Mets sign Cespedes
- Thread starter RedOctober3829
- Start date
I hope we get to read more about how the opt-out works in the team's favor in this thread. That's always fun.
Yeah, you will see them trade Bruce in the near future. His tenure with them didnt work out as planned, but still has value with one year left on his deal.
Still they run into the same problem with their defense as last year, none of the four outfielders they'd like to play can play an adequate CF. Granderson (1/15 left) for Brett Gardner (2/24 left) might help both teams, then they can still move Bruce and give Conforto the ABs he needs.
Keith Law has such a hilarious ego, he wrote up this signing and how it affects the Mets on ESPN Insider without mentioning Granderson as part of the OF picture at all, then when he got called on it on Twitter, he said "I didn't forget him". Um....
Credit to Cespedes, I think he could have gotten this AAV and a fifth year if he wanted, but he must have wanted to stay with the Mets.
Sox should sniff on Bruce as a DH or a LF if they move Bradley or Benintendi for a starter. Maybe there's a Bradley for Harvey and Bruce deal to be made (Sox need to give up more, but Bradley would be a good fit in CF for them).
Sox should sniff on Bruce as a DH or a LF if they move Bradley or Benintendi for a starter. Maybe there's a Bradley for Harvey and Bruce deal to be made (Sox need to give up more, but Bradley would be a good fit in CF for them).
He does have a good ego on him, but I think you're missing his point with his response. He's saying that Granderson shouldn't be considered in any kind of playing time scenario given the other players at those positions. That's just his way. It rubs some people the wrong way, but I feel pretty safe saying that he didn't forget Granderson is on the team. He's saying he sucks and shouldn't be in the equation and isn't worth mentioning.
I guess you're right, but that is even more ridiculous to me. Granderson is going to get at least 400 PAs on that team if he is healthy and still on the roster.
The same thought kept tumbling around in my head as well when i saw they got Cespedes done. Probably one of the few potential scenarios out there that i could realistically see DD moving Buchholz as an additional piece going back too, since picking up that option and then flipping him to a legit contender where he can put up better FA-to-be #'s isn't exactly doing him dirty.
Bradley + Buchholz + interesting flyer for Harvey and Bruce (or Granderson I guess) wouldn't be terrible for either team imo.
Still has a bat, but he's on the wrong side of 30, and that defense.... I'd say he did pretty well for himself.
The Cespedes signing also got my wheels turning in a similar way - the Mets still could use a true CF (like Bradley) and if Bradley get traded then Bruce would make an adequate short-term platoon partner with Young. But as you note, the key would be getting something valuable back from the Mets, like a good young SP. But we would probably want to send Buchholz back, or send a SP elsewhere to resolve the potential logjam - I'm not sure that the Mets would want Buchholz in this deal.
And Keith Law is correct, in that Conforto should be playing every day. Mets should probably trade both Bruce and Grandy, get a real CF, and use Lagares as their #4 OF.
Is Lagares out of the mix? He can't hit, but he plays a good CF when healthy. Which he hasn't been lately.
As a starter I'd say yeah. The Mets' offense was 4th worst in the league last year, and carrying his bat isn't helping if they want a legit shot at holding their own against the NL power houses. Improving the offense where they can needs to be an off season priority imo.
That starting staff is so fragile though that I can't see them not back filling it in the event they were to trade Harvey (who i think is a better bet to get moved then Sale this winter btw. Sale's name just fills the current big name speculation void better atm). In my scenario Buchholz is hardly the ideal guy to help improve on where that fragile state already resides at now, but like his current appeal here goes if not him who else you gonna go grab atm?
I agree he did pretty well for himself, but I would have thought he could have gotten more than 4 years. I also think it's tough to knock his defense this year when he was playing a position everyone knew he shouldn't be.
This article is up over at Fangraphs, and it struck me as about right, if not a little generous (although I admit I didn't realize that Wins were being pegged at $8.5 million per this offeason...yeesh).
