of these players were Mets when their careers were circling the drain. (I suppose you could make an argument for Eddie Murray or Tony Fernandez.) The Mets seem to have a habit of getting great hitters at the tail end of their careers, and in some cases were surprised when they had very little left. Compare this to the Yankees, who not only have their three homegrown guys (Jeter, Mickey Mantle, and Bernie Williams), but almost every other player who played for them on this list that they picked up along the way was at or near peak: Dave Winfield, Gary Sheffield, Reggie Jackson, Alex Rodriguez, Johnny Damon, and so on.
Okay, that part is what it is. The question is, what can the Mets do about the future?
1) Focus on developing hitters. Gee, that seems obvious. But it's clearly been a problem -- it's one thing to have developed great hitters and trade them away, but the situation is worse for the Mets, in that they're not developing anyone. The organization has been extant for nearly 50 years; by this time they should know how to scout and choose good hitters.
2) Keep the good players. The roster of bad trades the Mets have made is legendary: Amos Otis for Joe Foy, Nolan Ryan for Jim Fregosi, Rick Aguilera and Kevin Tapani for Frank Viola, Melvin Mora for Mike Bordick, Scott Kazmir for Victor Zambrano. Most of these trades have been similar: a bunch of young guys for a (semi-)established star. (I will say the Johan Santana trade has worked out quite well, so it's not foolproof.) I'm happy to say David Wright and Jose Reyes, who both have just under a thousand hits apiece, are both signed to long-term contracts -- Wright through 2012, Reyes through next year, with club options for both. Carlos Beltran, who should appear on this list in a year or two, is also signed through 2011.
3) Don't fall in love with free agent hitters older than 32. This is a failing of GM Omar Minaya, who, now that he has money to spend (he didn't when he was Montreal's GM), spends it. Of the "circling the drain" players listed above, excluding Julio Franco (who was acquired strictly to pinch-hit and carried minimal expectations), the only player younger than 32 was Tony Fernandez (who put up his career-worst numbers in a Met uniform). The others ranged in age from 34 (Alomar) to 41 (Mays). Picking up hitters at that age and expecting them to perform as they have is not a winning strategy. Pitchers will occasionally put up good seasons at that age, but hitters peak in their late 20s (throwing out the steroid years), and start falling off gradually from age 30 on. That's why, if the Mets had the choice between Matt Holliday and Jason Bay, all other things being equal, Holliday would be the better choice, as he's two years younger. But a better choice would be to find someone younger still, if they can.
By the way, the Mets once had Jason Bay as a minor leaguer. They traded him away
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
I like to read sports columns. I'm going to agree with some conclusions, disagree with others. I generally like what I read in Sports Illustrated, and I'm okay with the columnists I see on the ESPN and Sporting News web sites.
I continue to be astonished, however, at how poor the writing, rationales, and temperament is for many of the columnists at CBSSports.com. There are exceptions: Pete Prisco knows his subject, stays within his limits, and calls himself out (for example, he admits today he was wrong on Josh McDaniels and the Broncos, as was I). Mike Freeman is hit or miss.
But Gregg Doyel -- with his continued baiting of his readers and "Bleep you, I have a column" attitude, has just worn very thin. And today's Ray Ratto column reaches new heights of poor reasoning, conclusion jumping, and bad writing.
I should start with staying Ratto's column on the problems the Mets had with Tony Bernazard (7/28/09) made a certain amount of sense (although it seemed a bit overwrought for a writer located 3,000 miles away and not privy to the day-to-day team operations). I did note that Ratto added in his 8/30/09 column (in the Chronicle only) he stated: " Fred Wilpon was a billionaire before he met Bernie Madoff; now, according to a new book, he's down $700 million and probably has to sell the New York Mets."
The Wilpons have denied that they were in trouble and the Mets were having money issues, and, as it turns out, they were right: it turned out Madoff made $48 million for the Wilpons. Rather than reversing course, however, Ratto has doubled down: his column today makes the Wilpons -- and, consequently, the Mets, seem bigger rubes than before. (Because they made money?)
Most people are unaware of how their investments work. They don't sit with their investment advisor on a day-to-day basis and review where every cent has gone. They put a certain amount of trust in the advisor. Bernard Madoff clearly betrayed the trust of a lot of investors. There's no doubt about that.
