Musings
As a Seton Hall fan, I see the team embroiled in the latest NCAA Men’s Basketball Scandal. Like many of these scandals, this one involves team’s illegally paying players, and all the hot takes have ensued. We have seen all the usual from paying players all the way to just scrapping the entire system and starting over. Really, all of these takes and suggestions stem from one guiding principle – the system is broken.
Overall, when making suggestions, the one guiding principle needs to be these are student-athletes. The NCAA has always wanted to at least create this allusion, and as such, they need to put rules in place to treat the athletes like other students whenever possible. There are other legal and economic realities that need to be addressed as well. With those in mind, here are some suggestions and realities when trying to fix NCAA basketball:
You Can’t Pay Players
Look, time and again, we have seen record revenues for the NCAA Tournament, and we have see calls for schools to pay players. While, it sounds good, it’s just not possible.
First and foremost, while private universities like Duke and Stanford can do this, there is a real question about the ability for all of college basketball to do this. There is a real question whether smaller schools like SUNY Binghamton could pay their players. If pressed to pay their players, it is eminently possible we will see smaller schools shut down their basketball programs thereby creating fewer chances for players to receive an education. That should not be the goal of college athletics.
There is also the Title IX issue. With Title IX, you can certainly argue college programs which pay their men’s players will also have to pay their women’s players. For programs like UConn and Notre Dame, that may not be such a big deal. However, when you look at mid majors or even lower tier major conference schools like Providence, this could be a deal breaker. Ultimately, it may lead to the reduction of varsity sports offered on campus, and once again, we are back to limiting opportunities for students. That should never be the goal.
All Basketball Players Should Be on Scholarship
Personally, I have always found the measure to pay the athletes disingenuous. When this point is raised, people mostly want to pay the top athletes for a school who are real revenue generators. Essentially, people are okay with the leading scorer getting paid, but are nowhere near as concerned as the last guy on the bench. As per rules, remember that last guy on the bench puts in the same amount of time off the court as the star.
Also, in what is constantly a point of contention, players are already compensated with a scholarship plus reasonable expenses.
If you go to USC, that is compensation of roughly $60,000 per year. It could be more. We can dicker over whether this is fair market value or not. What cannot be argued is that’s a fairly large compensation for a 18 year old student. The only problem is you’re only getting it if you’re deemed one of the top players/recruits.
This is an inane decision designed to create competitive balance among schools. If you’re an organization who maintains these are student-athletes, why would you create an impediment for a student to select the school they want to attend? Let them decided if they want to sit for a year or two while going to the school they want to attend. Don’t take away their chance to go to Kentucky because Calipari has already handed out all of his scholarships.
Ultimately, each player on the team contributes to the school and the team. They are due compensation. In NCAA basketball, that is in the form of a scholarship.
As an aside, this would also end the shameful practice of dangling a scholarship to a student, and revoking it when a better player comes along, the student doesn’t produce on the field, or when the student suffers an injury.
Allow Players to Profit from Their Likeness
As part of a goal to promote amateurism, there have been many roadblocks for players to earn a living. For some players who live in poorer areas, they do need more than the scholarship. They need actual money. However, they are prevented from doing so, which in turn, creates the corruption the NCAA wants to avoid.
Really, by not allowing players to earn any money, you create an environment in which boosters or agents can slip money under the table to help entice students to attend their university. By permitting students to earn some money and by giving everyone a scholarship, you eliminate some of this.
Certainly, there should be some reasonable guidelines. For example, student-athletes should only be permitted to do these activities when they are not in-season. As we know, there are only so many hours of the day. These students do need to practice and study. Adding shooting a local commercial takes away time from both. However, there is an open window over the summer.
This would give the student a possibility to get money they need to not only take a girl out, but more importantly, to improve their standard of living. Ultimately, that’s the goal of attending college in the first place.
Allow Players to Have Agents
Let’s admit student-athletes are not normal students, and they really have more on their plate than the average student. Regardless of background, it’s a lot for an 18 year old to handle, and they need all the help they can get.
Sure, you can argue that’s the job of the head coach or the Athletic Director. However, it is fair to question whether they have adequate enough time to address all the needs a player has. That goes double when you place restrictions on how frequently a player and coach can interact.