It values him at $110 million, but over five years, not four. He probably could have gotten more years, but probably not for the same AAV. I don't really buy the team loyalty notion that jtn mentioned; I think the Mets just couldn't afford to lose any offense, and made it worth his while to close the deal quickly.
Agreed on all that. Loyalty had little to nothing to do with it and the Mets struck quick. I just figured with the FA market being as bleak as it is this year he could have garnered a 5/$120-130 deal. There are sluggers out there but not many that can particularly offer anything defensively and if you put him back in a corner he's fine. Depending on which WAR you prefer, he was either below average or terrible, but he shouldn't have been playing CF. FWIW, Law pegged him at 4/$100-120, calling it a slight overpay, but cited the Mets limited finances in labeling it that.
Granderson had 2.5 WAR last year and hit 30 home runs. He doesn't suck. He can't play CF but neither can anybody else on the Mets except Lagares who can't hit.
Maybe they go after Fowler or try to flip Bruce for somebody who can play CF and hit a bit, but I wouldn't be surprised if Granderson is the opening day CF.
It's Klaw at his worst, trying to show off how clever he is.
Exactly. At the very least, write one sentence that you think Granderson shouldn't get playing time given the other options, but pretending he doesn't exist is ridiculous.
I read it, as I have read elsewhere since, that Law believes Granderson won't be with the Mets next season, so he's not a factor to consider
Then take ten words and write that, he's on them now and it's far from definite he'll be moved.
He has written it. Perhaps not in that particular article and not so specifically, but - wrong or not - Law sometimes writes like you follow him and doesn't take the time to write out every thought in his head for the people reading one off articles.
I perhaps went too far in defending him by saying he thinks Granderson sucks, but if you read his chats and his articles he's pretty straightforward about these kinds of things. Playing guys out of position, blocking young guys that need time and are talented, etc.
He absolutely is a wise ass and gets cute sometimes and can be snarky, etc, but I personally appreciate it, if for no other reason that he engages the stupidity that comes with his forum. Can you imagine doing chats every week and the amount of nonsense thrown at you? Especially dealing with prospects and the inherent 'why do you hate my team???!??!!' aspect that comes with it.
Especially now that he's moved his chat off of ESPN to his own website, yet still gets inundated with 'why are you talking about board games and cooking, talk about baseball!!' Cause it's his fucking chat, if you don't like it don't log in. I love it that he now can throw an f bomb at those people.
I think he's a pretty shrewd guy, admits when he's wrong and has a pretty good track record. He's well rounded and no bullshit. I like that he can look at the Mets OF situation, acknowledge they shouldn't be playing Granderson, since he can't play CF and it's a net downgrade to put Cespedes there or to take time from Conforto, despite what his WAR was. And also that he can troll those who want to resort to twitter fights over it.
I also get why people don't like him, but I also am not familiar with someone on par with his mediums. Analysis, chat, twitter, prospects, MLB, on air, draft, etc. Maintains his own blog to include books, boardgames, food, cooking, travel, politics, music, etc. He's not Cafardo waiting in line for the buffet. I don't mind him having an edge but I guess I see why people might. I think he's one of the hardest working guys in the business, but ymmv.
Edit: at the very least, my overriding point remains, he didn't forget that Granderson is on the Mets.
I perhaps went too far in defending him by saying he thinks Granderson sucks, but if you read his chats and his articles he's pretty straightforward about these kinds of things. Playing guys out of position, blocking young guys that need time and are talented, etc.
He absolutely is a wise ass and gets cute sometimes and can be snarky, etc, but I personally appreciate it, if for no other reason that he engages the stupidity that comes with his forum. Can you imagine doing chats every week and the amount of nonsense thrown at you? Especially dealing with prospects and the inherent 'why do you hate my team???!??!!' aspect that comes with it.