But here's Ratto's argument, verbatim: "When it turned out the Madoff scheme had bitten a huge chunk out of the Wilpon fortune, people cheered. And now that it looks like they actually made money off Berniegate, the likelihood that they'll have to go to court to defend their relationship with one of the great financial criminals of all time will cheer people as well."
Damned if you did (lose money), damned if you didn't.
Also, I haven't seen any word on the Wilpons going to court. Ratto has jumped to this conclusion without any evidence that either there would be legal proceedings against the Wilpons, or that they would fight any charges.
A few more notes:
- "Ranking this Mets team among Mets teams is difficult only because the first three Mets teams were charmingly inept and so many others were just plain inept."
It took me about three readings before I understood (I think) Ratto is referring to the New York Mets of 1962, 1963, and 1964. (Either that or he's referring to the New York Metropolitans of the 1800s -- it's hard to distinguish what he means by "teams.") Yes, the Mets have had some lousy seasons -- watching them play in the late 1970s, 1993, or 2004 was a painful business. But since 1969, they've been roughly a .500 team, with seven playoff appearances, four pennants, and two World Series during that span. A few teams have won more pennants during that span -- the Yankees have 10, the Athletics six, the Dodgers, Cardinals, and Reds five apiece. But this isn't the Detroit Lions we're talking about either.
- "But knowing the Wilpons, they'd probably blow the other $452 million on the lawyers defending their right to keep the $48 million. It's called the Carlos Delgado Postulate, wherein one wildly overpays for something that made initial sense but eventually became a galactic money pit."
First of all, "knowing the Wilpons" is a stretch for a columnist based in San Francisco to say about a New York-based ownership group. Has he ever met them? Second, I state again there's been no mention of legal action. And third, using Carlos Delgado as an example of a bad baseball move is -- well, a terrible example. Yes, Delgado missed most of last year (so did Carlos Beltran and Jose Reyes -- no one mentions all three, plus David Wright, played 159 games or more in 2008, the first time in many years a team had four players play so many games) with a hip injury that first came up the year before.
Second, let's look at the records:
Delgado, lifetime: .280/.383/.546
Delgado, ages 34-37 (with the Mets): .267/.351/.488
Yes, it's a drop, but not a shocking one for someone of his age. Using a 162-game average (Delgado played 468 games in his four years with the team, having missed 130 games last year with hip injuries and 50 the other three years), he averaged 36 home runs, 117 RBI, and 94 runs scored for every 162 games played. Most teams would be pretty happy with that kind of output from their first baseman -- and most sportswriters seemed at least a little impressed; Delgado finished 12th in the MVP vote in 2006 and 9th in 2008. Pick out Roberto Alomar or Carlos Baerga, both of whom became old men the moment they entered Shea Stadium, but most Met fans were perfectly satisfied with Delgado's performance.
I have a hard time writing about this, because I think beat sportswriters are far better equipped to critique teams and players than columnists -- or bloggers. Some columnists rarely deign to appear at the ballpark; they just take aim and let the chips fall where they may. If I were paid to write about baseball (I'm not) and critiqued a team or players without allowing for rebuttal, I'd expect a backlash; just as if I'm telling the guy in the next cubicle he doesn't know what he's doing when I'm making a mess of things. Ratto -- and the other CBSSports.com columnists -- should expect the same.
(cross-posted to CBSSports.com)
I continue to be astonished, however, at how poor the writing, rationales, and temperament is for many of the columnists at CBSSports.com. There are exceptions: Pete Prisco knows his subject, stays within his limits, and calls himself out (for example, he admits today he was wrong on Josh McDaniels and the Broncos, as was I). Mike Freeman is hit or miss.
But Gregg Doyel -- with his continued baiting of his readers and "Bleep you, I have a column" attitude, has just worn very thin. And today's Ray Ratto column reaches new heights of poor reasoning, conclusion jumping, and bad writing.
