Ike Davis On The Verge Of Being Dealt To The Orioles

Source: #Orioles could be on the verge of landing Ike Davis very soon. They were rumored as a team who was interested.
— Andrew Rickli (@AndrewRickli) January 3, 2014

Welp..This is called putting your faith in the hands of an unproven source.  Here's what I can tell you.  Mr. Rickli was present at the winter meetings and has been tied to other much more reputable writers.  Are his sources legitimate?  I honestly don't know...but with last night's news that the Orioles were on on the verge of acquiring a bat, this news makes sense.

The Mets remain interested in pitching prospects in exchange for Davis' services, but their demands have been high and somewhat unrealistic.  That said, I remain confident Davis will eventually be moved this winter, even if that means its the equivalent of a salary dump.  Whether Rickli's source's are accurate remains to be seen, but Davis' time with the Mets remains limited.  That much is clear...

Update:
Rickli followed up his report with the following tweets...

With regards to Davis and the #Orioles my tweet said "COULD" my source was not directly involved in the negotiations but has some knowledge.
— Andrew Rickli (@AndrewRickli) January 3, 2014

Ike Davis' bat would project great in Camden Yards, and the #Orioles are looking for a LH bat. #Brewers were also rumored to be interested.
— Andrew Rickli (@AndrewRickli) January 3, 2014

I'm not sure either of those are great endorsements of the original report, but that's where we're at right now.  Davis may be on the move.. Or we're just anticipating a move so bad that we're willing to latch onto just about anything.  Only time will tell...

Rumor: Orioles Close On A Trade, But With Who?

This morning Roch Kubatko of MASN Sports reported that he has heard rumblings that Orioles GM, Dan Duquette, may have trade talks in the works that have gone as far as reviewing medical records.  Unfortunately that's all he's got.  No second team, no potential players involved...nothing.

He does go on to mention that the Mets have been in contact multiple times about Ike Davis, but that their demands have been too high.  Davis isn't without a significant injury history, having lost the majority of a season to an ankle injury and then having a more recent bought with Valley Fever.  I would imagine any team looking to acquire him would want to give that a very thorough once over.

With that said, this is all speculation.  However, that's more than we've had in recent weeks.  I still believe the Mets will deal Ike this winter and only Baltimore and Milwaukee remain as potential destinations.  As a result,  this is worth keeping an eye on.

Piazza's Case For The HOF Is An Easy One

One of the biggest injustices of last year's Hall of Fame vote by the baseball writers was the exclusion of Mike Piazza from enshrinement. They have the opportunity to make that right this year.

Piazza has a soft spot reserved in the hearts of most Met fans. A fan favorite for the eight seasons he spent in Queens, he was the centerpiece of the 2000 team that overachieved it's way to the World Series under Bobby Valentine, the Mets' most recent appearance. Setting aside the 2006 season and it's unfulfilled promises, the era of Piazza and his teammates on that memorable squad is the last high-water mark or many of today's Mets fans.

Sentiment aside, Piazza is the best hitting catcher in baseball history. A quick look at the essential numbers, from Matt Snyder at CBSSports.com:

Over the course of 16 years, Piazza hit .308/.377/.545 (143 OPS+) with 344 doubles, 427 homers, 1335 RBI and 1048 runs.

He won the 1993 NL Rookie of the Year, made 12 All-Star Games, won 10 Silver Sluggers and finished in the top 10 of MVP voting seven times. Though he never won the MVP, he finished as the runner-up twice and was a third-place finisher one time.

Piazza played in eight different playoff series in five different seasons, hitting .242/.301/.458 with eight doubles and six homers in 32 postseason games...

Among catchers in career numbers, Piazza ranks eighth in average, 13th in OBP, first in slugging, first in OPS+, eighth in hits, 13th in doubles, first in homers, fourth in RBI, 11th in runs and first in offensive WAR. 

His numbers fare well among non-catchers, as well, ranking 30th in slugging percentage and landing inside the top 50 in home runs and 90th in RBI's.

Of course, we dispelled the whole "bad defense" misnomer here on Effing Mets a few weeks ago.

So why wasn't he inducted? PED suspicion. No proof, mind you, but speculation. It's time for the witch hunt to end, and Piazza to be inducted. Do the right thing, snobby, annoying baseball writers.

Should Mets Go All In For 2014?

As posted earlier this morning, it appears more likely that Stephen Drew will be going back to Boston. It seems like the Mets are reluctant to sign him for financial reasons. I would take Stephen Drew, especially for only a 2 year commitment. But the Mets don't have to get Stephen Drew. Before you all jump down my throat and call me a shill, understand this: I like playing devils advocate and looking at other possibilites. I also hate Ruben Tejada and am in no way saying I am happy going into 2014 with him as our everyday shortstop.