A player having an agent would be helpful. The agent could effectively communicate with a player what their realistic draft stock is. Considering this would be an ongoing relationship, there may not be the same push to get that player to declare.
If there are family issues where someone needs money or the player runs into trouble, there is someone else to help handle the situation. If a player gets hurt, there is someone there to protect the player from both himself and a myopic school looking for an Elite 8 appearance.
There’s room for reasonable restrictions here. The NCAA can certify those agents themselves, and they can also set down contact and recruiting periods for agents to contact students. Maybe you limit a student to just one agent during his four years in college. Ultimately, the goal is to provide the student with both someone who will look out for them as well as another buffer against the corrupt boosters who look to take advantage of the players.
Students Should Be Allowed to Transfer When a Coach Leaves
It’s flat out dumb when a coach leaves, he can go to a new school the next day. However, if a player left behind by that coach wants to leave too, he has to sit out a year. The NCAA can come up with a number of reasons why this is a good rule, but it’s not.
The NCAA came up with a system where the coaching staff is supposed to be the ones who recruit a player to come to the school. As a result, the deciding factor why a student opted to attend that school was the coach. With the coach gone, the student should be permitted to re-assess their decision. If they decided they don’t like the new coach or new direction, they should be permitted to transfer once the season is over.
Students with a High GPA Should Be Allowed to Transfer without Sitting Out
Absent a coach leaving, there are very good reasons why you don’t want to see students being able to switch schools year to year. Mostly, it’s a constant distraction which would impede a student’s ability to concentrate in school or on the court. With that said, this is supposed to be about education.
While basketball players are a bit different, all students are just looking for the best opportunity they can get. Typically speaking, that comes with getting better grades. To that end, why not incentivize student-athletes to get better grades. The NCAA should set a floor, and if a student-athlete clears that GPA, they could then transfer without waiting out a year.
No More One and Done
This is an area where the NCAA has to work with the NBA because the one and done rule is an NBA and not an NCAA rule. We can debate the intentions of the rule, but what we do know is it is having an undesired effect on the quality of play and level of interest in college basketball.
There are a few options the NCAA and NBA could investigate to replace the one and done rule.
There is the MLB model where a player can declare for the draft out of high school. If they do not like their draft position or the bonus offered, they are then given the option to go to school. The caveat there is that student is not draft eligible again until after their Junior year.
Another idea is the old Larry Bird rule. No, not the salary cap rule. Back in 1978, Larry Bird was drafted sixth overall by the Boston Celtics. In lieu of signing with them, Bird went back to Indiana State for his senior year. He then played Magic Johnson and Michigan State in the Championship Game which elevated both the NCAA Tournament and NBA.
The caveat with Bird was the Celtics had to sign him before the 1979 Draft was held. Had they not, Bird would have re-entered the Draft. Really, there is no reason why that rule couldn’t be put back in place. Let teams draft and follow a player. There can be a signing period both before and after the NCAA basketball season. This can be tinkered with as the NBA and NCAA see fit, but there are good reasons to implement this.
Conclusion
The NCAA is currently in the state they are in because they are trying to maintain a 1940s idea of amateurism. They are seeking to maintain their level of revenues without incurring additional costs. That’s all well and good as it does help to pump money into colleges and universities. However, it should not come at the cost of helping student-athletes.
At the end of the day, if you give them all scholarships, incentivize learning, and allow them to earn money in the offseason, there is no reason why the NCAA cannot be put in a much healthier situation.
On March 4th, Amed Rosario was hit on the kneecap with a pitch. He’s undergone an MRI, and it came back negative. While that is great news, it is important to note Rosario has not played since that March 4th game. More to the point, he is no longer being listed on the group of players available to participate in Spring Training games. When he will be able to return to the Mets is anyone’s guess right now.
The Mets are easing Rosario back, but given how this is the Mets, Rosario’s status for Opening Day is still in doubt. As such, it is time the Mets begin looking at alternative options.
To some, the answer should obviously be Jose Reyes. Reyes was signed to be the team’s top utility player, and as an extension of those duties, Reyes is the most obvious candidate to step-in and play any infield position for long stretches of time should any of the regulars get injured.
While the obvious choice, Reyes may not necessarily be the correct choice.