I should start with staying Ratto's column on the problems the Mets had with Tony Bernazard (7/28/09) made a certain amount of sense (although it seemed a bit overwrought for a writer located 3,000 miles away and not privy to the day-to-day team operations). I did note that Ratto added in his 8/30/09 column (in the Chronicle only) he stated: " Fred Wilpon was a billionaire before he met Bernie Madoff; now, according to a new book, he's down $700 million and probably has to sell the New York Mets."
The Wilpons have denied that they were in trouble and the Mets were having money issues, and, as it turns out, they were right: it turned out Madoff made $48 million for the Wilpons. Rather than reversing course, however, Ratto has doubled down: his column today makes the Wilpons -- and, consequently, the Mets, seem bigger rubes than before. (Because they made money?)
Most people are unaware of how their investments work. They don't sit with their investment advisor on a day-to-day basis and review where every cent has gone. They put a certain amount of trust in the advisor. Bernard Madoff clearly betrayed the trust of a lot of investors. There's no doubt about that.
But here's Ratto's argument, verbatim: "When it turned out the Madoff scheme had bitten a huge chunk out of the Wilpon fortune, people cheered. And now that it looks like they actually made money off Berniegate, the likelihood that they'll have to go to court to defend their relationship with one of the great financial criminals of all time will cheer people as well."
Damned if you did (lose money), damned if you didn't.
Also, I haven't seen any word on the Wilpons going to court. Ratto has jumped to this conclusion without any evidence that either there would be legal proceedings against the Wilpons, or that they would fight any charges.
A few more notes:
- "Ranking this Mets team among Mets teams is difficult only because the first three Mets teams were charmingly inept and so many others were just plain inept."
It took me about three readings before I understood (I think) Ratto is referring to the New York Mets of 1962, 1963, and 1964. (Either that or he's referring to the New York Metropolitans of the 1800s -- it's hard to distinguish what he means by "teams.") Yes, the Mets have had some lousy seasons -- watching them play in the late 1970s, 1993, or 2004 was a painful business. But since 1969, they've been roughly a .500 team, with seven playoff appearances, four pennants, and two World Series during that span. A few teams have won more pennants during that span -- the Yankees have 10, the Athletics six, the Dodgers, Cardinals, and Reds five apiece. But this isn't the Detroit Lions we're talking about either.
- "But knowing the Wilpons, they'd probably blow the other $452 million on the lawyers defending their right to keep the $48 million. It's called the Carlos Delgado Postulate, wherein one wildly overpays for something that made initial sense but eventually became a galactic money pit."
First of all, "knowing the Wilpons" is a stretch for a columnist based in San Francisco to say about a New York-based ownership group. Has he ever met them? Second, I state again there's been no mention of legal action. And third, using Carlos Delgado as an example of a bad baseball move is -- well, a terrible example. Yes, Delgado missed most of last year (so did Carlos Beltran and Jose Reyes -- no one mentions all three, plus David Wright, played 159 games or more in 2008, the first time in many years a team had four players play so many games) with a hip injury that first came up the year before.
Second, let's look at the records:
Delgado, lifetime: .280/.383/.546
Delgado, ages 34-37 (with the Mets): .267/.351/.488
Yes, it's a drop, but not a shocking one for someone of his age. Using a 162-game average (Delgado played 468 games in his four years with the team, having missed 130 games last year with hip injuries and 50 the other three years), he averaged 36 home runs, 117 RBI, and 94 runs scored for every 162 games played. Most teams would be pretty happy with that kind of output from their first baseman -- and most sportswriters seemed at least a little impressed; Delgado finished 12th in the MVP vote in 2006 and 9th in 2008. Pick out Roberto Alomar or Carlos Baerga, both of whom became old men the moment they entered Shea Stadium, but most Met fans were perfectly satisfied with Delgado's performance.
I have a hard time writing about this, because I think beat sportswriters are far better equipped to critique teams and players than columnists -- or bloggers. Some columnists rarely deign to appear at the ballpark; they just take aim and let the chips fall where they may. If I were paid to write about baseball (I'm not) and critiqued a team or players without allowing for rebuttal, I'd expect a backlash; just as if I'm telling the guy in the next cubicle he doesn't know what he's doing when I'm making a mess of things. Ratto -- and the other CBSSports.com columnists -- should expect the same.
(cross-posted to CBSSports.com)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)