213 Miles From Shea

According to MLB Trade Rumors, the Royals have released Philip Humber in order to make room for Jeff Francoeur on their 40 man roster.

Is your head swimming from that statement? It should because of all of the Mets connections.

I guess we can first track Francoeur here, because his history is easy. At one point in time he was seen as the career Brave, where he was going to write history and always rock the “A” on his cap. He was then traded to the Mets were he was quickly loved and hated simultaneously by Mets fans. After that he got to go to the World Series with the Rangers and has recently signed with the Royals.

On the other side there is Humber. Humber was a much hyped prospect in the Mets farm system around the same time as Pelfrey and Milledge. He was then packaged off to go to Minnesota for Santana, where he didn't really work out, and then eventually ended up with the Royals. As a Royal last year, statistically he wasn't too bad but he saw an extremely limited amount of innings as he recorded barely over 21 innings with a 4.05 ERA.

Now that he's free, and our team needs pitching, you have to wonder that maybe the system will go with what it knows and try to see if they can get Humber for cheap in the minors? It is possible, you know (whether its correct or not is another question).

I went through a range of emotions last night when I heard Cliff Lee signed with the Phillies.

Well actually thats a lie. It was right after the Ravens won their game, so I was pretty happy, and I was outside in the snow waiting for the bus, which was pretty peaceful, so I actually wasn't upset at all.

When I woke up this morning and turned on Sports Center, I then fully realized what had transpired, but I still wasn't that upset. In the long run, this may not be too terrible for the Mets, but more on that later. What this signing shows is the Phillies know they really are in a “win now” situation and they also know how precious, and irreplaceable championships are. The evidence for this claim is their money is now wrapped in up two long deals for pitchers nearing their mid-30's (although they are aces) and wrapped up in a few position players. For them to make any free agent moves in the future they will have to blow up their budget (become the Yankees of the East) and their farm system has been devastated. They know that the only way to make this worth is they need to maximize their possibility of another championship this year and next year, and they probably did that with the Cliff Lee signing. They have a very good shot to win the World Series next year, a decent shot the following year and after that, things start to fall apart. It's ok though, because they understand once you win, no one can ever take it away from you.

Essentially, what we see here is the cost and benefits analysis of a team “guaranteeing” one World Championship for the ability to have a good shot at the postseason each year for the next decade. Once this team starts to age (2 seasons) there will be little they can do about it financially, so they have to make it worth it now.

Of course the other side of the coin, the more patient, misunderstood, mature side, is to set up a team that can make moves every season and compete every season. This is what the Red Sox did, up until this year (think 2003-2008 or 9) and this is what the Mets hope to do.

The Phillies will now have great expectations and a target on their back next season. While with that rotation they will probably blow the division away, they will need to live up to the hype in order to make it all worth it. They will probably live up to the hype, as we seen in the last few seasons.

In the long run, this is good for the Mets. As long as the Mets play the next several seasons smart with evaluating talent, making trades and talent, this sets the Mets up (and sadly the Braves as well) to swap with the Phillies in 3 years. But to truly get an idea of what that would take, I would have to make some strong predictions about what the Mets will do, and I honestly cannot do that at this time.

What I'm about to write doesn't mean anything, to anyone. So if you are one of those people who will read this article, and give the basic response, of “this doesn't matter on the baseball field”, well I agree with you. This means nothing. I, personally, find the psychology of sports and construction of meaning from subjective opinions of objective events really interesting, and just thought I would share with you what I was thinking about this morning, instead of studying for my Physics final.

The Mes have always had this stigma of being the “lovable losers”, which is the underlaying cultural definition of why we have became the laughing stock of the league. If I had to pinpoint though an event that started to turn the lovable part off, and then just turn us into those losers, it would be when we started to spend money. Spending money to win, while there is nothing wrong with it, comes with a certain connotation. There is something that feels dirty about spending money because it seems like an easy thing to do. Essentially, think of the view that Yankees got in the 90's, with the difference of course that they actually could spend and win.