Defensively, Reyes’ -27 DRS made him the worst infielder in Major League Baseball last year. At his natural position of shortstop, Reyes had a -15 DRS in 630.1 innings played there last season. Believe it or not, the last time Reyes had a positive DRS season at shortstop was in 2007.
Given his experience at the position, the Mets would be more than jusified putting Reyes at shortstop for the occasional game. However, asking him to play there for extended periods of time would be to significantly compromise the Mets defense. Worse yet, you are doing that at the most important defensive position.
With the Mets signing Todd Frazier to play third, the left side of the infield defense has become one of the strengths for this Mets team. It would certainly behoove the team to keep it that way even in Rosario’s absence. That is why the Mets should really consider Luis Guillorme to take over for Rosario should he not be able to play on Opening Day.
In the absence of Rosario, Guillorme is the best defensive shortstop in the Mets organization. In fact, there are some who would argue Guillorme is the better of the two. Playing Guillorme at short in Rosario’s absence would maintain a great left side of the infield defense.
The obvious caveat here is Guillorme’s bat. He’s never hit for power, and there are many who question if it will ever play at the Major League level. Truth be told, the Mets are going to have to find that out sooner or later, so why not now?
Looking at his minor league numbers, this is a player who has shown an ability to get on base, which could give the Mets some hope he could profile as Luis Castillo – the Marlins version, not the Mets version. With Guillorme working on driving the ball, and showing some positive results for those efforts this Spring, his ability to stick in the lineup becomes less of a doubt.
And if we are being honest, his bat should not be a deterrent; at least not now. Since 2015, Reyes has been a 91 OPS+ hitter, and in each of those seasons Reyes has gotten off to some dreadful starts. Since 2015, Reyes has hit .205/.263/.301 in the Month of April.
With that being the baseline April production, the Mets should really consider starting Guillorme on Opening Day should Rosario not be available. The offensive floor is low, and his defense right now has no ceiling.
In what is a yearly tradition, the St. Louis Cardinals hold a fan vote over which player should be inducted into the Cardinals Hall of Fame. For a number of reasons, the Mets do not hold such a vote for their fanbase, but in vein of what the Cardinals are doing, the Mets Bloggers tackle the issue of who should be the next Mets great inducted into the team’s Hall of Fame:
Joe Maracic(Loud Egg)
What about owners? Nelson Doubleday Jr.
Former Mets pitcher Mike Pelfrey has retired from the game of baseball after a 12 year career, and he has accepted an assistant coaching position with Division II Newman University. Now, Pelfrey can play the part of Rick Peterson in helping a young pitcher learn about which one of his pitches is like putting ketchup on ice cream.
Reflecting back on Pelfrey’s career, I mostly remember the disappointment.
There was his inability to jump from being the ninth overall pick in the 2005 draft to truly help an injured Mets rotation. That certainly stung when we watched Steve Trachselget pounded for five runs over the first two innings of a pivotal Game 3 of the 2006 NLCS.
There was also Pelfrey being a part of the 2007 and 2008 teams that collapsed. In 2007, his September 24th start saw the beginning of a five game losing streak with the Mets losing six of their last seven games to see a two game lead become an embarrassing collapse.
Pelfrey was a much better pitcher in 2008 with him going 13-11 with a 3.72 ERA. His improved pitching did not stop him from going 0-3 with a 4.06 ERA to help the Mets second consecutive collapse.
Still, Pelfrey showed enough to give Mets fans faith for the future. To that end, the rotation was set up so he would be the first ever Mets pitcher to toe the rubber at Citi Field. The third pitch throw in Citi Field history would be deposited by Jody Gerut into the left field stands for a lead-off homer.
Still, with Pelfrey, Mets fans always had hope for him, and we were waiting for him to finally turn that corner to be the front line starter we all imagined he could be. It just never happened for him.
He followed a good 2008 with a disappointing 2009. He rebounded in 2010 by winning 15 games, but he then went 7-13 with a 4.74 ERA. By that point, we all figured he was one of those every-other-year type of pitchers. It all seemed that way when he jumped out of the gate in 2012.
Through three starts, he had not recorded a decision, but he had a 2.29 ERA. His last start was an eight inning gem that would have been a win had the Mets not started that season with Frank Francisco as the Opening Day closer. A few days later, it was announced Pelfrey tore his UCL, and he was going to require season ending Tommy John surgery.