Especially now that he's moved his chat off of ESPN to his own website, yet still gets inundated with 'why are you talking about board games and cooking, talk about baseball!!' Cause it's his fucking chat, if you don't like it don't log in. I love it that he now can throw an f bomb at those people.
I think he's a pretty shrewd guy, admits when he's wrong and has a pretty good track record. He's well rounded and no bullshit. I like that he can look at the Mets OF situation, acknowledge they shouldn't be playing Granderson, since he can't play CF and it's a net downgrade to put Cespedes there or to take time from Conforto, despite what his WAR was. And also that he can troll those who want to resort to twitter fights over it.
I also get why people don't like him, but I also am not familiar with someone on par with his mediums. Analysis, chat, twitter, prospects, MLB, on air, draft, etc. Maintains his own blog to include books, boardgames, food, cooking, travel, politics, music, etc. He's not Cafardo waiting in line for the buffet. I don't mind him having an edge but I guess I see why people might. I think he's one of the hardest working guys in the business, but ymmv.
Edit: at the very least, my overriding point remains, he didn't forget that Granderson is on the Mets.
Last edited:
He thinks he's above his job which in this case to simply tell us what he believes the impact of this move will be on the Mets, his job is no longer part of a front office and he can't trade Granderson. People want to know what this transaction actually means to the Mets, not to some possible future incarnation of the Mets after they make a move he thinks they should make.
I followed him for a while but I don't think he is nearly as smart as he thinks he is, his taste in food and books isn't quite as good as he thinks it is and his baseball insight is lacking a bit too often for me. I do give him credit for saying that Severino would end up as a reliever even while he dominated as a starter in the majors in late 2015 (plenty of people still don't believe this, but I do now), but too often his against-the-grain takes are just wrong.
I followed him for a while but I don't think he is nearly as smart as he thinks he is, his taste in food and books isn't quite as good as he thinks it is and his baseball insight is lacking a bit too often for me. I do give him credit for saying that Severino would end up as a reliever even while he dominated as a starter in the majors in late 2015 (plenty of people still don't believe this, but I do now), but too often his against-the-grain takes are just wrong.
But Granderson is better than Bruce and both are under contract for one more year, why wouldn't NY try to move Bruce first if they can? Maybe they can get more for Granderson so he will end up being the one to go, but that is far from clear right now (and really they both should go and NY should bring in a real CF but I doubt that will happen).
Because Granderson is going to be 36 and has old people baseball skills? See Mike Cameron. Jay Bruce will be 30 and had somewhat of a bounce back year to his former levels of production after a forgettable 2014 and 2015. He was a 120+ OPS bat who fell off a cliff at age 27 and at age 29 may have climbed back up the cliff.
Oddly enough, on baseball reference the 2nd most similar batter through age 35 for Curtis Granderson is... Mike Cameron, lol. First is Ron Gant.
OK, but again, none of that matters in this context. What Law did here is the equivalent of someone being asked to write a piece about Boston's 2017 rotation and completely leaving out any mention of Buchholz because the writer thinks he shouldn't be an option. Whether the guy should be playing or not is one thing and opinions on that are welcome, but intentionally ignoring a healthy player who has a eight figure deal is just silly and egocentric (and typical, for Law).
Back in the real world, from today's paper, a piece in the Post about whether the Mets will move Granderson or Bruce:
"Ultimately, the Mets will make the deal that reaps the best return. But the tiebreaker points to Granderson staying if all other conditions are close to equal."
http://nypost.com/2016/12/02/bruce-granderson-trade-chips-mets-reveal-their-preference/
"Ultimately, the Mets will make the deal that reaps the best return. But the tiebreaker points to Granderson staying if all other conditions are close to equal."
http://nypost.com/2016/12/02/bruce-granderson-trade-chips-mets-reveal-their-preference/
50% less expensive and infinitely more productive than Rusnay Castillo, Pablo Sandoval, and Allan Craig, with a side of Justin Masterson.