This also brought another “set” of Mets fans. The win now fans, who came on in 2005 and 2006, and then became increasingly negative in 07, 08 and so on. The fans who didn't quite understand the Mets pedigree of losing.

Well now the Mets are starting to shed this cloak. With Sandy, the Mets are trying to spend smarter than spend more, and bring back that idea of a balance team, one that doesn't need to rely on reshaping its entire roster based on the most prized free agents every off-season.

As the Mets do this, the Nationals enter the opposite side, and there's nothing wrong with that. They overspent for Werth, and they will probably overspend for Pavano if they don't get Lee. It feels like they are trying that same type of strategy the Mets were using in 2005 and 2006 (if you feel like replacing players on their roster like Zimmerman and Strasburgh for our then and now homegrown darlings Wright and Reyes).

I guess what I am curious about is this. Up until this point in the Nationals history, they have been the lovable losers, just like the early Mets. Now that they have entered the spending ring, if they don't succeed next season, or don't significantly improve, what will the public perception be?

Take the Cubs for example. They are always the lovable losers, except of late. Remember back in the day, even as recent as the turn of the millennium, there was some compassion/sympathy/empathy in a conversation when talking about the Cubs? That feeling is practically gone now. I would argue it's because they over spent for a group of players, that didn't work out, and now they are not desirable.

In conclusion, in the great scheme of things, especially on the baseball field, this means nothing. It's just something to think about instead of worrying why a capacitor moving a constant velocity has decaying magnetic field, thus a decaying displacement electric field when it suddenly stops moving and why this emits as a plane wave and can be explained within its Maxwell Equations.

Jon Paul Morosi posted his Winter Meetings Winners and Losers, and I must disagree with where he put the Mets. Now its easy to write off me, as a Mets fan and blogger, being upset about being categorized as a “loser” in the Winter Meetings, as me just being upset because of the label.

The reason I disagree and am upset with Jon, and any other reporter that ranks the Mets as a loser in the Winter Meetings is the reasoning that he used:

” Even with a new general manager, there isn't much buzz about this team. Sandy Alderson has been asked to be frugal with the Wilpon checkbook. And so D.J. Carrasco and Ronny Paulino were the Mets' most significant signings this week. None of this is Alderson's fault. But it's shocking whenever a New York team is one of the least-talked-about teams in the winter meeting lobby.”

Essentially from the above, the Mets were ranked as losers because we were one of the least talked about teams in the lobby. We are the only team on this list because of this. What about all the other teams that did nothing?

The reason this is upsetting is it gives a voice for Mets fans that are insatiable and impatient. The idea of making moves to make moves and to make a splash is stupid and destructive. These types of actions are generally under the guise of we are a playing to compete and are playing to win. That is why we have Castillo, Oliver Perez, Jason Bay, K-rod, and all of our other bad contracts. These were moves to “win now” without thinking about the Mets assets and ability to compete in the long haul.

The decisions that were made by Sandy Alderson this past week were just what the Mets needed. They didn't add a headache, they didn't hurt the bottom line, and they didn't impeded on our abilities to spend in the 2011 and 2012 winter meetings, when all of current contracts end. This was the necessary “reset” button the Mets needed to have. Jon Paul Morosi was correct in not listing the Mets as a winner of the Winter Meetings, but we didn't shoot ourselves in the foot, make winning next year anymore difficult at the end of the week than in the beginning, and we weren't detrmental so we shouldn't be a loser either.

Without really going into the numbers and quantitative explanations, I was really happy with the Mets this past week. The Mets stuck to their guns and stayed committed to set up a team that can compete but will be able to start to dominate in a few years or so, which is just what we needed. It has been so long since we have had a plan, that it felt weird to have something to stick to. Russel Martin? Nope! Too expensive, lets go cheaper. It is that type of attitude that I'm glad the Mets have.