With his impending free agency, this mean that April 21st start would be his last in a Mets uniform. It would seem somewhat fitting his last win in a Mets uniform was from the previous August when he had a six inning three earned run quality start against the Phillies.
That was Pelfrey’s Mets career. His flashes of brilliance really led nowhere, and you were left to look for the little joys in his moments of mediocrity.
Still, it wasn’t all bad memories. He did bring hope with him. He was a player who chomped on his mouth-guard and kicked his fingers while he tried so desperately to succeed. As noted, there was a few seasons he did succeed. There was also a signature moment.
In 2010, there was a crazy 20 inning game between the Mets and Cardinals. With the Mets out of relievers and the team desperately clinging to a 2-1 lead, Pelfrey entered the game despite throwing 106 pitches just two days prior. On that day, Pelfrey saved the day.
That was always the case with Pelfrey. He was always willing, and he did all he could to improve even if that meant his stop putting ketchup in his ice cream.
In the end, he put together a 12 year Major League career full of adversity and perseverance. It’s a career un which he can take much pride. It’s one that will be of immense value as he now seems to impart his wisdom to a new generation of pitchers.
As a Mets fan, I know I wish him the best of luck.
During the offseason, there were reports the New York Mets had a deal in place for Indians second baseman Jason Kipnis, but the deal never did happen. As noted by Jon Heyman of Fan Rag Sports, the purported trade wasn’t killed over prospects, but rather, “it was killed by someone at the top, very likely over money.”
The money the Mets would have given to Kipnis eventually went to Jay Bruce despite the team already having Yoenis Cespedes and Michael Conforto tabbed as the corner outfielders over the next three seasons.
This is important to note because after all the moving parts to this offseason, the Mets have a trio of players in Asdrubal Cabrera, Wilmer Flores, and Jose Reyes, who both struggle defensively and against right-handed pitching. Moreover, the triumvirate are also injury prone.
That’s where things were interesting with Kipnis. Like most anyone who was on the Mets roster last year, Kipnis’ 2017 season was a nightmare. He had shoulder and hamstring issues. While we can reasonably believe the hamstring issues will be resolved heading into this season, there could be room for doubt over Kipnis’ shoulder.
At this point, it is important to remember this wasn’t the Carlos Gomez trade. The Mets killed that deal over physicals. The Kipnis deal was killed because the Mets couldn’t justify paying him $30.7 million over the next two years. That’s really interesting.
In 2015 and 2016, Kipnis was a .289/.357/.460 hitter who averaged 42 doubles, 16 homers, and 67 RBI. It was part of the reason why he averaged a 4.3 WAR over that two year span.
The last time a Mets position player had a WAR that high was Curtis Granderson in 2015 when he had a 5.1 WAR. The last time the Mets had a position player have consecutive seasons with a 4.0 WAR or greater was David Wright in 2012-2013.
The inability to maintain that high level of production when healthy was not an impediment to the Mets giving large free agent deals to Cespedes or Bruce. However, for some reason, it was an impediment for the Mets acquiring a player who would have resolved their second base situation for the next two seasons.
With Kipnis, it’s more than just those two years too. Since 2012, he has posted a 3.9 WAR or higher in four of the last six seasons. For the sake of comparison, Bruce has had a WAR that high just twice in his 10 year career, and Cabrera has done it just twice in his 11 year career. For both players, those high WAR seasons came a long time ago.
For Kipnis, he did it recently, and he appears to be that player again. Yes, Spring Training stats are flawed and shouldn’t be used as a barometer for future success, but Kipnis is 8-14 with five homers. If nothing else, it tells us he’s healthy and primed to be the 4.0+ win player he has been.
We can’t say the same about Bruce or Cabrera even when they are healthy. However, for some reason the Mets found the money to pay them and not Kipnis. In the end if you want a real barometer for how good an offseason the Mets have had, watch how Kipnis produces this season.
If Kipnis is Kipnis while Bruce and Cabreara are Bruce and Cabrera, the team should have some explaining to do.