You can look at it two ways. If the Mets sign Drew, they are improving the team and re-affirming their commitment to the fans by spending money. Shortstop is a tough spot to fill, so you almost feel obligated to fill it when you have the chance. However, if you sign Drew now, you're not going to sign a free agent shortstop for the 2015 season. Next off-season, there is a little more depth in the shortstop free agent pool. Hanley Ramirez, Asdrubal Cabrera and Jed Lowrie are all available next year. Guys like Yunel Escobar and JJ Hardy will be free agents as well. I'm not saying the Mets will get any of these guys. But it is unreasonable to look down the road and say maybe you should hold off and make a run at Hanley or one of the others? I don't think so.

I am not saying any of these guys are better or worse than Drew. But baseball teams don't get constructed in one offseason. And parts must be placed based on the totality of the whole unit. Some of those guys may not be as good as Drew, but they are still be better than Tejada. So coupled with a few more moves to solidify the team next year, you can live with that.

Let's face it. Stephen Drew is a decent player and an upgrade over who the Mets currently have. But is Stephen Drew going to make the Mets a championship team? No. With Drew, I have the Mets as a .500 baseball team . And a .500 baseball is a lot better than we have been seeing. They may tease us and stay in the race for the Wild Card until late August or so. But this team still has no lead off hitter and a very suspect bullpen. On top of that, you don't know what you're going to get from Travis d'Arnaud, who is very key in determining how good this team is going to be this year and in the future.

So is it smart to put all your eggs in a basket in one off-season? I don't think the Mets are in that position. Not yet. 2015 is the earliest year I think the Mets can be taken seriously anyway. I'd be happy if the Mets signed Drew, but I'm not going to lose my mind if they don't either.

Feel free to call me names on Twitter @GetsThruBuckner

Increasing Likelihood Drew Goes Back To The Red Sox

Late last night MLB Trade Rumors reported that its "more and more likely that Stephen Drew will re-sign with the Red Sox."  They cite the potential loss of a draft pick as the reason Drew's market hasn't developed, stating that multiple team's to include the Mets "appear content to go with internal options".  This is inline with last week's radio interview by Mets' special assistant J.P. Ricciardi where the Mets delivered a vote of confidence to Ruben Tejada.

I suppose its possible that the Mets will turn their back on a two year deal on Drew, I just don't think there are any good baseball reasons why they should.  It has to be simply money, as it always is with this team.  Should he find his way back to the Red Sox on a two year/$24 million dollarish contract, that narrative will rage!

Drew is an obvious upgrade to Tejada, and he can be had on the type of short term nature that this front office loves.  With no news of a potential trade for a young shortstop and what considering there is absolutely no chance of the Mets spending on a guy like Hanley Ramirez next winter, walking away from Drew now will leave the position unresolved indefinitely. 

The Mets can slap an exclamation point on an otherwise positive offseason if they find a way to make this happen.  Or they can allow the offseason to end the way it started, with an increasingly large faction of disappointed and disinterested fan base.  Are the Mets better on paper than the team they fielded last year? Absolutely, but they're not a lot better.  Stephen Drew is not the type of player who will turn the current roster into a playoff team, but he does represent what would be the organization following through on a promise it made to its fans.

The Case Against Free Agents as the Way to Make the Mets a Winner

Baseball has always been about three things: scouting, coaching and management. A franchise that does these things well wins.  The amount of money a franchise spends means only so much. The Yankees have outspent every team in baseball for the last dozen years and have only one championship to show for it.  Granted, they have been contenders nearly every year, but the Cardinals and Red Sox have had far greater success and spent a King's ransom less in the same time span. Many have argued that the Mets should follow the Yankees' example and buy every available player as a means to achieving post season success. Anticipating upgrades from the free agent marketplace, however, ignores the limitations of the Mets' owners willingness to spend.  More importantly, it overvalues the pool of available talent that might be purchased to help the franchise succeed.

A recent example shows why acquiring free agents is not all it is cracked up to be.  Michael Bourne was a free agent target of the Mets last winter.  Fans and media alike dubbed him "the Answer" in Centerfield. He was a proven glove and his offensive production was unquestionably far better than any option the Mets had in house.  He wanted a five year, $60M contract.  Sandy Alderson, perhaps knowing that four years wouldn't seal the deal, would not budge.  The Mets lost out on Bourn, who signed with the Indians.