Speaking of plans, I love this idea of not spending everything next year as well. I love this idea of scaffolding, making a system that will not fall apart as the entire team ages together. It seems like common sense, yet it hasn't be done for a while, thanks to desperation moves (ie, Ollie for 3 years 36 million).

The Mets made progress on starting pitching and were able to get a back up / starting catcher and a key addition to the bullpen, which is nice considering we just lost 4 players. The player I am most intrigued by, and will do a more thorough look at later, was Rule 5 pick up Pedro Beato. I remember watching Beato when he was young (like when he was 20) as a member of the Ironbirds. He has tremendous power in his arm, and didn't have a bad year. I am very interested to see how he performs in a major league bullpen this season.

Other than the Mets, I was fairly surprised this year. The Nationals spending caught me off guard, and so did the Red Sox. I'll hold my comments until the Lee signing unfolds.

The dust is just starting to settle over yesterday's bold move of the Nationals signing Jason Werth for 7 years at 18 million a season. I think Alderson said it best, “It makes some of our contracts look good” (Zing Omar, Zing Nationals). Anyway here are a few things to keep out for today:

According MLB Trade Rumors, the Nationals are still looking for another bat, and to move a bat. Their roster, with the exception of Werth and Zimmerman, is open to be traded and they would like to get something for Willingham before he walks next season (and those of you who read this website, you know my opinion about Willingham, as I see him as a major Mets killer, and would like him to be out of the division). Before this week is done, there is a possibility of the Nationals getting either Pavano or Pena.

Staying with the Nationals, they weren't able to get a deal worked out with Wang. If the price is right, I would pounce.

Lee will stay in Texas! If they offer him a 6th year.

Finally, Sandy says that the first day is crazy, but he is going to meet with agents, and it sounds like he expects to make moves later in the winter meetings, and they seem to be calculated moves.

There could have been some better places for Werth to land for the Mets, like outside the division, however as situations could go, this is pretty positive for the Mets. First, before some analysis, lets break down the deal. The Nationals had a pretty good offense last season, but they lost one of their key players last week when Dunn signed with the White Sox. The Nationals were able to go out and get Jason Werth for 7 years and 126 million. Jason now becomes the centerpiece for the Nationals offense. Expect to see a slight drop in his production next season as he will be playing in a bigger ball park, and he doesn't have as much protection in the lineup. The other players in the Nationals lineup will NOT see a drop in production as Werth essentially takes the focus that Dunn received.

Anyway there are a lot of implications about this contract, for example the size of it. Its huge. This is a big statement for the Nationals as they really look to be buyers for once, and they will need something for the ballpark while they wait for Strasburgh to come off of the DL. The contract also means that Crawford could possibly look to get a near historic contract, since this one was near historic. Finally, this spreads beyond the outfield position. This sets the level of pay that the best players will demand on the market.

Now why do I love this?

This is probably the worst possible scenario for the Phillies.

First, Werth stays in the division and can his new team tips about the Nationals pitching rotation. More importantly, the Phillies now don't just lose Werth's talents, they have to contend with them now.

Second, and more important, the only benefit the Phillies were going to get from losing Werth was two first round picks. However, the Nationals were so bad last season, that their first round pick is protected. Therefore the Phillies will receive a supplemental round pick and then the Nationals second round pick instead.

Like I said earlier, the best situation for the Mets would have been for Werth to go to a struggling team outside of the division, but I'll take him going to the Nationals.