Certainly, when you look at any free agent, there are a number of things you can look to pick apart. When looking at former Mets second baseman Neil Walker, you need not look at his recent health history. He needed back surgery in 2016, and last year, he missed a large chunk of time due to a partially torn hamstring.
Even with the injury issues, Walker has been a productive player when on the field. In 111 games last year, Walker hit .265/.362/.439 with 14 homers and 49 RBI. The one caution you would have with him is that he showed 2016 was a blip as he returned to struggling against left-handed pitching.
To that end, Walker would be the perfect fit for the current Mets roster.
Based upon their production there last year, the Mets have three players ill-suited to playing second base everyday with Asdrubal Cabrera (-6 DRS), Wilmer Flores (-1 DRS), and Jose Reyes (-5 DRS). What is interesting about this group is all three of them struggle against right-handed pitching. Heading into Opening Day, Cabrera is the starter, but based upon recent history, we can count for the Mets playing dozens of players at the position.
Given the defensive issues and platoon splits, it would behoove the Mets to add Walker to the mix. He’d be another body who can give them games, and he’s a well suited platoon candidate with any of the aforementioned incumbent second baseman.
Realistically speaking, that will never happen. The Mets are paying Cabrera $8.5 million, and based upon how the Mets operate, they are not likely going to put that on the bench. The organization also has a soft spot for both Flores and Reyes. So no, the Mets are not going to bring a player to play second base over them; not even Walker, who was productive as a Met when he was on the field.
However, the team does not owe the same loyalties to Adrian Gonzalez.
The soon to be 36 year old first baseman is coming off an injury riddled year himself where he hit just .242/.287/.355 with three homers and 30 RBI in 71 games. With him starting off the Spring going 2-15, he’s not exactly inspiring confidence he will bounce back.
With the Mets being a month away from Spring Training, you have to really question if he’s ever going to rediscover who he was three years ago. With him looking more and more like a player who is closer to retirement and Dominic Smith having a Spring which has combined being late and injured, the Mets should at least investigate the free agent market.
If he wants to pull a Todd Zeile, Walker could sign on with the Mets to play first base. If not, Todd Frazier has experience there, which would allow the Mets to put Walker at third base. When Dom is ready, or when injuries inevitably befall the Mets, the team would have some versatility with Walker. He likely could slot in at any infield position but short.
With Walker still on the market and likely available for a discount, this is something the Mets should definitely be considering. Ultimately, it may prove to be a better option that rolling the dice on Gonzalez and the three internal second basemen.
Editor’s Note: Hat tip to Rob Piersall whose tweet inspired this post
One thing I find interesting the second go-round with a newborn is how things are both the same and radically different at the same time. Some of that is good, and some of that is bad.
The obvious downside is some of the magic is gone. The buzz people have about your first baby is precipitously less than the buzz you have with a second child. However, I will say that the magic is still there for you as a parent. Those milestones are still all the sweeter than they were the first time.
The upside is you are much better prepared. The nervousness and downright fear are gone. You know what is coming your way. There are the sleepless nights and days. You are going to go through an entire wardrobe each and every day between the accidents, spit-ups, and changing weather. Mostly, it’s the sleep deprivation.
And we know the sleep deprivation puts a strain on a person. You’re not you without the sleep. You’re more stressed, and you don’t think as clearly as your normally would. Yes, this will definitively lead to more and more fights between you and everyone around you – including your spouse.
I can tell you it’s completely normal. It happens to everyone. This too shall pass.
The second time around I know I’ve been much better prepared to deal with it. Having been through it previously, I can take that deep breath and process instead of reacting. If you know me, that can be extremely difficult at times. That goes not just to me reacting to something a family member says, it also goes for things that would normally send me through the roof.
Really, I am much better off for having the first child because it forced me to learn how to be a better husband, and really a better man. That happened because of the difficulties we had with our first son, and with our son not sleeping through the night until nearly six months old, we had more than our fair share of sleep deprivation issues.
You will too. Just hang in there because in the end you will be better for this. You will also have a beautiful child who is going to bring you much joy. I know not a day goes by I don’t thank God for my first born, and the same goes with my second. I cherish everyday with my wife and family, and I appreciate it all the more because of those difficult times that surround being a first time parent.
Times will get better for you too. Much better. Just hang in there.