Here were the results: Bourn played 130 games for Cleveland. He had 525 at-bats, scored 75 runs, had a batting average of .263 with an on base percentage of .316. He stole 12 bases and struck out 132 times. Juan Lagares, who was on exactly nobody's radar last winter, played centerfield for the Mets in 2013.  He had 392 at-bats, scored 35 runs, had a batting average of .242 with an on base percentage of .281. He stole 6 bases and struck out 96 times.  Bourn admittedly had marginally better offensive statistics than Lagares in 2013 - some of which can be attributed to batting order placement and more consistent playing time. No one who watched Lagares play day in and day out can say that Bourn was a better defensive outfielder. Lagares has a much higher ceiling and Bourn gets closer to being Cleveland's Jason Bay as each day passes.  Alderson saved the Mets $11.6M in 2013 and for the next four years, close to $40M.  In addition, the Mets selected Dominick Smith with the draft pick they saved by not signing Bourn. Smith played in the Gulf Coast League (and a cup of coffee in Kingston) where he hit a combined .301 with an on base percentage of .398.  He is very young (he turns 19 this coming June), but if he progresses as he started, he is sharing an infield with David Wright in 2016.  Had Alderson signed Bourn, no one ever sees Lagares in a Mets uniform and Dominick Smith plays for a different franchise.  Put differently, assume the roles were reversed and Michael Bourn were on the 2013 Mets with a four year $48M contract ahead of him.  The Indians come knocking on the Mets' door looking for a trade of Lagares and Smith for Bourn. Would the Mets take the deal?  Well, of course they would.

The Class of 2014 Free Agents have been a group led by Robinson Cano ($240M), Jacoby Ellsbury ($153M) and Shin-Soo Choo ($130M).  A talented trio - but unless their individual performances improve substantially, only Cano has Hall of Fame potential.  None of the other free agents this year can turn a club around on his own.  Even the pitching is weak - so much so that a man who has thrown not one pitch to a Major League hitter is the most sought after player.  A look at next year's projected free agents shows a group not as talented and likely to be even more expensive.  Also, because of the rules for becoming a free agent, most players available are over 30 - with many in their mid to late 30's. Hardly the stuff of Cornerstone franchise players. The free agent market can be a valuable source of complementary players, but teams seeking to buy their way to a pennant will find themselves poorer and with a farm system that is devoid of talent as the result of the compensation picks they have to surrender.

The Mets have drafted wisely over the past several years (Matt Harvey, for example), traded players at their peak value for young talent (Beltran and Dickey for Wheeler and d'Arnaud and Syndergaard are two prime examples) and have avoided signing players to contracts that they will regret in years to come (like Jose Reyes). Gone are the days of Bay, Santana, Castillo and Oliver Perez.  They have amassed an abundance of young pitching that they can keep or use as trade bait when the time is right.  In the category of young pitching the Mets could deal are Raphael Montero, Jacob deGrom, Jeurys Familia, Jenrry Mejia, Bobby Parnell, Vic Black, Darin Gorski, Steven Matz, Jeff Walters and Cori Mazzoni.  The road map to consistently good performance starts on the mound. The Mets have accumulated a wealth of high ceiling pitching talent that they could never have acquired via free agency.

The post-Minaya era Mets have demonstrated that they are good talent evaluators.  By not mistaking wishes for facts, the front office has resisted the temptation to sacrifice what they are building long term for short term satisfaction. They have shown remarkable fiscal and emotional discipline (trading R.A. Dickey was a gut-wrenching decision, but clearly the smart move.)  The Mets are obviously a few players away from contending in the tough National League East.  Still, they are far better poised today, without breaking the bank on overpriced free agents, than they were in 2010 when they signed Jason Bay, who was supposed to deliver a World Series to Flushing.

This is a guest post by Denis Engel.

Ike Davis Trade Talks Continue

#Orioles talks with #Mets regarding Ike Davis are seemingly back "on" #Orioles previously balked when #Mets asked for Eduardo Rodriguez.
— Andrew Rickli (@AndrewRickli) December 31, 2013

#Mets are looking for pitching from the #orioles who are reluctant to give up much. They will not give up Gausman, Bundy, or Rodriguez
— Andrew Rickli (@AndrewRickli) December 31, 2013

There is two things to note here. The Mets are still actively trying to trade Ike Davis and they're still reaching for the stars in terms of what they want in exchange for bounce back candidate. 

Its important for fans to remain patient.  There is little to indicate that the fact that Ike Davis remains on the roster is preventing the Mets from making any other moves.  Its also important to realize that there is absolutely no harm in Alderson asking for the moon.  If you don't ask, you won't get it.  There are still two potential suitors in Baltimore and Milwaukee, so it makes perfect sense for Alderson to maximize Davis' value.