I agree that deGrom’s health is the key to what the Mets did or did not do in terms of acquiring acceptable starting pitching depth. But I think because of the state of our minor league system, ie: being too top heavy, its hard to see how the Mets would have done that without overpaying beyond reason for a rental not knowing deGrom’s health. Let me repeat- deGrom is the key. I find it almost impossible for the Mets to make it out of the divisional series vs any combination of Brewers, Padres, Dodgers, and Giants without deGrom. So any rental- even Berrios is not worth it. Scherzer wouldve been worth it. Story AND marquez I wouldve given up a good amount too- but the Rockies FO is a s*it show But Maeda and Donaldson? Cmon
Secondly- bullpen arms were tough. I wouldve wanted Raisel Iglesias but he wasnt available. Kimbrel cost them Madrigal and a SP. is Kimbrel worth Maurcio and Matt Allan? For a reliever? No way. Again. Everything hinged on that deGrom news. You cant be that irresponsible with the future of the franchise given what was available and prices even on the elite reliever market
The Mets played it safe, which we may be thankful for in the off-season. As you point out, the price tag on every impact starter or reliever was over the top. Why waste capital and manpower this season when we can get a better price in the off-season? We may make the playoffs this year but we’re not winning the WS without a healthy Jacob deGrom. If you look at the trade deadline from that point of view, the Mets “do no harm” strategy appears to be wise. I know other fans are underwhelmed and perhaps disappointed but building a winning team takes time.
Good analysis, as always. I think the meaningful question to ask is: who among the available pitchers could the Mets have acquired for Crow-Armstrong? Clearly not Berrios. Kimbrel? Doubtful or it would likely would have happened. I’d like to see an article comparing C-A to prospects who were traded by other teams. Unless he compares favorably, you can’t criticize the Mets for how they handled the deadline. Would you really have given up any of the other top prospects for Berrios or Kimbrel? It’s always debatable but I would not. Also, the Mets essentially added Carrasco at the deadline and expect deGrom and Thor back in Sept so a trade for a starter would only have been for 4 weeks, thus diminishing the value. Finally, if the offense thus far had even been mediocre, the Mets would have something like a 10 game lead in the division. So adding a bat is a very acceptable move.
Good stuff. I would stress that the Mets have some returning starters (one did well last night) who can be kind of like new acquisitions, and that is one argument for not over-paying for starters or top relievers.
Now, smart guys, explain something else to me, please. Yesterday in the first Conforto took a clear strike 3 in the low 90s, not even from a leftie, with no outs and the bases loaded. Infield was back, meaning many types of contact would have brought a run home. Do analytics/Mets coaches tell big hitters to be selective so they can swing big, even with 2 strikes, rather than protect the plate in these situations? Over the long haul do stats show team is better with him looking for a pitch to drive at the risk of striking out rather than shortening his swing to put it in play?
Or, did Michael just do this on his own, guessing curve (the guy had a good one) and thus frozen by the fastball?
The pitch was nowhere near the corner or the top or bottom of the strike zone. Inner half, but totally hittable (say I from poolside😎) and only 91 or so mph. How can he take that with bases loaded and no outs? The number of strikeouts looking is alarming in general, but this case seems inexplicable. What am I missing?
The Mets new organization was fully exposed with this past weeks non activities as well as the one trade they made. We now know the GM is clueless, and the new owner as cheap as the last owners. The traded for a SS when they have one. Which means the guy playing 2nd - McNeil is out of a job. If that was the disered result then why not trade him for starting pitching - 35 years and counting and no championships.
I agree that deGrom’s health is the key to what the Mets did or did not do in terms of acquiring acceptable starting pitching depth. But I think because of the state of our minor league system, ie: being too top heavy, its hard to see how the Mets would have done that without overpaying beyond reason for a rental not knowing deGrom’s health. Let me repeat- deGrom is the key. I find it almost impossible for the Mets to make it out of the divisional series vs any combination of Brewers, Padres, Dodgers, and Giants without deGrom. So any rental- even Berrios is not worth it. Scherzer wouldve been worth it. Story AND marquez I wouldve given up a good amount too- but the Rockies FO is a s*it show But Maeda and Donaldson? Cmon
Secondly- bullpen arms were tough. I wouldve wanted Raisel Iglesias but he wasnt available. Kimbrel cost them Madrigal and a SP. is Kimbrel worth Maurcio and Matt Allan? For a reliever? No way. Again. Everything hinged on that deGrom news. You cant be that irresponsible with the future of the franchise given what was available and prices even on the elite reliever market
I cant get on the Mets based on the market.
The Mets played it safe, which we may be thankful for in the off-season. As you point out, the price tag on every impact starter or reliever was over the top. Why waste capital and manpower this season when we can get a better price in the off-season? We may make the playoffs this year but we’re not winning the WS without a healthy Jacob deGrom. If you look at the trade deadline from that point of view, the Mets “do no harm” strategy appears to be wise. I know other fans are underwhelmed and perhaps disappointed but building a winning team takes time.
Good analysis, as always. I think the meaningful question to ask is: who among the available pitchers could the Mets have acquired for Crow-Armstrong? Clearly not Berrios. Kimbrel? Doubtful or it would likely would have happened. I’d like to see an article comparing C-A to prospects who were traded by other teams. Unless he compares favorably, you can’t criticize the Mets for how they handled the deadline. Would you really have given up any of the other top prospects for Berrios or Kimbrel? It’s always debatable but I would not. Also, the Mets essentially added Carrasco at the deadline and expect deGrom and Thor back in Sept so a trade for a starter would only have been for 4 weeks, thus diminishing the value. Finally, if the offense thus far had even been mediocre, the Mets would have something like a 10 game lead in the division. So adding a bat is a very acceptable move.
Pitching should have been the key target. Also- Bryant better than Baez
Good stuff. I would stress that the Mets have some returning starters (one did well last night) who can be kind of like new acquisitions, and that is one argument for not over-paying for starters or top relievers.
Now, smart guys, explain something else to me, please. Yesterday in the first Conforto took a clear strike 3 in the low 90s, not even from a leftie, with no outs and the bases loaded. Infield was back, meaning many types of contact would have brought a run home. Do analytics/Mets coaches tell big hitters to be selective so they can swing big, even with 2 strikes, rather than protect the plate in these situations? Over the long haul do stats show team is better with him looking for a pitch to drive at the risk of striking out rather than shortening his swing to put it in play?
Or, did Michael just do this on his own, guessing curve (the guy had a good one) and thus frozen by the fastball?
The pitch was nowhere near the corner or the top or bottom of the strike zone. Inner half, but totally hittable (say I from poolside😎) and only 91 or so mph. How can he take that with bases loaded and no outs? The number of strikeouts looking is alarming in general, but this case seems inexplicable. What am I missing?
The Mets new organization was fully exposed with this past weeks non activities as well as the one trade they made. We now know the GM is clueless, and the new owner as cheap as the last owners. The traded for a SS when they have one. Which means the guy playing 2nd - McNeil is out of a job. If that was the disered result then why not trade him for starting pitching - 35 years and counting and no championships.