To be fair, no one really expected the free agent market to go the way it has. Really, as free agency opened, the Mets with their limited budget was not expected to be able to bring in Jay Bruce, Todd Frazier, and Anthony Swarzak. Based upon past years, the Mets really only would have had the budget to get just one of them. However, with the way it has played out, it does beg you to re-visit the Mets offseason.
Certainly, there should be no quibbling with the aforementioned additions. Bruce provides the Mets both with a left-handed power bat as well as first base insurance. Frazier joins Amed Rosario to give the Mets a defensive left side of the infield they have not had since at least a decade ago. Swarzak helps solidify a bullpen that needed all the quality arms it could get.
Where you can question the Mets was their minor moves. The team brought back Jose Reyes back on a one year $2 million deal, and because the Dodgers are playing his 2018 salary, the Mets were able to sign Adrian Gonzalez for the league minimum. In retrospect, was this really the best move the Mets could have made.
When the Mets signed Bruce, it gave the team only four healthy outfielders on the 40 man roster. Two of those outfielders, Yoenis Cespedes and Juan Lagares, are injury prone. Already, both players are having health issues, which certainly calls into question whether the Mets outfield can last a full season. It gets even worse when you consider Bruce is dealing with plantar fasciitis.
Because of those injuries, the Mets may be left with the rock and hard place decision of choosing between putting Wilmer Flores in the outfield or playing Matt den Dekker and his career .234/.316/.354 batting line in the outfield. The Mets are faced with this decision because as Josh Lewin put it during the Mets Spring Training opener, Reyes has shown not interest in playing the outfield this year.
It does seem odd the player many consider to be the quickest, if not the fastest, on the team is not even going to try to play the outfield. Considering he was signed as a utility player, it certainly begs the question why he isn’t playing the outfield at all.
There’s also the matter of Gonzalez. There’s no doubt when he’s on the top of his game, he’s much better than Duda or what the Mets envision Dominic Smith will be. However, at 37 and with back problems, is Gonzalez really that player anymore? His last full season was 2016 when he hit .285/.349/.435 with 18 homers and 90 RBI. Considering how poorly he played last year, his needing two hours to work with trainers just to get onto the field, and his start to the Spring, it’s doubtful he even puts up those numbers.
Last year, Duda hit .246/.347/.532 with 17 homers and 37 RBI in 75 games with the Mets. Overall, he would have the second 30 homer season of his career. In three of his last four years, he’s hit 27 or more homers. The one year he didn’t was an injury riddled 2016 season.
Certainly, you can say Duda was a better bet than Gonzalez. Moreover, it’s fair to say giving him $3.5 million was a better decision than giving $2.5 million to Reyes and Gonzalez. It also would’ve given the Mets wiggle room to add another player to the roster who was at least capable of playing the outfield. Given their suspect depth there, you really need to question Sandy Alderson’s thought process on these respective decisions.
Believe it or not, there are just five pitchers who remain from the Mets 2015 Opening Day roster. Those five pitchers are Matt Harvey, Jacob deGrom, Jeurys Familia, Jerry Blevins, and of course, Rafael Montero. That’s right, Montero was on the 2015 Opening Day roster, and in case you forgot, he was once again on the Opening Day roster last year.
And you know what? Montero is going to be on the 2018 Mets Opening Day roster as well.
The Mets have given us a clear indication this will happen. Right after the season, the team outrighted pitchers Erik Goeddel and Tyler Pill from the 40 man roster. They claimed Burch Smith in the Rule 5 Draft, and he was immediately sent to the Kansas City Royals for cash. To make room for Major League signings this offseason, the Mets designated Kevin McGowan, Chasen Bradford, and Josh Smoker for assignment.
Put another way, the Mets have had plenty of opportunities to extricate themselves of Montero, and they continuously refuse to do so whether it is out of stubbornness, hope, or really, just plain lunacy. Fact is, while no Mets fans believe in him and his 5.38 ERA, the Mets still believe in him and want him here.
If the Mets truly do want to see their continued investment in Montero pay off for them, then the team is going to have to put him on the 40 man roster because he is out of options. That means Montero gets one more last chance. I’d list what chance number that is, but like most Mets fans, I’ve lost count.