It's time for the WInter Meetings, the time of the year when baseball execs get together and try to see what they can work out. There are all sorts of teams that go to the meetings. There are sellers (Padres this year, more on this later), buyers, rebuilders, and inactive. It looks like the Mets, from Sandy Alderson via Metsblog, will be looking to get some players this year, but cautiously, trying to make sure that the moves are smart, not long ranging, and allowing the Mets to be buyers in 2012. Here are some of the headlines for the Mets going into this winter meetings:

The Mets are looking to get some light starting pitching, a rebuilding project, for cheap to fill in some gaps. The hope of these projects is the same as anytime this happens, that the Mets will get a player in a low swing, and the player will be become a big deal.. Targets right now include Jeff Francis and Chris Young. Both are good choices and if the price is low and for one year, lets bring them both on.

The Relief pitching could be interesting for the Mets. They may try to get a closer in trade to not activate Krods 17.5 million dollar option, which would be a huge chunk of the change for 2012. Also the Mets have essentially lost Valdes, Takahashi, Feliciano and Nieve. The latter players will probably be replaced by cheaper options in January.

Finally the Mets could be making moves as well. Will there be a blockbuster trade for Grienke? Doubt it but its possible. Will Reyes be traded? Doubt it, its possible though. Will Castillo and Perez be traded? I wish. It should be an interesting week.

I think what is adding to the excitement of next week is it is still a mystery to what the Mets will look like next year and beyond. I'm curious to finally get an insight to Sandy's master plan.

The Mets haven't made many moves yet, but the 2011 Mets are already looking a little different. One of the marks of a good team are the peripheral players, the players on the bench or in the pen that have golden seasons and provide that X factor a team. The Mets, as we know, have been plagued for a while certain players they keep hanging on to (many of which were let go of last year), or keep relying on players that don't pan out. On the other side, they also have some quality players, but when their contracts are up, these players demand too much money.

Thats essentially what is happening with the Mets. There are four players who will either definitely not be with the team next season, or will most likely not be on the team next season.

Raul Valdes

Fernandeo Nieve

Takahashi

Pedro Feliciano

With Valdes and Nieve, its a shame they didn't pan out, especially Nieve. When we first got him in 2009 it felt like we had something, something that Houston overlooked but last year it just wasn't work. Both of these players have signed minor league contracts with other teams.

Takahashi and the Mets weren't able to reach agreement, and thats alright. While he was effective, there are ways to save money and I'm glad this front office understands the importance of getting similar talent for a lower price.

Feliciano is a tough one to (most likely) say good bye to. Over the last several years he has been so consistent and such a key part of the bullpen, considering the way management has completely misused and overused him. I'll welcome him back to the team, but only for the right price (the concerns about his use have to start to become a reality at some point). At least the front office took a gamble and offered him arbitration, so we can at least get a pick out of it.

It's been pretty busy in Mets world recently. Last week we had the introduction of our new skipper and then that was followed by the Thanksgiving Holiday, so its normal to miss news that was very important to the Mets. In the Mets world, of course, the major news was the Mets offering Pedro Feliciano arbitration (which I'll admit even surprised me), and that Sandy is open to trading Jose Reyes if he is offered a boatload (which is always a good idea to keep your options open). There were several moves that happened last week, or were finalized in the last week, that really impact both the free agent market and the trade market going into the winter meetings, which are right around the corner (sources are from combing through MLB Trade Rumors):

The major player to drop off the market this week was Victor Martinez who received a 4 year 50 million dollar contract from the Tigers. Martinez was previously with the Red Sox.

Jon Garland is off the free agent market. He's wearing Dodger blue now.

Javier Vazquez is off the free agent market after signing a one year contract (7 million) with the Marlins. This is an effort for Javier to raise his value next season, assuming he has a bounce back year with the Marlins.

No more Raul Valdes. He signed a minor league contract with the Cards.

Dontrelle Willis also signed a minor league deal. He's now with the Reds.

Zach Duke is now on the Diamondbacks, well sort of. He was traded for a player to be name later, although he has to have his deal renegotiated for the 2011 season. The Diamondbacks are saying if they can't get a deal near what he was paid in 2011, then they will non-tender him.

All of the above was with a shortened week with Thanksgiving, so I expect this week to be more interesting.