This means, the Mets are going to have to hope Montero’s .376 BABIP last year was largely the result of a truly poor defensive team. They will have to hope his being the second best starter on the team, Jason Vargas included, in not yielding barrels translates to success. (Statcast). They’re also going to have to hope, as noted by Anthony DiComo of MLB.com, he continues to yield the fewest hard hit balls on this pitching staff.
Mostly, the team is going to have to hope Mickey Callaway and Dave Eiland are part pitching coaches and part miracle workers.
If this does happen, and Montero FINALLY attacks the zone like he has shown in Double-A and below, the Mets may have something. Their patience may finally be rewarded and, frankly, applauded. However, it is much more likely we will see more of the same, which should create heat on Sandy Alderson because he parted with quality pitcher after quality pitcher in order to hold onto Montero.
Regardless of your opinion on Montero and the likelihood of his being successful, he’s going to be on the Opening Day roster. There are bullpen spots open, and Montero is out of options. At this point, we can only hope the stubborn refusal to DFA him will pay off.
Since cracking the Opening Day roster in 2014, Travis d’Arnaud has averaged 90 games per season behind the plate with last year being his high at 112 games. This is because d’Arnaud has not withstood to the day-to-day rigors of catching. Each and every year, he deals with a different injury to another part of his body, and as a result, the Mets have been left scrambling to figure out their Major League catching depth.
With the re-emergence of Kevin Plawecki as the Mets catcher of the future and the minor league signing of Jose Lobaton, the Mets are in a much better position from a catching standpoint than they have been in years past. While the Mets have better depth, the end game should be to keep d’Arnaud healthy for a full season.
And for that matter, with Plawecki finally showing the type of bat the Mets believed he had, the team needs to find a spot for him in the lineup.
To that end, a platoon between the catchers makes sense. Fortunately, both catchers seem inclined to go forward with the plan, and they both thrived under the situation last September with d’Arnaud hitting .297/.343/.656 in 20 games and Plawecki hitting .278/.400/.426 in 19 games.
So based upon their production in an admittedly small sample size, we know it could potentially work. What we don’t know is how it should work next season, especially when you consider both are right-handed hitters.
Perhaps, the Mets should approach this from a different perspective. Instead of focusing on what pitcher is on the mound for the opposing team, the Mets should focus on what pitcher is on the mound for their own team. That is, much like what we saw in 2016 with Noah Syndergaard and Rene Rivera, assign a catcher to a Mets starter based upon whom the pitcher works best.
When you look at the numbers, what is quite startling is just how much better the Mets starters numbers are with Plawecki behind the plate. There is a very important caveat to that. Plawecki did the bulk of the catching of these pitchers back in 2015 when they were all healthy and dealing. It was d’Arnaud who had to deal with each one of them having real injury issues which corresponded with diminished stuff and stats.
Basically, this will come down to comfort, and for starters, we know that likely means Plawecki will be catching Syndergaard because as we saw in 2016, he and d’Arnaud have had difficulty getting on the same page. As an aside, it was somewhat telling Syndergaard was caught by Plawecki and Tomas Nido in his two “starts” at the end of the season.
Coincidence or not, there may be something to Plawecki not catching Jacob deGrom at all last season. Given their track record together, which includes deGrom winning the 2014 Rookie of the Year Award and his amazing 2015 postseason, or their both having lower case ds in their last name, there is a rapport between deGrom and d’Arnaud which should continue.
Likely, you want to get each of the catchers 2-3 days in a row when they do play in order to afford them to maximizing rest and getting in rhythm. To that end, d’Arnaud should catch deGrom with the fourth and fifth starter, whoever they may be. This would set up this type of rotation:
- Jacob deGrom (d’Arnaud)
- Noah Syndergaard (Plawecki)
- Jason Vargas (Plawecki)
- Matt Harvey (d’Arnaud)
- Steven Matz (d’Arnaud)
Really, after deGrom and Syndergaard, you can order the pitchers anyway you want, and you can certainly resort them depending on which catcher and pitcher feel most comfortable as a tandem. In the end, what really matters is Mickey Callaway, Dave Eiland, and Glenn Sherlock communicate with the starters and catching tandem to find the best fit for each pitcher. If done properly, we may see the catchers last a full season, and more importantly, we could see the pitching staff as a whole revert to their 2015 level.